America

Contributor: Voters want both ‘tough on crime’ and compassionate reform

Zohran Mamdani, the progressive standard-bearer who could become New York City’s next mayor after Tuesday’s election, faces a public-safety trap that has entangled progressives nationwide: Voters want less cruelty, not less accountability. Confuse the two, and even progressives will vote you out.

Even before he has taken office, Mamdani is already fending off attacks from opponents, including former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other political adversaries. They seek to brand him as a radical by tying him to the national Democratic Socialists of America’s most controversial criminal justice planks, such as declining to prosecute misdemeanor offenses.

Yet, in distancing himself from those specific policies, Mamdani is cleverly navigating a political minefield that has doomed other reformers. His strategy demonstrates a crucial lesson for the broader progressive movement: voters want a less inhumane justice system, not one that is unenforced. If progressives are perceived as abandoning accountability for offenses like shoplifting and public drug usage, they invite a political backlash that will not only cost them elections (or reelections) but also set back the cause of reform nationwide.

Americans across the political spectrum support reducing extremely harsh punishments. They want shorter sentences, alternatives to incarceration and rehabilitation over punishment. The moral case against excessive punishment resonates with voters who see our system as unnecessarily cruel. The evidence is overwhelming: 81% of Americans believe the U.S. criminal justice system needs reform, and 85% agree the main goal of our criminal justice system should be rehabilitation.

But when it comes to deciding which behaviors deserve prosecution, the politics shift dramatically. Mamdani has previously aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America, an organization that calls for ending the enforcement of some misdemeanor offenses.

This is precisely the kind of stance that can trigger backlash. The 2022 recall of San Francisco’s progressive district attorney shows why. About 1 in 3 “progressive” voters cast a ballot to remove the progressive DA from office. It wasn’t because they disagreed with his policies; in fact, these same voters supported his specific reforms when his name wasn’t attached to them. Their opposition was rooted in a fear that declining to prosecute low-level crimes would create a deterrence vacuum and incentivize lawlessness.

In Los Angeles, George Gascón’s trajectory offers a cautionary tale. As Los Angeles County district attorney, he survived two recall attempts before losing his 2024 reelection bid by 23 points. L.A. voters hadn’t abandoned reform — they’d supported it just four years earlier. But Gascón’s categorical bans on seeking certain harsher sentences or charging juveniles as adults triggered a revolt from his own rank-and-file prosecutors, creating the perception that entire categories of misconduct would go unaddressed. When prosecutors publicly sued him, arguing his directives violated state law, the deterrence vacuum became tangible. By the time Gascón walked back some policies, voters’ trust had evaporated.

This pattern repeats across the country. In Boston, DA Kevin Hayden has distanced himself so forcefully from predecessor Rachael Rollins’ “do not prosecute” list that he bristles at reporters even mentioning it. Yet Hayden’s office is still diverting first-time shoplifters to treatment programs — the same approach Rollins advocated. The difference? Hayden emphasizes prosecution of repeat offenders while offering alternatives to first-timers. The policy is nearly identical; the politics couldn’t be more different.

Critics are right to argue that the old model of misdemeanor prosecution was a failure. It criminalized poverty and addiction, clogged our courts and did little to stop the revolving door. But the answer to a broken system is not to create a vacuum of enforcement; it is to build a new system that pairs accountability with effective intervention.

Mamdani has already shown political wisdom by declaring, “I am not defunding the police.” But the issue isn’t just about police funding — it’s about what behaviors the criminal justice system will address. As mayor, Mamdani would not control whether the prosecutors abandon prosecution of misdemeanors, but what matters are his stances and voters’ perception. He should be vocal about how we thinks prosecutors should respond to low-level offenses:

  • First-time shoplifters: Restitution or community service.
  • Drug possession: Treatment enrollment, not incarceration.
  • Quality-of-life violations: Social service interventions for housing and health.
  • DUI offenders: Intensive supervision and treatment.

To be clear, this isn’t about ignoring these offenses; it’s about transforming the response. For this to work, the justice system must use its inherent leverage. Instead of compelling jail time, a pending criminal case becomes the tool to ensure a person completes a treatment program, pays restitution to the store they stole from, or connects with housing services. This is the essence of diversion: Accountability is met, the underlying problem is addressed, and upon successful completion, the case is often dismissed, allowing the person to move forward without the lifelong burden of a criminal record.

Mamdani’s proposed Department of Community Safety is a step in the right direction. But it must work alongside, not instead of, prosecution for lower-level offenses, and Mamdani must frame it as a partner to prosecution. If voters perceive it as a substitute for accountability, his opponents will use it as a political weapon the moment crime rates fluctuate.

New York deserves bold criminal justice reform. But boldness without pragmatism leads to backlash that sets the entire movement back. The future of the criminal justice progressive movement in America will not be determined by its ideals, but by its ability to deliver pragmatic safety. For the aspiring mayor, and for prosecutors in California and beyond, this means understanding that residents want both order and compassionate justice.

Dvir Yogev is a postdoctoral researcher at the Criminal Law & Justice Center at UC Berkeley, where he studies the politics of criminal justice reform and prosecutor elections.

Source link

Latin America could receive $239B in mining investments through 2033

The El Teniente mine in Rancagua, south of Santiago, Chile, is the largest underground mine in the world. File Photo by Mario Ruiz/EPA

SANTIAGO, Chile, Nov. 4 (UPI) — Latin America is projected to receive $239 billion in mining investments through 2033, a study by consulting firm PwC indicates. Chile, Brazil, Argentina and Peru are expected to be the main beneficiaries, although most of the projects are not new initiatives.

“It’s a large and strategic figure in absolute terms and competitive compared with other resource-rich regions. Latin America maintains a leading position in transition minerals such as copper and lithium, as well as base minerals like iron,” Carlos Rivas, senior manager for PwC Chile’s mining sector consulting division, told UPI.

The analysis included projects from major mining companies such as BHP, China Shenhua Energy, Rio Tinto Group, Freeport-McMoRan, Zijin Mining Group and Glencore.

Rivas said much of the projected investment is needed for companies to maintain production levels amid declining ore grades and increasing environmental, social and governance requirements.

“New capital investment is required to address issues such as environmental permits, water, energy and logistics needs, and to diversify supply in the face of global concentration risks,” Rivas said.

Chile, which accounts for 22% of global copper production and 17% of lithium output, will receive the largest share of investments — about $83.2 billion — of which only 20% is earmarked for new projects.

“The predominance of brownfield projects [those developed on existing sites or infrastructure] at 80% reflects the maturity of Chile’s mining assets and a rational strategy,” Germán Millán, a partner in PwC Chile’s mining sector consulting division, told UPI.

“These projects generally carry lower financial risk and involve faster permitting processes. Exploration continues, but it competes for capital with emerging hubs such as Argentina and faces longer development cycles,” he said.

Millán said expansion projects include a significant component of technology investment that is highly relevant to the industry.

Brazil is projected to attract about $68.5 billion in mining investments, while Peru is expected to receive roughly $54.6 billion over the next eight years, with 60% of those projects focused on new developments.

Millán cited Argentina, where investments of about $33 billion are projected, with 70% of the total earmarked for new projects.

Among greenfield projects — those launched from scratch — new initiatives stand out in mining districts such as Vicuña, with ventures like Filo del Sol for copper, gold and silver exploration and Josemaría, which is related to copper.

Under development scenarios, Argentina could reach 1.2 million metric tons of copper production within a decade.

“For that to materialize, infrastructure must be secured in areas such as water, energy, roads and ports, along with predictable permitting processes, strong community engagement and access to capital,” Rivas said.

He added that with Chile’s support and expertise, “Argentina’s learning curve could be accelerated. There is strong growth potential if institutional frameworks, infrastructure and financing align, with partnerships that share risk and accelerate the development of studies and the execution of projects.”

PwC’s Mine 2025 study noted that the global mining supply is becoming increasingly concentrated, and that “in several cases, there is a growing mismatch between where mineral reserves are located and where they are produced. This situation creates both opportunities and supply risks.”

For copper, Chile and Peru remain among the world’s leading centers of production and reserves, reinforcing their role in new value chains despite rising output in other jurisdictions, such as the Democratic Republic of Congo.

For lithium, Australia, Chile and China lead production, while the largest reserves are situated in the Lithium Triangle — Chile, Argentina and Bolivia — “opening room for further development and potential cross-border synergies in South America. This concentration calls for responsible diversification and solid investment frameworks,” the report said.

Source link

MAGA anti-Indian racism and antisemitism create a massive rift among conservatives

South Asians have played a prominent role in President Trump’s universe, especially in his second term.

Second Lady Usha Vance is the daughter of Indian immigrants who came to California to study and never went back. Harmeet Dhillon, born in India and a devout Sikh, is currently his U.S. assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division. And the head of the FBI, Kash Patel, is (like potential New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani,) of Indian descent by way of Uganda.

Some Republicans have taken pride in this kind of diversity, citing it for the gains Trump made in 2024 with Black and Latino voters.

But these days, the MAGA big tent seems to be collapsing fast.

Last week, MAGA had a total anti-Indian meltdown on social media, revealing a deep, ugly racism toward South Asians.

It comes amid the first real rebellion about rampant and increasingly open antisemitism within the MAGAverse, creating a massive rift between traditional conservatives and a younger, rabidly anti-Jewish contingent called groypers whose leader, Nick Fuentes, recently posted that he is “team Hitler.”

Turns out, when you cultivate a political movement based on hate, at some point the hate is uncontrollable. In fact, that hate needs to be fed to maintain power — even if it means feasting on its own.

This monster of white-might ugliness is going to dominate policy and politics for the next election, and these now-public fights within the Republican party represent a new dynamic that will either force it to do some sort of soul searching, or purge it of anything but white Christian nationalism. My bet is on the latter. But if conservatives ever truly believed in their inclusive talk, then it’s time for Republicans to stand up and demand the big Trump tent they were hailing just a few months ago.

Ultra-conservative commentator Ben Shapiro, who opposes much of Fuentes’ worldview, summed up this Republican split succinctly.

Fuentes’ followers “are white supremacists, hate women, Jews, Hindus, many types of Christians, brown people of a wide variety of backgrounds, Blacks, America’s foreign policy and America’s constitution,” Shapiro explained. “They admire Hitler and Stalin and that splinter faction is now being facilitated and normalized within the mainstream Republican Party.”

MAGA’s anti-Indian sentiment had an explosive moment a few days ago when a South Asian woman asked Vice President JD Vance a series of questions during a Turning Point USA event in Mississippi. The young immigrant wanted to know how Vance could preach for the removal of nearly 18 million immigrants? And how could he claim that the United States was a Christian nation, rather than one that valued pluralism?

“How can you stop us and tell us we don’t belong here anymore?” the woman asked. “Why do I have to be a Christian?”

Vance’s answer went viral, in part because he claimed his wife, although from a Hindu family, was “agnostic or atheist,” and that he hoped she would convert to Christianity.

“Do I hope eventually that she is somehow moved by the same thing that I was moved in by church? Yeah, I honestly do wish that,” he said.

Vance later tried to do some damage control on social media, calling Usha Vance a “blessing” and promising to continue to “support her and talk to her about faith and life and everything else, because she’s my wife.”

But many South Asians felt Vance was dissing his wife’s heritage and attempting to downplay her non-whiteness. They vented on social media, and got a lot of MAGA feelings back.

“How can you pretend to be a white nativist politician who will ‘bring america back to it’s golden age’ … when your wife is an indian immigrant?” wrote one poster.

Dhillon received similar feedback recently for urging calm and fairness after a Sikh truck driver allegedly caused a fatal crash.

“[N]o ma’am, it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that sihks and hindus need to get the hell out of my country,” one reply stated. “You and your kind are no longer welcome here. Go the [expletive] home.”

Patel too, got it, after posting a message on Diwali, a religious holiday that celebrates the victory of light over darkness. He was dubbed a demon worshipper, a favorite anti-Indian trope.

Perhaps you’re thinking, “Duh, of course MAGA is racist.” But here’s the thing. The military has been scrubbed of many Black officers. The federal workforce, long a bastion for middle-class people of color, has been decimated. Minority cabinet members or top officials are few. Aside from another South Asian, Tulsi Gabbard, there’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Labor Secretary Lori Chavez‑DeRemer and HUD head Scott Turner.

South Asians are largely the last visible sign of pluralism in Republican power, an erstwhile proof that the charges of racism from the left are unfair. But now, like Latinos, they are increasingly targets of the base.

At the same time anti-Indian hate was surfacing last week, a whole load of MAGA antisemitism hit the fan. It started when Tucker Carlson, who in his post-network life has re-created himself as a hugely popular podcaster with more than 16 million followers on X, invited Fuentes on his show.

In addition to calling for the death of American Jews, Fuentes has also said women want him to rape them and should be burned alive, Black people belong in prison and LGBTQ+ people are an abomination.

Anyone who is not his kind of Christian “must be absolutely annihilated when we take power,” he said.

Turns out far-right Charlie Kirk was a bulwark against this straight-up American Nazi. Kirk’s popularity kept Fuentes — who often trolled Kirk — from achieving dominance as the spirit guide of young MAGA. Now, with Kirk slain, nothing appears to be stopping Fuentes from taking up that mantle.

After the Fuentes interview, sane conservatives (there are some left) were apoplectic that Carlson would support someone who so openly admits to being anti-Israel and seemingly pro-Nazi. They demanded the Heritage Foundation, historical backbone of the conservative movement, creators of Project 2025 and close allies of Tucker, do something. The head of Heritage, Kevin Roberts, offered what many considered a sorry-not-sorry. He condemned Fuentes, saying he was “fomenting Jew hatred, and his incitements are not only immoral and un-Christian, they risk violence.”

But also counseled that Fuentes shouldn’t be banished from the party.

“Join us — not to cancel — but to guide, challenge, and strengthen the conversation,” Roberts said.

Are Nazis really all bad? Discuss!

The response from ethical conservatives — Jewish and non-Jewish alike — has been that you don’t politely hear Nazis out, and if the Republican Party can’t clearly say that Nazis aren’t welcome, it’s got a problem.

Yes, the Republican Party has a problem.

The right rode to power by attacking what it denigrates at “wokeism” on the left. MAGA declared that to confront fascism or racism or misogyny — to tell its purveyors to sit down and shut up — was wrong. That “canceling,” or banishment from common discourse for spewing hate, was somehow an infringement on 1st Amendment rights or even terrorism.

They screamed loud and clear that speaking out against intolerance was the worst, most unacceptable form of intolerance itself — and would not be tolerated.

You know who heard them loud and clear? Fuentes. He has checkmated establishment Republicans with their own cowardice and hypocrisy.

So now his young Christian white supremacists are empowered, and intent on taking over as the leaders of the party. Fuentes is saying what old guard Republicans don’t want to hear, but secretly fear: He already is dangerously close to being the mainstream; just read the comments.

Roberts, the Heritage president, said it himself: “Diversity will never be our strength. Unity is our strength, and a lack of unity is a sign of weakness.”

Trying to shut Fuentes up or kick him out will likely anger that vocal and powerful part of the base that enjoys the freedom to be openly hateful, and really wouldn’t mind a male-dominated white Christian autocracy.

The far right has free-speeched their way into fascism, and Fuentes is loving every minute of it.

So now this remaining vestige of traditional conservatives — including senators such as Ted Cruz and Mitch McConnell — is faced with a painful reckoning. Many mainstream Republicans for years ignored the racism and antisemitism creeping into the party. They can’t anymore. It has grown into a beast ready to consume its maker.

Will they let this takeover happen, call for conversation over condemnation to the glee of Fuentes and his followers?

Or will they find the courage to be not just true Republicans, but true Americans, and declare non-negotiable for their party that most basic of American ideals: We do not tolerate hate?

Source link

Volunteers race to preserve U.S. history ahead of Trump edicts

A famous Civil War-era photo of an escaped slave who had been savagely whipped. Displays detailing how more than 120,000 U.S. citizens of Japanese ancestry were forcibly imprisoned during WWII. Signs describing the effects of climate change on the coast of Maine.

In recent months, a small army of historians, librarians, scientists and other volunteers has fanned out across America’s national parks and museums to photograph and painstakingly archive cultural and intellectual treasures they fear are under threat from President Trump’s war against “woke.”

These volunteers are creating a “citizen’s record” of what exists now in case the administration carries out Trump’s orders to scrub public signs and displays of language he and his allies deem too negative about America’s past.

Hundreds of Japanese–Americans were forcibly incarcerated at Manzanar in the Owens Valley during World War II.

More than 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry were forcibly relocated and incarcerated in camps during World War II, including these Japanese Americans seen at Manzanar in the Owens Valley in 1942.

(LA Library)

“My deepest, darkest fear,” said Georgetown University history professor Chandra Manning, who helped organize an effort dubbed Citizen Historians for the Smithsonian, is that the administration plans to “rewrite and falsify who counts as an American.”

In March, Trump issued an executive order entitled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” arguing that, over the past decade, signs and displays at museums and parks across the country have been distorted by a “widespread effort to rewrite our Nation’s history,” replacing facts with liberal ideology.

“Under this historical revision,” he wrote, “our Nation’s unparalleled legacy of advancing liberty, individual rights, and human happiness is reconstructed as inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed.”

He ordered the National Parks Service and The Smithsonian to scrub their displays of content that “inappropriately disparages Americans” living or dead, and replace it with language that celebrates the nation’s greatness.

The Collins Bible at the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, DC.

The Collins Bible — a detailed family history recorded by Richard Collins, a formerly enslaved man — is seen at the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, D.C.

(Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times)

That’s when Manning’s colleague at Georgetown University, James Millward, who specializes in Chinese history, told her, “this seems really eerie,” Manning recalled. It reminded him of the Chinese Communist Party’s dictates to “tell China’s story well,” which he said was code for censorship and falsification.

So the professors reached out to friends and discovered that there were like-minded folks across the country working like “monks” in the Middle Ages, who painstakingly copied ancient texts, to photograph and preserve what they regarded as national treasures.

“There’s a human tradition of doing exactly this,” Manning said. “It feels gratifying to be a part of that tradition, it makes me feel less isolated and less alone.”

Jenny McBurney, a government documents librarian at the University of Minnesota, said she found Trump’s language “quite dystopian.” That’s why she helped organize an effort called Save Our Signs, which aims to photograph and preserve all of the displays at national parks and monuments.

The sprawling network includes Manzanar National Historic Site, where Japanese American civilians were imprisoned during the Second World War; Fort Sumter National Monument, where Confederates fired the first shots of the Civil War; Ford’s Theater National Historic Site in Washington, D.C., where Abraham Lincoln was assassinated; and the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Park.

It would be difficult to tell those stories without disparaging at least some dead Americans — such as the assassins John Wilkes Booth and James Earl Ray — or violating Trump’s order to focus on America’s “unmatched record of advancing liberty, prosperity and human flourishing.”

At Acadia National Park in Maine, where the rising sun first hits the U.S. coast for much of the year, signs describing the effect of climate change on rising seas, storm surge and intense rain have already been removed.

McBurney doesn’t want volunteers to try to anticipate the federal government’s next moves and focus only on displays they think might be changed, she wants to preserve everything, “good, bad, negative or whatever,” she said in a recent interview. “As a librarian, I like complete sets of things.”

And if there were a complete archive of every sign in the national park system in private hands — out of the reach of the current administration — there would always be a “before” picture to look back at and see what had changed.

“We don’t want this information to just disappear in the dark,” McBurney said.

Another group, the Data Rescue Project, is hard at work filling private servers with at-risk databases, including health data from the Centers for Disease Control, climate data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the contents of government websites, many of which have been subject to the same kind of ideological scrubbing threatened at parks and museums.

Both efforts were “a real inspiration,” Manning said, as she and Millward pondered what they could do to contribute to the cause.

Then, in August, apparently frustrated by the lack of swift compliance with its directives, the Trump administration sent a formal letter to Lonnie G. Bunch III, the first Black Secretary of the Smithsonian, setting a 120-day limit to “begin implementing content corrections.”

Days later, President Trump took to Truth Social, the media platform he owns, to state his case less formally.

“The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL,” he wrote, “everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been.”

Even though the Smithsonian celebrates American astronauts, military heroes and sports legends, Trump complained that the museums offered nothing about the “success” and “brightness” of America, concluding with, “We have the “HOTTEST” Country in the World, and we want people to talk about it.”

People visit the Smithsonian Museum of American History on the National Mall in Washington, April 3, 2019.

People visit the Smithsonian Museum of American History on the National Mall in Washington.

(Pablo Martinez Monsivais / Associated Press)

Immediately, Manning and Millward knew where they would focus.

They sent emails to people they knew, and reached out to neighborhood listservs, asking if anyone wanted to help document the displays at the 21 museums that make up the Smithsonian Institution — including the American History Museum and the Natural History Museum — the National Zoo and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.

Within about two weeks, they had 600 volunteers. Before long, the group had grown to over 1,600, Manning said, more people than they could assign galleries and exhibitions to.

“A lot of people feel upset and kind of paralyzed by these repeated assaults on our shared resources and our shared institutions,” Manning said, “and they’re really not sure what to do about it.”

With the help of all the volunteers, and a grad student, Jessica Dickenson Goodman, who had the computer skills to help archive their submissions, the Citizen Historians project now has an archive of over 50,000 photos and videos covering all of the sites. They finished the work Oct. 12, which was when the museums closed because of the government shutdown.

After several media outlets reported on the order to remove the photo of the whipped slave from the Fort Pulaski National Monument in Georgia — citing internal emails and people familiar with deliberations who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly — administration officials described the reports as “misinformation” but declined to specify which part was incorrect.

A National Parks Service spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment for this story.

But the possibility that the administration is considering removing the Scourged Back photo is precisely what has prompted Manning, and so many others, to dedicate their time to preserving the historical record.

“I think we need the story that wrong sometimes exists and it is possible to do something about it,” Manning said.

The man in the photo escaped, joined the Union army, and became part of the fight to abolish slavery in the United States. If a powerful image like that disappears from public display, “we rob ourselves of the reminder that it’s possible to do something about the things that are wrong.”

Source link

Mistaken Identities : And in America, Light-Skinned Blacks Are Acutely Aware That Race Still Matters to Many People

Rep. Augustus Hawkins, 81, vividly remembers riding a bus in his home town of Los Angeles many years ago when a white woman sat down beside him. “She kept moving over to be next to me,” he recalled, “and then she said, ‘You know, we sure are getting a lot of blacks in this neighborhood. I don’t like sitting next to them because they smell.’ ”

Hawkins, both curious and offended, asked the woman if he smelled. When she answered no, he said, “If I were to tell you that I’m black, what would you say?” Her answer: “I wouldn’t believe you.”

‘Assumed I Was Lying’

“That woman’s view has never changed,” said Hawkins. “She probably assumed I was lying just to kid her.”

What was a disagreeable incident for Hawkins, who represents such areas as Watts, South Gate and Huntington Park, is an all-too-common occurrence for many very light-skinned black people: They are born between two worlds. Some choose to join the white world, “passing” in order to gain privileges denied to black people. Others prefer to live black, gaining the satisfaction of feeling true to themselves and their race.

As Hawkins’ experience shows, it is not a new predicament.

But today, with interracial marriages more common–according to the Census Bureau, there were 218,000 black-white marriages by last year, compared with 51,000 in 1960–and racial confrontations once again grabbing headlines, the issue of what determines a person’s race is more prevalent in our society. By being mistaken for white, black people often see white behavior and attitudes–ranging from the humorous to the sinister–that would otherwise be concealed.

Mistaken for White

What follows are some of the stories of blacks who have been mistaken for white.

Carla Dancy, 34, now a lobbyist with a computer firm in Washington, received a welcome to Raleigh, N.C., that she will never forget. “I went there on a Saturday,” she said, “and my boss was taking me around, introducing me to people.

“One of the people who greeted me welcomed me by saying, ‘Hi, so glad to meet you. You’re going to love North Carolina. We still lynch niggers and burn crosses down here.’ ”

Dancy, noting that the man was a customer of the firm she was starting to work for, said nothing to him because she did not want to sour the professional relationship. She said: “I didn’t tell him. I don’t know what my face looked like or how I handled it in front of him. I said, ‘Yeah, I’m glad to be here,’ or something like that, and kept on going.”

But “someone must have told him after that that I am black,” she said, because “he could never look me in the eye for the four years we worked together. And he never said he was sorry. We never discussed it.” Three other white people present, including her boss, knew she was black and “were flabbergasted,” said Dancy.

On another occasion, she was waiting a long time in line for a North Carolina driver’s license, slogging her way through the bureaucracy and finally dashing out of the examination office only to find that her license said she was white.

“The people had never asked me my race,” she said, “so I had to go back and get the picture taken again. I don’t know why they did not have me fill out something that told my race.”

Dancy’s reaction to being mistaken for white is not uncommon, according to Joyce Ladner, a sociologist and professor of social work at Howard University. The mistake “is like calling you out of your name,” she said. “You want to be recognized for what you are.”

Ladner asserted that attention to race continues, even though many legal barriers to race-mixing have fallen, largely because the Reagan Administration fostered “a heightened awareness of racial tensions.”

“That unleashed people’s most base instincts,” she said.

Amid increasing cultural and ethnic diversity in the United States, race remains unshakable as the ultimate identifier. One can change dress, life style, weight and many other characteristics, but race, as Ladner put it, remains “fixed and immutable.”

When Carol Tyler, 54, a Red Cross executive in Columbus, Ohio, went to a blood banking meeting in Toledo, she and a few white associates started a conversation about another acquaintance, who was black. They were “speculating about her age.”

Amid the banter, one of the white women said, “Don’t you know you can’t tell about those people?”

Tyler remembered being “completely taken aback, but I didn’t say anything about it. The next day somebody said something about my age.” Recalling that moment, Tyler laughed and said, “Oh, that was the perfect set-up.” She said she told the group: “You know I’m one of those people whose age you can’t tell about.”

The white woman, who also was taken aback, “was so upset that she couldn’t look at me,” Tyler recalled. “I finally said, ‘Hey, I didn’t intend to make you feel bad, but you never know who you’re talking to.’ ”

Tyler said that when she saw the woman during annual meetings after the incident, “our relationship was a little strained.”

Like Tyler, many light-skinned blacks “enjoy being able to smoke out white people,” said Charles King, who as director of the Urban Crisis Center in Atlanta, conducts seminars for businesses, schools and government agencies to help them deal with racial problems.

But mistaken identity can lead to angry confrontations.

Derek Henson, 35, a Los Angeles hotel executive, was in a Veterans Administration counseling session earlier this year with a group of white men in Long Beach, when a casual conversation turned ugly.

“This guy was talking,” Henson recalled, “and he said, ‘You know, my daughter is hanging around with a whole lot of (blacks), and it’s really starting to (irritate) me.’ ”

A furious Henson told the man: “Excuse me, we’re all men here. We’re all veterans. We can talk (about sex and profanity) and all this stuff, but if you say that word one more time, I’m going to bust you over the head. . . .

“He was shocked. He was beet red. He followed me to my car and said, ‘No offense.’ I said there was offense.” Henson said he sees the man weekly and “he’s never brought it up again.”

Henson, who is suing a Beverly Hills hotel, charging that he lost his job as executive assistant manager last year when his boss found out he was black, said he frequently has to “pull people to the curb” to warn them of his color.

He told the moderator of the VA class that he was shocked that he would allow such a conversation.

“It was totally inappropriate, even if there weren’t a black person there. I looked at everybody in the class and I said, ‘You can talk all the (black) talk you want, but when I walk through the door, it ceases because I don’t want to hear it.’ ”

If Henson had not spoken out, it is unlikely anyone else would have, said King. “Very seldom will a white person correct another white person about race. They feel it’s impossible to get that person to change his mind.”

This cold reality conflicts with America’s idealistic view of itself, King said. “America lives in a myth of a melting pot, teaching children that this country is for everyone. But the practical reality is that equality has never been lived out.”

Hazel McConnell, a widowed 74-year-old retired federal employee who lives in Wakefield, Mass., dated a man long ago in Columbus, Ohio, “and we were out for a ride. All of a sudden, four white men drove up beside us on the side I was sitting on.

They shouted racial slurs, she recalled. “My friend reached down and said he had a club under the seat, just in case they stop and try to do anything. It was really scary. There were four of them, and I thought they might jump out and beat us up or something.”

Her friend was “really angry,” McConnell said, “and I was scared. It was a very threatening situation. But afterward, I felt he just expected it as something that you have to deal with when you’re a minority person.”

King says that, whether light- or dark-skinned, black people always expect the worst in race relations.

“Being black,” he said, “means you don’t expect to have a good time. There’s no shock value left in being black.”

Nonetheless, cases of mistaken identity can lead to some remarkable responses. Jessica Daniel, a Boston psychologist, said that some light-skinned blacks “go to extra lengths to prove they’re ‘blacker’ than somebody who is dark-skinned.” In the 1960s and 1970s, wearing the biggest Afro and the brightest dashiki provided the proof. Today, joining black groups and speaking out on black issues show blackness, Daniel said.

Why does a person’s race matter?

For Anthony Browder, a Washingtonian who studies and lectures on African culture, the answer is simple: “We live in a racist society where people are judged by the color of their skin.”

Underscoring his assertion, Browder was a key organizer of the third annual Melanin Conference, which explored political, economic and social issues involving skin color.

Browder sees the emphasis on color as part of the “divide and conquer syndrome” fostered historically by whites. “Many African Americans have bought into this idea that if you’re light, you’re all right,” he said.

Browder and others noted that light-skinned blacks used to be deemed by whites as more intelligent and better looking. Blacks, in turn, used various “tests” to determine whether a person was light enough to join certain organizations.

Nowadays, in an ironic twist, darker skinned blacks often are deemed more desirable by some employers who want to make sure their affirmative action employees are visible.

Gus Hawkins remembers the days after the 1965 Watts uprising, when he “had to be careful going through” the area he still represents in Congress because “there was a strong hostility to whites in the neighborhoods at that time. It hurt me not to be able to get around the area,” he said, but he was afraid someone “might take a shot at you” thinking he was “a white face passing through.”

In fact, Hawkins said, “I recall once in Will Rogers Park, I was walking from the clubhouse out to my automobile and some fellow ran down to attack me on the basis of ‘here’s whitey in our neighborhood.’ ”

Hawkins said friends who knew he is black rescued him. He did not report the incident, he said, but it taught him a lesson.

“Usually, in the areas where I have that situation,” he said, “I always have a person obviously black along with me. You learn to adjust to some of these situations and reduce the risk.”

One of the ways he reduces the risk of being mistaken by whites these days is by removing his Masonic ring, which identifies him as a member of the secret fraternity whose members use secret handshakes in greeting each other.

“I have had white Masons attempt to give me the (white) grip,” Hawkins said. “I have become so embarrassed . . . I just refuse to be a Mason when I’m traveling.”

Reflecting the experiences of many people like himself, Hawkins said, “I get accused on both sides. Blacks think that you’re passing, and whites think that you’re the uppity type and are challenging them. So, in a sense you’re an outcast. This has been a problem all through the years for me.”

And for many others, including Walter White, who led the NAACP through the 1930s and 1940s until he died in 1955. In his 1948 autobiography, he wrote of his “insistence, day after day, year in and year out,” on identifying himself as black, asserting that when white people discover his color they are upset by a “startling removal of the blackness.” Then, he said, “they find it impossible suddenly to endow me with the skin, the odor, the dialect, the shuffle, the imbecile good nature traditionally attributed to” black people.

“Instantly they are aware that these things are not part of me,” White wrote. “They think there must be some mistake. There is no mistake. I am a Negro.”

Many light-skinned black people today are just as avowedly black and take pains to avoid being mistaken for white–partly because they are proud of their race and partly because they want to avoid the pain of hearing other blacks denigrated. They, like White, say many whites are amazed that anyone would decline to be white.

Whites often assume black people are white because of context–where they live, shop and go for fun, say many blacks. To signal her race, Dancy said, her resume “has always said, NAACP, Urban League, African Methodist Episcopal Church–you know, things that make people look and say, ‘Oh!’ ”

She and others note that black people are more likely than whites to believe that a person is black, regardless of how light his or her skin may be.

Henson said: “We always know. I don’t care how light you are, if you have green eyes or whatever, there’s something about you, and when you pass each other, you’ll get that look.”

Whenever mistakes are made, light-skinned blacks say they often get blamed for them.

“It’s as if you’ve insulted people,” said McConnell, “by allowing them to believe you’re white. They think you’re supposed to say, ‘Don’t talk to me. I’m black.’ ”

Mistakes are made in all kinds of ways, as Beatrice de Munick Keizer of Boston knows. Personnel administrator at the headquarters of the Unitarian Universalist Assn., she said a black woman came to her office and said, “It’s so wonderful to see a black person in this job.”

“Yes, it’s great,” replied de Munick Keizer, who is white.

Recalling the conversation, she said, “It all goes to show how meaningless these things (racial distinctions) are.”

Ideally, yes. Eventually, maybe. But not yet. After all, until six years ago Louisiana had a law saying anyone was legally black if she had more than 1/32 black blood. The law was repealed in 1983 because of a contentious court case involving Susie Guillory Phipps, who wanted to change the designation on her birth certificate from “colored” to “white.”

While the 1/32 law was repealed, Phipps is still legally black.

“We lost,” said her lawyer, Brian Begue. “The world wasn’t ready for a race-free society.”

Race freedom is available only to whites, said King. “They never have to deal with any problem of who they are.” He added: “One of the truisms is everyone in America has to adopt to another identity to succeed except a white male Protestant heterosexual. He is the only one who escapes the trauma of identity.”

For light-skinned blacks, there is no way out.

“They’re in a twilight zone,” King said.

Source link

Trump’s comments on nuclear testing upend decades of U.S. policy. Here’s what to know about it

President Trump’s comments Thursday suggesting the United States will restart its testing of nuclear weapons upends decades of American policy in regards to the bomb, but come as Washington’s rivals have been expanding and testing their nuclear-capable arsenals.

Nuclear weapons policy, once thought to be a relic of the Cold War, increasingly has come to the fore as Russia has made repeated atomic threats to both the U.S. and Europe during its war on Ukraine. Moscow also acknowledged this week testing a nuclear-powered-and-capable cruise missile called the Burevestnik, code-named Skyfall by NATO, and a nuclear-armed underwater drone.

China is building more ground-based nuclear missile silos. Meanwhile, North Korea just unveiled a new intercontinental ballistic missile it plans to test, part of a nuclear-capable arsenal likely able to reach the continental U.S.

The threat is starting to bleed into popular culture as well, most recently with director Kathryn Bigelow ‘s new film “A House of Dynamite.”

But what does Trump’s announcement mean and how would it affect what’s happening now with nuclear tensions? Here’s what to know.

Trump’s comments came in a post on his Truth Social website just before meeting Chinese leader Xi Jinping. In it, Trump noted other countries testing weapons and wrote: “I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis. That process will begin immediately.”

The president’s post raised immediate questions. America’s nuclear arsenal is maintained by the Energy Department and the National Nuclear Security Administration, a semiautonomous agency within it — not the Defense Department. The Energy Department has overseen testing of nuclear weapons since its creation in 1977. Two other agencies before it — not the Defense Department — conducted tests.

Trump also claimed the U.S. “has more Nuclear Weapons than any other country.” Russia is believed to have 5,580 nuclear warheads, according to the Washington-based Arms Control Association, while the U.S. has 5,225. Those figures include so-called “retired” warheads waiting to be dismantled.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute further breaks the warhead total down, with the U.S. having 1,770 deployed warheads with 1,930 in reserve. Russia has 1,718 deployed warheads and 2,591 in reserve.

The two countries account for nearly 90% of the world’s atomic warheads.

U.S. last carried out a nuclear test in 1992

From the time America conducted its “Trinity” nuclear bomb detonation in 1945 to 1992, the U.S. detonated 1,030 atomic bombs in tests — the most of any country. Those figures do not include the two nuclear weapons America used against Japan in Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II.

The first American tests were atmospheric, but they were then moved underground to limit nuclear fallout. Scientists have come to refer to such tests as “shots.” The last such “shot,” called Divider as part of Operation Julin, took place Sept. 23, 1992, at the Nevada National Security Sites, a sprawling compound some 65 miles from Las Vegas.

America halted its tests for a couple of reasons. The first was the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. The U.S. also signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty in 1996. There have been tests since the treaty, however — by India, North Korea and Pakistan, the world’s newest nuclear powers. The United Kingdom and France also have nuclear weapons, while Israel long has been suspected of possessing atomic bombs.

But broadly speaking, the U.S. also had decades of data from tests, allowing it to use computer modeling and other techniques to determine whether a weapon would successfully detonate. Every president since Barack Obama has backed plans to modernize America’s nuclear arsenal, whose maintenance and upgrading will cost nearly $1 trillion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

The U.S. relies on the so-called “nuclear triad” — ground-based silos, aircraft-carried bombs and nuclear-tipped missiles in submarines at sea — to deter others from launching their weapons against America.

Restarting testing raises additional questions

If the U.S. restarted nuclear weapons testing, it isn’t immediately clear what the goal would be. Nonproliferation experts have warned any scientific objective likely would be eclipsed by the backlash to a test — and possibly be a starting gun for other major nuclear powers to begin their own widespread testing.

“Restarting the U.S. nuclear testing program could be one of the most consequential policy actions the Trump administration undertakes — a U.S. test could set off an uncontrolled chain of events, with other countries possibly responding with their own nuclear tests, destabilizing global security, and accelerating a new arms race,” experts warned in a February article in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.

“The goal of conducting a fast-tracked nuclear test can only be political, not scientific. … It would give Russia, China and other nuclear powers free rein to restart their own nuclear testing programs, essentially without political and economic fallout.”

Any future U.S. test likely would take place in Nevada at the testing sites, but a lot of work likely would need to go into the sites to prepare them given it’s been over 30 years since the last test. A series of slides made for a presentation at Los Alamos National Laboratories in 2018 laid out the challenges, noting that in the 1960s the city of Mercury, Nevada — at the testing grounds — had been the second-largest city in Nevada.

On average, 20,000 people had been on site to organize and prepare for the tests. That capacity has waned in the decades since.

“One effects shot would require from two to four years to plan and execute,” the presentation reads. “These were massive undertakings.”

Gambrell writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Trump bonds with Japan’s new prime minister and says her nation is delivering on U.S. investments

President Trump treated his time in Japan on Tuesday as a victory lap — befriending the new Japanese prime minister, taking her with him as he spoke to U.S. troops aboard an aircraft carrier and then unveiling several major energy and technology projects in America to be funded by Japan.

Sanae Takaichi, who became the country’s first female prime minister only days ago, solidified her relationship with Trump while defending her country’s economic interests. She talked baseball, stationed a Ford F-150 truck outside their meeting and greeted Trump with, by his estimation, a firm handshake.

By the end of the day, Trump — by his administration’s count — came close to nailing down the goal of $550 billion in Japanese investment as part of a trade framework. At a dinner for business leaders in Tokyo, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announced up to $490 billion in commitments, including $100 billion each for nuclear projects involving Westinghouse and GE Vernova.

“You’re great business people,” Trump told the gathered executives before the dinner. “Our country will not let you down.”

It was not immediately clear how the investments would operate and how they compared with previous plans, but Trump declared a win as he capped off a day of bonding with Takaichi.

Trump and Japanese PM swap warm words

The compliments started as soon as the two leaders met on Tuesday morning. “That’s a very strong handshake,” Trump said to Takaichi.

She talked about watching the third game of the U.S. World Series before the event, and said Japan would give Washington 250 cherry trees and fireworks for July 4 celebrations to honor America’s 250th anniversary next year.

Takaichi emphasized her ties to the late Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, her archconservative mentor who had forged a friendship with Trump during his first term through their shared interest of golf.

“As a matter of fact, Prime Minister Abe often told me about your dynamic diplomacy,” she said, later gifting Trump a putter used by Abe.

Trump told her it was a “big deal” that she is Japan’s first woman prime minister, and said the U.S. is committed to Japan. While the president is known for not shying away from publicly scolding his foreign counterparts, he had nothing but praise for Takaichi.

“Anything I can do to help Japan, we will be there,” Trump said. “We are an ally at the strongest level.”

Takaichi laid out a charm offensive, serving American beef and rice mixed with Japanese ingredients during a working lunch, where the two leaders also discussed efforts to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Takaichi would be nominating Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize.

The two leaders signed black “Japan is Back” baseball caps that resembled Trump’s own red “Make America Great Again” caps.

Reporters arriving for the meeting were hustled past a gold-hued Ford F-150 outside the Akasaka Palace, which is Tokyo’s guest house for visiting foreign leaders.

Trump has often complained that Japan doesn’t buy American vehicles, which are often too wide to be practical on narrow Japanese streets. But the Japanese government is considering buying a fleet of Ford trucks for road and infrastructure inspection.

They vow a ‘golden age’ for alliance and cooperation on critical minerals

Both leaders signed the implementation of an agreement for the “golden age” of their nations’ alliance, a short affirmation of a framework under which the U.S. will tax goods imported from Japan at 15% while Japan creates a $550 billion fund of investments in the U.S.

Later, at a dinner at the U.S. embassy in Tokyo packed with CEOs including Apple’s Tim Cook, Trump reveled in the deals. Trump and Takaichi also signed an agreement to cooperate on critical minerals and rare earths.

Trump has focused his foreign policy toward Asia around tariffs and trade, but on Tuesday he also spoke aboard the USS George Washington, an aircraft carrier docked at an American naval base near Tokyo. The president brought Takaichi with him and she also spoke as Japan plans to increase its military spending.

The president talked about individual units on the aircraft carrier, his political opponents, national security and the U.S. economy, saying that Takaichi had told him that Toyota would be investing $10 billion in auto plants in America.

Trump arrived in Tokyo on Monday, meeting the emperor in a ceremonial visit after a brief trip to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, for the annual summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

Trump is scheduled to leave Japan on Wednesday for South Korea, which is hosting the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. Trump plans to meet with South Korean President Lee Jae Myung.

On Thursday, Trump is expected to cap off his Asia trip with a highly anticipated meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping. There were signs that tensions between the U.S. and China were cooling off before the planned meeting in South Korea. Top negotiators from each country said a trade deal was coming together, which could prevent a potentially damaging confrontation between the world’s two largest economies.

Boak and Megerian write for the Associated Press. Megerian reported from Seoul, South Korea. Mayuko Ono and Mari Yamaguchi in Tokyo contributed to this report.

Source link

Commentary: As Trump blows up supposed narco boats, he uses an old, corrupt playbook on Latin America

Consumer confidence is dropping. The national debt is $38 trillion and climbing like the yodeling mountain climber in that “The Price is Right” game. Donald Trump’s approval ratings are falling and the U.S. is getting more and more restless as 2025 comes to a close.

What’s a wannabe strongman to do to prop up his regime?

Attack Latin America, of course!

U.S. war planes have bombed small ships in international waters off the coast of Venezuela and Colombia since September with extrajudicial zeal. The Trump administration has claimed those vessels were packed with drugs manned by “narco-terrorists” and have released videos for each of the 10 boats-and-counting it has incinerated to make the actions seem as normal as a mission in “Call of Duty.”

“Narco-terrorists intending to bring poison to our shores, will find no safe harbor anywhere in our hemisphere,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth posted on social media and who just ordered an aircraft carrier currently stationed in the Mediterranean to set up shop in the Caribbean. It’ll meet up with 10,000 troops stationed there as part of one of the area’s biggest U.S. deployments in decades, all in the name of stopping a drug epidemic that has ravaged red America for the past quarter century.

This week, Trump authorized covert CIA actions in Venezuela and revealed he wants to launch strikes against land targets where his people say Latin American cartels operate. Who cares whether the host countries will give permission? Who cares about American laws that state only Congress — not the president — can declare war against our enemies?

It’s Latin America, after all.

The military buildup, bombing and threat of more in the name of liberty is one of the oldest moves in the American foreign policy playbook. For more than two centuries, the United States has treated Latin America as its personal piñata, bashing it silly for goods and not caring about the ugly aftermath.

“It is known to all that we derive [our blessings] from the excellence of our institutions,” James Monroe concluded in the 1823 speech that set forth what became known as the Monroe Doctrine, which essentially told the rest of the world to leave the Western Hemisphere to us. “Ought we not, then, to adopt every measure which may be necessary to perpetuate them?”

Our 19th century wars of expansion, official and not, won us territories where Latin Americans lived — Panamanians, Puerto Ricans, but especially Mexicans — that we ended up treating as little better than serfs. We have occupied nations for years and imposed sanctions on others. We have propped up puppets and despots and taken down democratically elected governments with the regularity of the seasons.

The culmination of all these actions were the mass migrations from Latin America that forever altered the demographics of the United States. And when those people — like my parents — came here, they were immediately subjected to a racism hard-wired into the American psyche, which then justified a Latin American foreign policy bent on domination, not friendship.

Nothing rallies this country historically like sticking it to Latinos, whether in their ancestral countries or here. We’re this country’s perpetual scapegoats and eternal invaders, with harming gringos — whether by stealing their jobs, moving into their neighborhoods, marrying their daughters or smuggling drugs — supposedly the only thing on our mind.

That’s why when Trump ran on an isolationist platform last year, he never meant the region — of course not. The border between the U.S. and Latin America has never been the fence that divides the U.S. from Mexico or our shores. It’s wherever the hell we say it is.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro Urrego

Colombian President Gustavo Petro Urrego addresses the 80th session of the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 23 at U.N. headquarters.

(Pamela Smith / Associated Press)

That’s why the Trump administration is banking on the idea that it can get away with its boat bombings and is salivating to escalate. To them, the 43 people American missile strikes have slaughtered on the open sea so far aren’t humans — and anyone who might have an iota of sympathy or doubt deserves aggression as well.

That’s why when Colombian President Gustavo Petro accused the U.S. of murder because one of the strikes killed a Colombian fisherman with no ties to cartels, Trump went on social media to lambaste Petro’s “fresh mouth,” accuse him of being a “drug leader” and warn the head of a longtime American ally he “better close up these killing fields [cartel bases] immediately, or the United States will close them up for him, and it won’t be done nicely.”

The only person who can turn down the proverbial temperature on this issue is Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who should know all the bad that American imperialism has wrought on Latin America. The U.S. treated his parents’ homeland of Cuba like a playground for decades, propping up one dictator after another until Cubans revolted and Fidel Castro took power. A decades-long embargo that Trump tightened upon assuming office the second time has done nothing to free the Cuban people and instead made things worse.

Instead, Rubio is the instigator. He’s pushing for regime change in Venezuela, chumming it up with self-proclaimed “world’s coolest dictator” Nayib Bukele of El Salvador and cheering on Trump’s missile attacks.

“Bottom line, these are drug boats,” Rubio told reporters recently with Trump by his side. “If people want to stop seeing drug boats blow up, stop sending drugs to the United States.”

You might ask: Who cares? Cartels are bad, drugs are bad, aren’t they? Of course. But every American should oppose every time a suspected drug boat launching from Latin America is destroyed with no questions asked and no proof offered. Because every time Trump violates yet another law or norm in the name of defending the U.S. and no one stops him, democracy erodes just a little bit more.

This is a president, after all, who seems to dream of treating his enemies, including American cities, like drug boats.

Few will care, alas. It’s Latin America, after all.

Source link

U.S. sanctions Colombia’s president in an escalation of tensions in Latin America

The United States slapped sanctions on Colombian President Gustavo Petro on Friday and said it was sending a massive aircraft carrier to the waters off South America, a new escalation of what the White House has described as a war against drug traffickers in the region. Also Friday, the U.S. military conducted its 10th strike on a suspected drug-running boat, killing six people in the Caribbean Sea.

The Treasury Department said it was sanctioning Petro, his wife, his son and a political associate for failing to stop the flow of cocaine to the United States, noting that cocaine production in Colombia has risen in recent years. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent accused Petro of “poisoning Americans.”

Petro denied those claims in a statement on X, saying he has fought to combat drug trafficking for decades. He said it was “quite a paradox” to be sanctioned by a country with high rates of cocaine consumption.

The sanctions put Petro in the same category as the leaders of Russia and North Korea and limit his ability to travel to the United States. They mark a new low for relations between Colombia and the United States, which until recently were strong allies, sharing military intelligence, a robust trade relationship and a multibillion-dollar fight against drug trafficking.

Elizabeth Dickinson, a senior analyst for the Andes region at the International Crisis Group, a think tank, said that while Petro and the U.S. government have had disagreements over how to tackle trafficking — with the Americans more interested in eradicating coca fields and Colombians focused on cocaine seizures — the two countries have been working for decades toward the same goal.

“To suggest that Colombia is not trying is false and disingenuous,” Dickinson said. “If the U.S. has a partner in counternarcotics in Latin America, it’s Colombia. Colombian forces have been working hand in hand with the Americans for literally four decades. They are the best, most capable and frankly most willing partner the U.S. has in the region.

“If the U.S. were to cut this relationship, it would really be the U.S. shooting themselves in the foot.”

Many viewed the sanctions as punishment for Petro’s criticism of Trump. In recent days, Petro has accused the U.S. of murder, saying American strikes on alleged drug boats lack legal justification and have killed civilians. He has also accused the U.S. of building up its military in South America in an attempt to topple Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

The quickened pace of U.S. airstrikes in the region and the unusually large buildup of military force in the Caribbean Sea have fueled those speculations.

On Friday, a Pentagon official said the U.S. ordered the USS Gerald R. Ford and its strike group to deploy to U.S. Southern Command to “bolster U.S. capacity to detect, monitor, and disrupt illicit actors and activities that compromise the safety and prosperity of the United States.”

The USS Ford is currently deployed to the Mediterranean Sea along with three destroyers. It would probably take several days for the ships to make the journey to South America.

The White House has increasingly drawn a direct comparison between the war on terrorism that the U.S. declared after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and the Trump administration’s crackdown on drug traffickers.

Trump this month declared drug cartels to be unlawful combatants and said the U.S. was in an “armed conflict” with them, relying on the same legal authority used by the Bush administration after 9/11.

When reporters asked Trump on Thursday whether he would request that Congress issue a declaration of war against the cartels, he said that wasn’t the plan.

“I think we’re just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country, OK? We’re going to kill them, you know? They’re going to be like, dead,” Trump said during a roundtable at the White House with Homeland Security officials.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source link

Column: Trump is in his Louis XIV era, and it’s not a good look

To say that President Trump is unfazed by Saturday’s nationwide “No Kings” rally, which vies for bragging rights as perhaps the largest single-day protest in U.S. history, is the sort of understatement too typical when describing his monarchical outrages.

Leave aside Trump’s grotesque mockery of the protests — his post that night of an AI-generated video depicting himself as a becrowned pilot in a fighter jet, dropping poop bombs on citizens protesting peacefully below. Consider instead two other post-rally actions: On Sunday and Wednesday, “Secretary of War” Pete Hegseth announced first that on Trump’s orders the military had struck a seventh boat off Venezuela and then an eighth vessel in the Pacific, bringing the number of people killed over two months to 34. The administration has provided no evidence to Congress or the American public for Trump’s claims that the unidentified dead were “narco-terrorists,” nor any credible legal rationale for the strikes. Then, on Monday, Trump began demolishing the White House’s East Wing to create the gilded ballroom of his dreams, which, at 90,000 square feet, would be nearly twice the size of the White House residence itself.

As sickening as the sight was — heavy equipment ripping away at the historic property as high-powered hoses doused the dusty debris — Trump’s $250-million vanity project is small stuff compared to a policy of killing noncombatant civilian citizens of nations with which we are not at war (Venezuela, Colombia and Ecuador). Yet together the actions reflect the spectrum of consequences of Trump’s utter sense of impunity as president, from the relatively symbolic to the murderous.

“In America the law is king,” Thomas Paine wrote in 1776. Not in Trump’s America.

Among the commentariat, the president’s desecration of the East Wing is getting at least as much criticism as his extralegal killings at sea. Many critics see in the bulldozing of the People’s House a metaphor for Trump’s destructive governance generally — his other teardowns of federal agencies, life-saving foreign aid, healthcare benefits and more. The metaphor is indeed apt.

But what’s more striking is the sheer sense of impunity that Trump telegraphs, constantly, with the “je suis l’état” flare of a Louis XIV — complete (soon) with Trump’s Versailles. (Separately, Trump’s mimicry of French emperors now includes plans for a sort of Arc de Triomphe near Arlington Cemetery. A reporter asked who it would be for. “Me,” Trump said. Arc de Trump.)

No law, domestic or international, constrains him, as far as the convicted felon is concerned. Neither does Congress, where Republicans bend the knee. Nor the Supreme Court, with its 6-3 right-wing majority, including three justices Trump chose in his first term.

The court’s ruling last year in Trump vs. United States gives Trump virtual immunity from criminal prosecution, but U.S. servicemembers don’t have that protection when it comes to the deadly Caribbean Sea attacks or any other orders from the commander in chief that might one day be judged to have been illegal.

The operation’s commander, Navy Adm. Alvin Holsey, reportedly expressed concerns about the strikes within the administration. Last week he announced his retirement after less than a year as head of the U.S. Southern Command. It could be a coincidence. But I’m hardly alone in counting Holsey as the latest casualty in Trump and Hegseth’s purge of perceived nonloyalists at the Pentagon.

“When the president decides someone has to die, the military becomes his personal hit squad,” military analyst and former Republican Tom Nichols said Monday on MSNBC. Just like with kings and other autocrats: Off with their heads.

Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, a rare maverick Republican, noted on Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that in years past, the Coast Guard would board foreign boats suspected of ferrying drugs and, if contraband were found, take it and suspected traffickers into custody, often gleaning information about higher-ups to make a real dent in the drug trade. But, Paul added, about one in four boats typically had no drugs. No matter nowadays — everyone’s a target for deadly force. “So,” Paul said, “all of these people have been blown up without us knowing their name, without any evidence of a crime.” (Paul was the only Republican senator not invited to lunch with Trump on Monday in the paved-over Rose Garden.)

On Monday, Ecuador said no evidence connects a citizen who survived a recent U.S. strike to any crime. Colombian President Gustavo Petro accused the United States of murdering a fisherman in a September strike, provoking Trump to call Petro a “drug leader” and unilaterally yank U.S. foreign aid. A Venezuelan told the Washington Post that the 11 people killed in the first known U.S. strike were fishermen; national security officials told Congress the individuals were headed back to shore when hit. Meanwhile, the three countries and U.S. news reports contradict Trump’s claims that he’s destroying and seizing fentanyl — a drug that typically comes from Mexico and then is smuggled by land, usually by U.S. citizens.

Again, no matter to America’s king, who said last week that he’s eyeing land incursions in Venezuela now “because we’ve got the sea very well under control.” Trump’s courtiers say he doesn’t need Congress’ authorization for any use of force. The Constitution suggests otherwise.

Alas, neither it nor the law limits Trump’s White House makeover. He doesn’t have to submit to Congress because he’s tapping rich individuals and corporations for the cost. Past presidents, mindful that the house is a public treasure, not their palace, voluntarily sought input from various federal and nonprofit groups. After reports about the demolition, which put the lie to Trump’s promise in July that the ballroom “won’t interfere with the current building,” the American Institute of Architects urged its members to ask Congress to “investigate destruction of the White House.”

Disparate as they are, Trump’s ballroom project and his Caribbean killings were joined last week. At a White House dinner for ballroom donors, Trump joked about the sea strikes: “Nobody wants to go fishing anymore.” The pay-to-play titans laughed. Shame on them.

Trump acts with impunity because he can; he’s a lame duck. But other Republicans must face the voters. Keep the “No Kings” protests coming — right through the elections this November and next.

Bluesky: @jackiecalmes
Threads: @jkcalmes
X: @jackiekcalmes

Source link

Soarin’ becomes Soarin’ Over America in Disney’s patriotic makeover

The Disneyland Resort will in 2026 be getting a little more patriotic.

Soarin’ Around the World at Disney California Adventure will in 2026 be converted to Soarin’ Across America, a move timed to the 250th anniversary of the United States of America. The makeover is planned for next summer at both California Adventure in Anaheim and in Florida at Walt Disney World’s Epcot.

Disney unveiled the news via a social media post with actor Patrick Warburton, who plays the chief flight attendant of Soarin’. In the clip, Warburton, as the fan favorite character of Patrick, promises “amber waves of grain” and “purple mountain majesties” while showcasing red, white and blue mouse ears fit for the Fourth of July. A post on the Disney Parks Blog hints that the new film will also capture various American cityscapes.

The Soarin’ makeover will coincide with a number of Disney initiatives designed to honor America’s 250th birthday. “Disney Celebrating America” will launch on Veterans Day, Nov. 11, and continue through July 4, 2026. Various Disney networks, from ABC to ESPN, will engage in America-themed programming. Disneyland and Walt Disney World will host a special, one-off fireworks show on the Fourth of July.

An attraction poster for Soarin' Across America released via the Walt Disney Co.'s corporate media site.

An attraction poster for Soarin’ Across America released via the Walt Disney Co.’s corporate media site.

(The Walt Disney Co.)

The celebration arrives at a divisive time in American history. A poster for the attraction showcases the Statue of Liberty juxtaposed with the American flag and bald eagle. It’s art that conveys a sense of nationalistic pride, and it’s perhaps representative of shifting an outward-facing, global ride with one that may suddenly be more inward-looking.

It coincides with a time when U.S. politics are pushing a so-called America First agenda (see President Trump’s tariffs) while the Walt Disney Co. itself has faced criticism for its handling of recent controversy surrounding late night comedian Jimmy Kimmel and pro-administration ICE-recruitment ads running on its various streaming services. Disney’s own social media posts announcing the move are filled with rampant debate as to whether this is an instance of propaganda as it runs the risk of feeling jingoistic.

That being said, it is not unprecedented for the Disney theme parks to lean into American exceptionalism, although in recent years the parks have been shifting away from some of its America-centric viewpoints to showcase a more global and diverse vision. In 2022 when the park resurrected the Electrical Parade it struck its giant American eagle and flag float from the procession, replacing it instead with a showcase of scenes from more recent Disney and Pixar animated films, including “Encanto,” “Coco” and “Frozen.”

Yet Disneyland, of course, is a place of tradition, and even today the park houses a robotic Abe Lincoln (temporarily displaced for a show honoring Walt Disney), stages flag retreats and tells the story of the first Christmas each December.

Soarin’ debuted with California Adventure in 2001 as Soarin’ Over California. The latter typically returns each spring as part of the park’s popular Food & Wine Festival.

A Disney representative described Soarin’ Across America as a “limited time” offering.



Source link

Trump’s immigration crackdown weighs on the U.S. labor market

Maria worked cleaning schools in Florida for $13 an hour. Every two weeks, she’d get a $900 paycheck from her employer, a contractor. Not much — but enough to cover rent in the house that she and her 11-year-old son share with five families, plus electricity, a cellphone and groceries.

In August, it all ended.

When she showed up at the job one morning, her boss told her that she couldn’t work there anymore. The Trump administration had terminated the Biden administration’s humanitarian parole program, which provided legal work permits for Cubans, Haitians, Venezuelans and Nicaraguans like Maria.

“I feel desperate,’’ said Maria, 48, who requested anonymity to talk about her ordeal because she fears being detained and deported. “I don’t have any money to buy anything. I have $5 in my account. I’m left with nothing.’’

President Trump’s sweeping crackdown on immigration is throwing foreigners like Maria out of work and shaking the American economy and job market. And it’s happening at a time when hiring is already deteriorating amid uncertainty over Trump’s tariffs and other trade policies.

Immigrants do jobs — cleaning houses, picking tomatoes, painting fences — that most native-born Americans won’t, and for less money. But they also bring the technical skills and entrepreneurial energy that have helped make the United States the world’s economic superpower.

Trump is attacking immigration at both ends of the spectrum, deporting low-wage laborers and discouraging skilled foreigners from bringing their talents to the United States.

And he is targeting an influx of foreign workers that eased labor shortages and upward pressure on wages and prices at a time when most economists thought that taming inflation would require sky-high interest rates and a recession — a fate the United States escaped in 2023 and 2024.

“Immigrants are good for the economy,’’ said Lee Branstetter, an economist at Carnegie-Mellon University. “Because we had a lot of immigration over the past five years, an inflationary surge was not as bad as many people expected.”

More workers filling more jobs and spending more money has also helped drive economic growth and create still more job openings. Economists worry that Trump’s deportations and limits on even legal immigration will do the reverse.

In a July report, researchers Wendy Edelberg and Tara Watson of the centrist Brookings Institution and Stan Veuger of the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute calculated that the loss of foreign workers will mean that monthly U.S. job growth “could be near zero or negative in the next few years.’’

Hiring has already slowed significantly, averaging a meager 29,000 a month from June through August. (The September jobs report has been delayed by the ongoing shutdown of the federal government.) During the post-pandemic hiring boom of 2021-23, by contrast, employers added a stunning 400,000 jobs a month.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, citing fallout from Trump’s immigration and trade policies, downgraded its forecast for U.S. economic growth this year to 1.4% from the 1.9% it had previously expected and from 2.5% in 2024.

‘We need these people’

Goodwin Living, an Alexandria, Va., nonprofit that provides senior housing, healthcare and hospice services, had to lay off four employees from Haiti after the Trump administration terminated their work permits. The Haitians had been allowed to work under a humanitarian parole program and had earned promotions at Goodwin.

“That was a very, very difficult day for us,” Chief Executive Rob Liebreich said. “It was really unfortunate to have to say goodbye to them, and we’re still struggling to fill those roles.’’

Liebreich is worried that 60 additional immigrant workers could lose their temporary legal right to live and work in the United States. “We need all those hands,’’ he said. “We need all these people.”

Goodwin Living has 1,500 employees, 60% of them from foreign countries. It has struggled to find enough nurses, therapists and maintenance staff. Trump’s immigration crackdown, Liebreich said, is “making it harder.’’

The ICE crackdown

Trump’s immigration ambitions, intended to turn back what he calls an “invasion’’ at America’s southern border and secure jobs for U.S.-born workers, were once viewed with skepticism because of the money and economic disruption required to reach his goal of deporting 1 million people a year. But legislation that Trump signed into law July 4 — and which Republicans named the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — suddenly made his plans plausible.

The law pours $150 billion into immigration enforcement, setting aside $46.5 billion to hire 10,000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and $45 billion to increase the capacity of immigrant detention centers.

And his empowered ICE agents have shown a willingness to move fast and break things — even when their aggression conflicts with other administration goals.

Last month, immigration authorities raided a Hyundai battery plant in Georgia, detained 300 South Korean workers and showed video of some of them shackled in chains. They’d been working to get the plant up and running, bringing expertise in battery technology and Hyundai procedures that local American workers didn’t have.

The incident enraged the South Koreans and ran counter to Trump’s push to lure foreign manufacturers to invest in America. South Korean President Lee Jae Myung warned that the country’s other companies might be reluctant about betting on America if their workers couldn’t get visas promptly and risked getting detained.

Sending Medicaid recipients to the fields

America’s farmers are among the president’s most dependable supporters.

But John Boyd Jr., who farms 1,300 acres of soybeans, wheat and corn in southern Virginia, said that the immigration raids — and the threat of them — are hurting farmers already contending with low crop prices, high costs and fallout from Trump’s trade war with China, which has stopped buying U.S. soybeans and sorghum.

“You’ve got ICE out here, herding these people up,’’ said Boyd, founder of the National Black Farmers Assn. “[Trump] says they’re murderers and thieves and drug dealers, all this stuff. But these are people who are in this country doing hard work that many Americans don’t want to do.’’

Boyd scoffed at Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ suggestion in July that U.S.-born Medicaid recipients could head to the fields to meet work requirements imposed as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. “People in the city aren’t coming back to the farm to do this kind of work,’’ he said. “It takes a certain type of person to bend over in 100-degree heat.’’

The Trump administration admits that the immigration crackdown is causing labor shortages on the farm that could translate into higher prices at the supermarket.

“The near total cessation of the inflow of illegal aliens combined with the lack of an available legal workforce results in significant disruptions to production costs and [threatens] the stability of domestic food production and prices for U.S. consumers,’’ the Labor Department said in an Oct. 2 filing to the Federal Register.

‘You’re not welcome here’

Jed Kolko of the Peterson Institute for International Economics said that job growth is slowing in businesses that rely on immigrants. Construction companies, for instance, have shed 10,000 jobs since May.

“Those are the short-term effects,’’ said Kolko, a Commerce Department official in the Biden administration. “The longer-term effects are more serious because immigrants traditionally have contributed more than their share of patents, innovation, productivity.’’

Especially worrisome to many economists was Trump’s sudden announcement last month that he was raising the fee on H-1B visas, meant to lure hard-to-find skilled foreign workers to the United States, from as little as $215 to $100,000.

“A $100,000 visa fee is not just a bureaucratic cost — it’s a signal,” said Dany Bahar, senior fellow at the Center for Global Development. “It tells global talent: You are not welcome here.”

Some are already packing up.

In Washington, D.C., one H-1B visa holder, a Harvard graduate from India who works for a nonprofit helping Africa’s poor, said Trump’s signal to employers is clear: Think twice about hiring H-1B visa holders.

The man, who requested anonymity, is already preparing paperwork to move to the United Kingdom.

“The damage is already done, unfortunately,’’ he said.

Associated Press writers Wiseman and Salomon reported from Washington and Miami, respectively. AP writers Fu Ting and Christopher Rugaber in Washington contributed to this report.

Source link

Bad Bunny is the Super Bowl halftime star. People are still mad.

How much clout does Bad Bunny have?

Enough that certain people are still mad nearly two weeks after it was announced that the “Nuevayol” singer — one of the most popular and consequential artists on the planet, someone who can single-handedly boost local economies — will be the halftime performer during Super Bowl LX, to be held Feb. 8, 2026, in Santa Clara, Calif.

You’re reading Latinx Files

Fidel Martinez delves into the latest stories that capture the multitudes within the American Latinx community.

By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service and our Privacy Policy.

The right-wing backlash was immediate, with much of the criticism focusing on three things: first, that Bad Bunny (real name is Benito Antonio Martínez Ocasio) has been vocal about his opposition to the ongoing immigration raids, both in the mainland and in Puerto Rico; secondly, that he sings primarily in Spanish; and thirdly, that he’s “not American.”

This latter point, as conservative media personality Tomi Lahren hilariously learned the hard way and in real time, is not factually correct. (The interjection by Lahren’s guest, Krystal Ball — “He’s Puerto Rican…. That’s part of America, dear” — is still sending me.) And even if it was, it’d be irrelevant. As my colleague LZ Granderson recently pointed out, there have been plenty of non-American musical acts who have performed at the Super Bowl — from the Rolling Stones to U2 to Shakira.

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was so appalled by Bad Bunny being tapped to perform that she announced that Immigration and Customs Enforcement would be present at the big game.

“I have the responsibility for making sure everybody who goes to the Super Bowl has the opportunity to enjoy it and to leave, and that’s what America’s about,” she said. “So yeah, we’ll be all over that place. We’re going to enforce the law.”

What Noem left out was that federal law enforcement agents have historically been present at such high-profile events as the Copa America and previous Super Bowls — rapper 21 Savage was even arrested by ICE during the 2019 game, held in Atlanta.

To be clear, I’m not surprised that conservatives were upset about the pick. In fact, I’m willing to bet that they would’ve been mad regardless of whom the National Football League selected. At one point, Taylor Swift was rumored to be the headliner, and we all know how President Trump feels about her — she’s a “woke singer” who “is no longer hot.” Then there’s Kendrick Lamar, who upset many on the right last year when he reclaimed the American flag for Black people during his performance.

I expected the outrage. In fact, when I found out, I lamented that the announcement came while I was still on paternity leave and would therefore be unable to write about it in this space. Because surely, the news cycle would have moved on to something else.

But I was wrong. This story is about to be two weeks old and it still has legs.

“I’ve never heard of him. I don’t know who he is,” Trump said, channeling his inner Mariah Carey during an interview with Newsmax on Monday. “I don’t know why they’re doing it. It’s crazy. And then they blame it on some promoter they hired to pick up entertainment. I think it’s absolutely ridiculous.”

(Must be a Nicky Jam fan, then. I hear “she’s hot.”)

Even the Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.), known pop culture maven, chimed in.

“I didn’t even know who Bad Bunny was. But it sounds like a terrible decision, in my view, from what I’m hearing,” Johnson said during an interview. “It sounds like he’s not someone who appeals to a broader audience. And there are so many eyes on the Super Bowl — a lot of young, impressionable children. And, in my view, you would have Lee Greenwood, or role models, doing that. Not somebody like this.”

Lee Greenwood? Be serious, Mike Johnson.

For the unfamiliar, Greenwood is best known for “God Bless the U.S.A.” and has had nearly as many marriages (five) as he’s had No. 1 hits on Billboard’s U.S. Hot Country Songs chart (seven). He clearly lacks the number of bangers to put together a solid halftime performance.

But wait, there’s more. Turning Point USA — the conservative nonprofit organization founded by the late Charlie Kirk — announced Thursday via social media that it was planning on counter-programming Bad Bunny’s performance and organizing its own Super Bowl halftime show with an artist (or artists) to be determined. The group also published a poll asking people to vote on what kind of act they wanted; with the first option being “Anything in English.” (I saw them at South by Southwest in 2012, and let me tell you — they were meh.)

If it seems like I’m making light of things, it’s because I am. The whole situation is absurd and the outrage feels manufactured. At best, it’s just fodder to feed into the bottomless right wing content machine, and at worst, it feels like a distraction from much bigger issues, like the government shutdown or the ongoing constitutional crisis playing out in cities such as Chicago and Portland, Ore.

And if right-wingers are genuinely about Bad Bunny at the Super Bowl, here’s an idea: Don’t watch. But that wouldn’t be very American, would it?

Consider subscribing to the Los Angeles Times

Your support helps us deliver the news that matters most. Become a subscriber.

A pair of thank yous

This week’s edition of the Latinx Files is my first one since coming back from paternity leave — a period in which I was fully able to bond with my baby and not think about work. This is in large part because of Suzy Exposito and Carlos de Loera, who handled the day-to-day operations of De Los and who wrote this weekly newsletter, respectively. Thank you both. I am eternally grateful.

Stories we read this week that we think you should read

Unless otherwise noted, stories below were published by the Los Angeles Times.

Immigration

Arts and culture

Food

  • The myths and realities of gentrification in Mexico City. Should you still visit?
  • The best restaurants and bars in Mexico City: 34 spots that aren’t tourist traps.

Source link

Contributor: Trump’s Mideast deal is just the beginning of his role

Congratulations are in order for President Trump. He said he would bring home Israel’s hostages and end the horrific fighting in Gaza, and that appears to be exactly what he is doing with this week’s deal. While many of the ideas that went into Trump’s 20-point peace plan predated his reelection, he and his team deserve a standing ovation for translating those ideas into a practical proposal, defining a first phase that was both big and digestible and putting together all the pieces that made its agreement possible.

Success, however, does have its downsides. Remember the Pottery Barn rule of foreign policy, made famous during the Iraq war? “You break it, you own it.” We now have the Trump corollary: “You patch it, you own it.”

Despite coming to office eager to shed America’s Middle East commitments, Trump just took on a huge one: responsibility for a peace plan that will forever bear his name. On Oct. 6, 2023, the day before Hamas’ assault, Arab-Israeli relations were poised for the historic breakthrough of Saudi-Israel normalization; two years later, Arab-Israeli relations — including Trump’s first-term Middle East peacemaking achievement of the Abraham Accords — are hanging on by a thread. By offering a plan that promises not just an end to fighting in Gaza but building a full and enduring regional peace, the president has taken on the task of repairing the damage wrought by Hamas’ unholy war. In other words: fixing the Middle East.

How Trump fulfills this not inconsequential responsibility has major consequences for America’s role in the region and in the world. The Chinese are watching whether, when the going gets rough, he will have the mettle to maintain a broad alliance. The Russians are watching whether the president will strictly enforce the letter of the deal or let certain unpleasant aspects slip. The Iranians will be watching whether Trump will find himself so drowning in the details of Gaza reconstruction that he won’t be able to stitch together a repeat of the highly successful Arab-Israeli coalition that protected Israel a year ago from Iran’s barrages of ballistic missiles and drones. And all these adversaries — and others — will wonder whether the intense U.S. focus needed to ensure implementation of this deal will distract the president from their own areas of mischief.

Those are some of the international stakes. There’s a difficult road ahead in achieving the deal itself. Some of the most vexing challenges will include:

  • Implementing a highly complex Gaza peace plan that, in its requirements for disarmament, envisions Hamas to be fully complicit in its organizational suicide — or at least its institutional castration;
  • Having the U.S. military orchestrate the recruitment, deployment and management of multinational forces to police the territory just as the Israel Defense Forces are withdrawing from it, a tricky maneuver fraught with risk;
  • Creating and supervising a transitional administration that will oversee everything from humanitarian relief to rubble and ordnance removal to massive reconstruction projects, all the while preventing what’s left of Hamas from stealing goods to divert to underground weapons factories, an art that it perfected after previous ceasefires;
  • Securing buy-in from the United Nations and its specialized agencies, which need to play an essential role in delivering food and medical services, without buckling under pressure to rehabilitate the deeply flawed U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, an organization that bears special responsibility for keeping the Palestinian-Israeli conflict alive for decades;
  • Preventing Qatar and Turkey — longtime friends of Hamas who have emerged in recent weeks as diplomatic Good Samaritans — from translating their current status into a malign influence over the direction of Palestinian politics, which can only be worrisome to Israel and the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority and a long-term detriment to the cause of peace;
  • And dealing every step of the way with an Israeli prime minister of a rightist coalition who will likely view every decision, great and small, through the lens of a fateful election he is expected to call very soon that will show whether the Israeli people want to punish him for the terrible errors that left Israel unprepared for Hamas’ 2023 attack or reward him for the impressive victories Israel’s military achieved across the region in the two years that followed.

Getting this far was a huge achievement. Ensuring effective execution — never a strong suit for a “big idea guy” like Trump — is a thousand times more difficult. This can’t be done with a small team of White House officials chatting on Signal. It will require an army of — please excuse the term — experts: experts in military command and control, experts in ordnance removal and disposal, experts in civilian rehabilitation and reconstruction, experts in communication and community engagement. Corporate subcontracting can address some of this, as can the impressive talents of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, but don’t be fooled into thinking that a consulting company or a former foreign official can pick up the slack of the entire U.S. government. This plan, after all, has Trump’s name on it, not Deloitte’s or Blair’s.

The president has at least one more vital task in this matter. He must explain to the American people why we are doing this. For nearly 20 years, American presidents of both parties have said they wanted to pivot away from the Middle East, but they continually find themselves entangled in the region’s often byzantine conflicts and politics. Americans deserve to know why the “America First” president has decided that American interests are intimately bound up in the success of this peace plan. Our domestic divisions notwithstanding, fair-minded people on both sides of the aisle will be rooting for Trump’s success in this peace deal.

For now, sure, the president should enjoy the accolades and celebrate the coming release of Hamas’ hostages. The morning after will come soon enough.

Robert Satloff is executive director of the Washington Institute.

Source link

FN America Delivers New 6.5mm Machine Gun, Rifle Prototypes For U.S. Military Testing

The American subsidiary of Belgian gunmaker Fabrique Nationale (FN) has delivered new prototype rifles and machine guns chambered to fire the 6.5x43mm Lightweight Intermediate Caliber Cartridge (LICC) to the U.S. military. LICC is one of several avenues the U.S. military has pursued in the past decade to find new small arms that offer greater range and terminal effectiveness, particularly over existing types firing the 5.56x45mm round. Though a U.S.-led effort, Canada has also been deeply involved in LICC.

FN America put out a press release today saying it had provided an unspecified number of test samples of the LICC-Individual Weapon System (LICC-IWS) and LICC-Assault Machine Gun (LICC-AMG) to the Irregular Warfare Technical Support Directorate (IWTSD). The IWTSD, first established in 1999 as the Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office (CTTSO), resides within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict. It is charged with identifying and developing new capabilities primarily to aid in irregular warfare operations. In U.S. military parlance, irregular warfare is an umbrella term that encompasses a host of lower-intensity mission sets, including counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism, as well as advising and assisting foreign forces, often performed by special operations units.

FN America’s LICC-AMG, at left, and LICC-IWS, at right. FN America

The LICC effort traces its roots back to the mid-2010s. The 6.5x43mm cartridge evolved directly from the .264 USA round, which was developed internally by the U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit (AMU). FN has been under contract to develop a weapon system to go with the LICC ammunition since 2019. The steel-cased 6.5x43mm rounds are 20 percent lighter than equivalent cartridges with brass cases, and have better accuracy, range, and performance compared to typical 5.56x45mm loadings, according to the company.

6.5x43mm LICC cartridges. FN America

The LICC-IWS is a version of FN’s Improved Performance Carbine (IPC). Though it has some broad external resemblances to the AR-15/M16 family, as well as larger AR-10-style guns, the IPC is a proprietary gas-piston operated design that first broke cover in 2023.

FN America has developed three subvariants of the LICC-IWS with 12.5-inch, 14.5-inch, and 18-inch barrels, referred to as the Close Quarters Battle, Carbine, and Designated Marksmanship Rifle types, respectively. The company says the 14.5-inch barrelled version is 35 and a half inches overall (32 and a half inches with its stock collapsed) and weighs 7.75 pounds. This puts it in the same general size and weight class as the 5.56x45mm M4A1 carbine, which continues to be widely issued across the U.S. military and has been something of a control standard for the LICC effort.

The LICC-IWS Carbine subvariant, at left and center right. The Close Quarters Battle and Designated Marksmanship Rifle subvariants are also shown at right. FN America

“Initial test firing results from the U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit and other operators show that the accuracy of the LICC-IWS is consistently two times better than the M4A1,” Jim Williams, Vice President of Military Programs for FN America, said in a statement today. “Additionally, the LICC-IWS handles like the M4A1, yet remains soft shooting when firing the new 6.5×43 lightweight ammunition.”

The LICC-AMG is a 6.5x43mm variant of FN’s Evolys machine gun, which made its public debut in 2021. The belt-fed Evolys is also offered chambered in 5.56x45mm and 7.62x51mm. The LICC version has a 14.5-inch barrel, is nearly 40 inches long overall (36 and a half inches with its stock collapsed), and weighs nearly 14 pounds. FN America says it has tested the LICC-AMG against its Mk 48, Mk 46, and M249 Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW) machine guns. The Mk 48 is a 7.62x51mm derivative of the 5.56x45mm M249. The Mk 46 is a special-purpose subvariant of the M249. All three types are in service with various elements of the U.S. military.

The LICC-AMG machine gun. FN America

“In prototype testing, the AMG was more accurate than the FN MK 48 in full auto mode,” according to FN America’s release today. “Overall, the AMG demonstrated improved performance in lethality, accuracy, durability, balance, and handling over the FN M249 and FN MK 46/MK 48 machine guns.”

“FN’s ultimate goal is to advance from development into production and field a final solution that provides operators a system that is easier to operate, more accurate and more effective than anything available today,” Mark Cherpes, President and CEO for FN America, also said in a statement. “After this test and evaluation phase, our plan is to take user feedback, fine-tune the systems, and move into low-rate initial production.”

“Multiple users will test the operational samples, providing critical feedback to aid FN and IWTSD in the final development of the systems,” today’s press release adds.

FN America

All this being said, what the exact plan is going forward for the LICC effort, and who might be in line to field the LICC-IWS and/or the LICC-AMG on any level, is not entirely clear. Key to the genesis of the preceding .264 USA cartridge were lessons learned by U.S. forces from combat in Afghanistan during the Global War on Terror era, where being outranged was a common complaint.

“Tactical operators require an integrated, user-tailorable, lightweight shoulder-fired individual weapon and lightweight intermediate caliber cartridge (LICC) that can overmatch the current maximum effective range and terminal effects of peer, near peer, and future threat individual weapons and ammunition, while also defeating current and emerging threat individual protective equipment out to 800 meters,” what was then CCTSO had said in a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) contracting notice back in 2018.

Since then, the U.S. Army has selected a new standard service rifle and replacement for the M249, the M7 and M250, both from Sig Sauer and chambered to fire a 6.8x51mm round. The Next Generation Squad Weapons program that birthed those weapons was driven heavily by the same concerns about range as LICC, as well as improvements in adversary body armor.

The M250 machine gun, at top, and the M7 rifle, at bottom. Sig Sauer

Army special operations units were involved in developmental testing of the M7 and M250, though it remains to be seen how widespread the use of those guns within the broader special operations community might be in the end. The M7 rifle has been the subject of some controversy recently, including criticism about its weight, bulk, and increased recoil compared to the M4A1, as you can read more about here.

In recent years, the U.S. special operations community has also increasingly embraced the 6.5mm Creedmoor round, again because of the increased range, accuracy, and terminal performance it offers over 5.56x45mm, as well as 7.62x51mm. U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) has ordered examples of at least two new rifles in this caliber in the past two years, and has also been evaluating belt-fed machine guns chambered to fire this round.

The Lewis Machine & Tool (LMT) Mid-Range Gas Gun-Assault (MRGG-A), one of two 6.5mm Creedmoor rifles SOCOM has begun to acquire in recent years. LMT

This all prompts a question of whether the IWTSD is now continuing to pursue LICC with more of an eye toward requirements from foreign allies and partners. As mentioned, Canada is known to be heavily involved in the effort. The 2018 BAA notably used Colt Canada’s C8 Special Forces Weapon (SFW), an AR-15/M16 pattern carbine distinct from the U.S. standard M4A1, as the comparison point for many of the stated LICC requirements. At the time of writing, the LICC-IWS and LICC-AMG pages on FN America’s website notably show the IWTSD logo and the crest of Canadian Special Operations Forces Command (CANSOFCOM).

Screen captures from the LICC-AMG and LICC-IWS webpages on FN America’s website showing the IWTSD logo and CANSOFCOM crest. FN America

“With an eye to the future, CANSOFCOM is pursuing a NATO Standardization Agreement (STANAG) for 6.5 x 43 mm in partnership with at least one additional NATO member,” Soldier Systems Daily reported earlier this year, citing unnamed sources. “At this point, the other party has not been disclosed. However, I know it is not the US, which has been working on the 6.8 x 51mm common case cartridge as their path forward.”

Canada has historically been very tight-lipped about its special operations community.

Whatever the case, FN America is clearly continuing to work with the IWTSD to advance the LICC effort, with series production of guns chambered in that round now said to be finally on the horizon.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Joseph has been a member of The War Zone team since early 2017. Prior to that, he was an Associate Editor at War Is Boring, and his byline has appeared in other publications, including Small Arms Review, Small Arms Defense Journal, Reuters, We Are the Mighty, and Task & Purpose.


Source link

‘We packed our bags and moved to America but life isn’t always a breeze’

A British woman who recently moved her family to Florida in the US has shared the top 10 things they don’t like about living in the sunshine state. There are certain things they seem to hate

A British family have relocated to America, but they’ve confessed there are certain aspects of life in the US they’re struggling to adjust to, and she’s not the first expat to be shocked by the differences. The woman who documents their experience under the username brits.inthesunshinestate on TikTok has revealed the 10 things the family dislike about living in Florida.

Despite only residing in the US for a matter of months, there are certain things they simply cannot get used to, and they’ve now laid them all bare. Emily posted her thoughts in a recent video, and her opinions have certainly sparked considerable debate.

It’s not the first occasion Brits have voiced their perspectives on the American lifestyle either. Previously, it emerged some Brits consider certain American customs completely impolite.

In the footage, she revealed: “Number one, the public bathroom stalls. The doors have a gap, probably like that either side. You can see straight through them.

“If you are sat on the toilet or, if you are washing your hands, you can see the reflection in the mirror. You can see people moving, you can see people’s clothes. I don’t like it, I don’t like the lack of privacy.

“Number two, WhatsApp does not really exist much out here. It’s all about texting and, to me, that is old school.

“Three, Florida drivers. They are wild, they are aggressive. In time, I will get used to it but, for now, it’s still a little bit crazy.

“Four. Since we’ve been here, we have had multiple people soliciting at our door, trying to sell their business, because they happen to be in the neighbourhood or going door to door. Don’t like that. We can stop it by putting a ‘no soliciting’ thing on our door. We can get that fixed.”

Content cannot be displayed without consent

In the clip, Emily also pointed out the family aren’t keen on sluggish pumps at petrol stations either. According to her, filling up can “take forever.”

She also highlighted that post can take ages to turn up, unless you’re ordering from Amazon Prime. Based on her experience, she said her mail can take anything from a week to 10 days to arrive.

Insects can also be “relentless” during the evening when you go for a stroll, she added. As soon as the sun goes down, she said they appear everywhere, and she finds it really annoying.

Snakes have also been a problem for her, though she admitted one she spotted was “fine.” Emily explained they have found a cottonmouth snake in the garden, and she didn’t like this as they can be dangerous.

Last but not least, she also admitted she thinks the healthcare system is “confusing.” Even though she likes how it’s run, she doesn’t like how tricky it is to understand.

She said there’s a lot of paperwork, and it’s something they’ll have to learn to get used to. Emily admitted it’s up to them to learn all they need to know about the system. Despite listing the downsides, she insisted that moving was still the best decision they’ve ever made.

The family are over the moon with their new life and adore living in the States. The video has racked up thousands of views since it was posted, sparking a flurry of comments, and opinions were decidedly split.

One viewer remarked: “As an American, we don’t like our stalls either. Might as well leave the door open wide.”

Another commented: “That’s exactly what I thought when I went to the USA years ago. I couldn’t live there because of the public toilets.”

A third responded: “I’ve lived in America for five years and I’ve never seen snakes.” Meanwhile, a fourth added: “All my bills come by email.”

Another person chimed in with: “Most drivers aren’t from Florida. They are either tourists or live here but moved from another state. It does make driving tricky though.”

Source link

Column: Anyone calling Bad Bunny un-American needs a geography lesson

Is there a better inkblot test for America right now than reaction to Bad Bunny being the halftime act for Super Bowl LX?

Soon after his name was announced, social media exploded into meritocracy debates as if the National Football League’s decisions are culturally motivated and not commercially. Taylor Swift is the most streamed artist in Spotify history. Bad Bunny is No. 2. For a domestic sports league trying to grow its popularity globally, the rationale seems clear.

And yet because he is a Puerto Rican who sings in Spanish, conservative talking heads must project outrage and offer listeners nonsensical objections.

“It’s so shameful they’ve decided to pick somebody who seems to hate America so much to represent them at the halftime show,” Corey Lewandowski, a longtime confidant of President Trump who currently advises the Department of Homeland Security, told conservative podcast host Benny Johnson. “We should be trying to be inclusive, not exclusive. There are plenty of great bands and entertainment people who could be playing at that show that would be bringing people together and not separating them.”

Suggesting Bad Bunny hates America is an interesting take given Puerto Ricans have been U.S. citizens since 1917. The three-time Grammy winner also has four No. 1 albums on the very American Billboard pop charts and has already performed during halftime at the Super Bowl back in 2020 with Jennifer Lopez and Shakira. The Federal Communications Commission received more than 1,300 complaints about the show that year with the vast majority being from parents complaining about the stripper pole and twerking of the women, not Bad Bunny’s alleged hate of America.

I don’t know if Lewandowski and Johnson knew any of that before they started talking, but I get the feeling it wouldn’t have mattered anyway. Once Lewandowski suggested ICE was going to be at the Super Bowl — an event that had an average resale ticket price of $8,600 in 2024 — it was clear their conversation wasn’t about solving the immigration problem.

It was clear they didn’t know much about the history of halftime acts either.

In 2006, a Super Bowl held in the heart of Detroit — the birthplace of Motown — rolled out the Rolling Stones, who are from London. In 2010, a Super Bowl in Miami — home of salsa and Afro-Cuban jazz — gave us the Who … who are also from England. In 2002, months after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, U2 — a band from Dublin, Ireland — did the show. There is a decades-long precedent for non-Americans to headline the Super Bowl. Though, again, quick geography lesson: Puerto Rico is part of the United States and Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens.

Detractors like Lewandowski and Johnson want to make English being Bad Bunny’s second language an indictment of his patriotism, as if growing up speaking English is a criterion for citizenship. It isn’t and never has been. Perhaps instead of using their platform to stir fear at a time when calm is needed, the two could see next February’s show as an opportunity to grow. Because honestly, it is so counterproductive to allow influential voices to gaslight the country into forgetting the milestones it’s already crossed. “La Bamba” by Los Lobos was sung in Spanish and hit No. 1 nearly 40 years ago. The only English in the K-pop hit “Gangnam Style” is “hey, sexy lady,” and that song made PSY an international sensation.

Instead of making people fear Spanish at the Super Bowl, maybe encourage them to spend this NFL season learning something beyond “gracias.“ Because in this world, there are people who choose to speak in English and there are people who have no other choice. Only one of those scenarios feels like freedom to me.

That was the topic of discussion in the summer of 2008 after then-Sen. Barack Obama said this at a campaign stop in Georgia: “Understand this, instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English — they’ll learn English — you need to make sure your child can speak Spanish. You should be thinking about how can your child become bilingual.”

At the time many conservatives — such as Tucker Carlson and Lou Dobbs — used those comments not as a prompt to debate the merits of Obama’s remarks regarding U.S. education but as a weapon to attack him. They accused him of being divisive — when years ago Nelson Mandela said when you talk to someone “in his own language, that goes to his heart.” In fact, Dobbs said “instead of diversity, he’s talking about factionalism.” Nonsense that sounds a lot like the echoes we hear from Lewandowski and Johnson today.

It’s not just a question of if our children should be bilingual; it’s also about being curious about the world we live in. This NFL season has already featured games in Ireland and Brazil. Mexico City is an annual event. The league is in it for the bag. And eventually there will be a team based overseas where Spanish is heard, visiting teams carry passports and Bad Bunny is no stranger.

YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow

Source link

Rory McIlroy awash in apologies over abusive Ryder Cup crowd

Rory McIlroy hadn’t even left the practice range last Friday morning when a small section of fans at the Ryder Cup started a profane chant aimed at his image on a video screen at Bethpage Black in Farmingdale, N.Y.

The verbal abuse and other inappropriate behavior directed toward McIlroy and his European teammates worsened as the weekend went on. At one point Saturday a cup of beer sailed out of the crowd and hit the brim of a hat worn by McIlroy’s wife, Erica Stoll, who was walking next to her husband.

The poor treatment didn’t prevent Team Europe from claiming a 15-13 win over the U.S. Afterward, McIlroy told reporters, “What happened here this week is not acceptable” and “I think golf should be held to a higher standard than than what was was seen out there this week.”

Derek Sprague, chief executive of PGA of America, told the Athletic this week that he had apologized to McIlroy and Stoll in an email.

Comedian Heather McMahan, who served as a morning emcee on the first two days of the Ryder Cup, also apologized this week for participating in a profane chant toward McIlroy.

And on Thursday — several days after he had seemingly trivialized the boorish fan behavior at the Ryder Cup by likening it to that of attendees at youth soccer games — PGA of America president Don Rea Jr. finally apologized in an email to the organization’s 30,000-plus members.

Don Rea Jr. wears a green vest over a white shirt as he speaks during a news conference.

PGA of America president Don Rea Jr. speaks during a news conference at the PGA Championship in May.

(Matt York / Associated Press)

“Let me begin with what we must own. While the competition was spirited — especially with the U.S. team’s rally on Sunday afternoon — some fan behavior clearly crossed the line,” Rea wrote in the email, which was viewed by the Associated Press. “It was disrespectful, inappropriate, and not representative of who we are as the PGA of America or as PGA of America golf professionals. We condemn that behavior unequivocally.”

It was a different tone from the one Rea took Sunday when the BBC asked him about the unruly behavior of fans.

“Well, you’ve got 50,000 people here that are really excited, and heck, you could go to a youth soccer game and get some people who say the wrong things,” Rea said. “We tell the fans, booing at somebody doesn’t make them play worse. Typically, it makes them play better. And when our American players have to control the crowds, that distracts them from playing. So our message today to everybody who’s out here is, cheer on the Americans like never before, because that’ll always get them to play better and get them out of crowd control and let them perform.”

Asked specifically about the verbal abuse directed toward McIlroy, Rea said: “You know, it happens when we’re over in Rome on the other side. And Rory understands. I thought he handled the press conference just amazingly. But yeah, things like that are going to happen. And I don’t know what was said, but all I know is golf is the engine of good.”

Sprague, who took over as PGA of America’s chief executive in January, told the Athletic on Wednesday that he had apologized to McIlroy’s manager that morning and asked him to pass along a message to the five-time major champion and his wife.

“I sent a long email to share with Rory and Erica and just told him that we will do better in the future,” Sprague said. “I’m the CEO now. I don’t condone this type of behavior. This is not good for the game of golf. It’s not good for the Ryder Cup. It’s not good for any of the professional athletes, and we will do better.”

A blond woman in a low-cut black gown poses in front of a blue background

Heather McMahan arrives at the 76th Emmy Awards on Sept. 15, 2024, at the Peacock Theater.

(Jae C. Hong / Invision / Associated Press)

In video footage from the first tee Saturday morning, McMahan appeared to be taking part in a profane chant aimed at McIlroy. That night, the PGA of America released a statement saying McMahan had apologized to McIlroy and Team Europe and had stepped down from her first-tee hosting duties.

McMahan addressed the situation Wednesday on her “Absolutely Not” podcast, saying she did not start the chant, as some outlets have reported, and said it only once before realizing it wasn’t something she wanted to take part in.

“I will take full responsibility and sincerely apologize to Rory, Team Europe for saying that,” McMahan said. “It was so foolish of me. I did not start the chant. I would just like that narrative to get out there. I did not start it, but any way that I had participated in that, even just saying it once, was so foolish and silly of me.

“And as soon as it came out and they started chanting, I was just like, ‘Oh, the energy just shifted.’ It went from us trying to be fun and funny … to immediately just was negative and felt really kind of toxic. So as soon as I said that I was like, ‘I don’t want any part of this.’”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source link

Military historians warn rolling back diversity initiatives could weaken America’s fighting force.

Historically, the U.S. military has been an engine for cultural and social change in America. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s vision for the armed forces he leads runs counter to that.

In comments Tuesday to hundreds of military leaders and their chief enlisted advisers, Hegseth made clear he was not interested in a diverse or inclusive force. His address at the Marine Corps base in Quantico, Virginia, verbalized what Hegseth has been doing as he takes on any program that can be labeled diversity, equity or inclusion, as well as targeting transgender personnel. Separately, the focus on immigration also is sweeping up veterans.

For too long, “the military has been forced by foolish and reckless politicians to focus on the wrong things. In many ways, this speech is about fixing decades of decay, some of it obvious, some of it hidden,” Hegseth said. “Foolish and reckless political leaders set the wrong compass heading, and we lost our way. We became the woke department, but not anymore.”

Hegseth’s actions — and plans for more — are a reversal of the role the military has often played.

“The military has often been ahead of at least some broader social, cultural, political movements,” said Ronit Stahl, associate professor of history at the University of California, Berkeley. ”The desegregation of the armed forces is perhaps the most classic example.”

President Harry S. Truman’s desegregation order in 1948 came six years before the Supreme Court ordered school desegregation in the Brown vs. Board of Education case — and, Stahl said, “that obviously takes a long time to implement, if it ever fully is implemented.”

It has been a circuitous path

Truman’s order was not a short progression through American society. Although the military was one of the few places where there was organizational diversity, the races did not mix in their actual service. Units like the Tuskegee Airmen, the Navajo Code Talkers and the Buffalo Soldiers, formed in 1866, were segregated until the order opened the door to integrated units.

Women were given full status to serve in 1948 with the Women’s Armed Services Integration Act. There were restrictions on how many could serve and they were generally not allowed to command men or serve in combat. Before then, they had wartime roles and they did not serve in combat, although hundreds of nurses died and women were pilots, including Women Airforce Service Pilots, or WASPs.

The WASPs and Tuskegee Airmen were among the first groups this year to be affected when Hegseth issued his DEI order. The Air Force removed training videos of the airmen along with ones showing the World War II contributions of the WASPs at the basic training base in San Antonio. The videos were restored after widespread bipartisan outcry over their removal.

Other issues over time have included “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the policy that allowed gay and lesbian service members to serve as long as their sexual orientation was not public. That was repealed during the Obama administration. Women were allowed to serve on combat aircraft and combat ships in the early 1990s — then all combat positions after a ban was lifted in 2015.

“The military has always had to confront the question of social change and the question of who would serve, how they would serve and in what capacity they would serve. These are questions that have been long-standing back to the founding in some ways, but certainly in the 20th century,” said David Kieran, distinguished chair in Military History at Columbus State University in Columbus, Georgia. “These are not new questions.”

Generally the answer has come down to what “the military writ large” has concluded. “‘How do we achieve our mission best?’” Kieran said. “And a lot of these things have been really hotly debated.”

Part of a larger, longer debate

Kieran offered one example: changes the Army made in the 1960s when it was dealing with a climate of racism and racial tensions. Without that, he said, “the military can’t fight the war in Vietnam effectively.”

The same considerations were given to how to address the problem of sexual harassment. Part of the answer involved what was morally right, but “the larger issue is: If soldiers are being harassed, can the Army carry out its mission effectively?”

While “it is important to see these actions as part of a longer history and a larger debate,” Kieran said, “it’s certainly also true that the current administration is moving at a far more aggressive and faster pace than we’ve seen in earlier administrations.”

Michael O’Hanlon, director of research in the foreign policy program at the Brookings Institution, questioned some of the actions that Trump’s Defense Department has taken, including replacing the chairman of the joint chiefs, Air Force Gen. CQ Brown Jr.

“He was a fine Air Force officer,” O’Hanlon said. Even if he got the job in part because of his race, “it wouldn’t be disqualifying in my book, unless he was unqualified — and he wasn’t.”

Matthew Delmont, a professor of history at Dartmouth College, said the current attitudes he is seeing toward the military suggest a misunderstanding of the armed forces and why the changes have been made.

“The military, for more than seven decades now, has been more on the leading edge in terms of figuring out how to put together an organization that tries to take advantage of the talents and capacities of all Americans,” Delmont said. Since Truman signed his executive order, “the military has moved faster and farther than almost any other organization in thinking about issues of racial equality, and then later thinking about the issues related to gender and sexuality.”

Delmont said bias, prejudice and racism remain in the military, but the armed services have done more “than a lot of corporations, universities, other organizations to try to address those head-on.”

“I wouldn’t say it was because they were particularly interested in trying to advance the social agenda,” he said. “I think they did it because they recognized you can’t have a unified fighting force if the troops are fighting each other, or if you’re actively turning away people who desire to serve their country.”

Fields writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Ryder Cup: Rory McIlroy abuse “crossed the line” – PGA of America CEO Derek Sprague

McIlroy described the abuse as “unacceptable” and said it should be “off-limits”.

Sprague says he plans on apologising to McIlroy and his family.

“I haven’t spoken to Rory or Erica [McIlroy] but I do plan on sending them an email with my heartfelt apologies because of what occurred,” he said.

McIlroy suffered lengthy abuse before eventually snapping by swearing at a spectator that called out while he was addressing the ball.

“I chirped back because it got to me a few times, but we tried to handle everything that came our way with class and poise, and for the most part, I felt like we did that,” said McIlroy.

“It was a rough week for all of us. But at the same time, we shut them up by our performance.”

Source link