text stringlengths 237 126k | date_download stringdate 2022-01-01 00:32:20 2023-01-01 00:02:37 ⌀ | source_domain stringclasses 60 values | title stringlengths 4 31.5k ⌀ | url stringlengths 24 617 ⌀ | id stringlengths 24 617 ⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The ‘Peanuts’ team is creating scholarships to support diversity in the arts
Cartoonist Robb Armstrong, who shares his surname with “Peanuts” character Franklin Armstrong, is eager to see the art that will emerge from the Armstrong Project, which will provide $200,000 in endowments to two HBCUs. (Tito Gibbs)
Robb Armstrong remembers the thrill of first seeing a character who looked like him within the mostly-White world of “Peanuts.”
Armstrong was 6 years old when Charles M. “Sparky” Schulz introduced a Black playmate named Franklin in the summer of 1968. That change, rolled out despite concerns from the syndication service, represented something profound to a West Philadelphia child who had a precocious gift with a pen. Says Armstrong, who would grow up to create the popular syndicated strip “JumpStart”: “It was a prominent beam of possibility.”
Armstrong didn’t know then that a schoolteacher’s recent letters to Schulz advocating for more diversity had led to the creation of Franklin. And he couldn’t have guessed that about a quarter-century later, Schulz would ask for his permission to give the character the full name of Franklin Armstrong — as an artistic salute to his colleague who was a creator for the same syndicate.
Today, Armstrong simply knows he wants to pay such inspiration forward.
Peanuts Worldwide will announce Monday the launch of the Armstrong Project, which will provide $200,000 in endowments to two HBCUs: Howard University in Washington and Hampton University in Virginia.
The project will offer a scholarship to a student at each school who is studying the arts, animation, entertainment or communication, as well as provide mentorships and internships.
“I’m hopeful that the awareness and action we are creating through the Armstrong Project will grow into extraordinary expressions of creativity and accomplishment, as these students launch lifelong careers in the arts,” says Jean Schulz, widow of the cartoonist and president of the board of directors at the Charles M. Schulz Museum. “I’m personally so excited to see what they will achieve.”
Leaders at each university expressed their gratitude in statements to announce the project.
The endowments also come at a time when Black creators are underrepresented in comics syndication. In 2020, Steenz (“Heart of the City”) and Bianca Xunise (“Six Chix”) became two of the few African American women ever to appear on mainstream comics pages.
Newspaper comics hardly ever feature black women as artists. But two new voices have arrived.
Armstrong, though, doesn’t focus on such “dismal statistics.” Instead, he places his hope in students’ aspirations. “I don’t want things to change — I want kids to change in favor of the things they want to do,” says Armstrong, noting: “Things are best when young people don’t feel deterred.”
The cartoonist, speaking by phone from Burbank, Calif., says it was an internship that altered the course of his life.
As an adolescent, Armstrong was transferred to the Shipley School in Bryn Mawr, Pa., by his arts-supportive mother. The school had recently gone coed, and Armstrong recounts being not only one of its few Black students then, but also one of its relatively few boys.
Yet when Armstrong was 17, the connections in that setting led to a three-week internship with local artist Signe Wilkinson, who would later become the first woman to win the Pulitzer Prize for editorial cartooning. From that experience, he learned firsthand how to be a “working pragmatic” cartoonist, hitting the bricks to make your art sales and refusing to take rejections to heart. Soon after, the teen cartoonist was drawing editorial artwork for the Philadelphia Tribune.
Armstrong’s art garnered further support in the ’80s while he attended Syracuse University, as his campus newspaper comic grew in popularity. Several years later, he signed with United Feature Syndicate — which also distributed “Peanuts” — and launched “JumpStart,” which centers on a Black family with four children. At the time, few Black families appeared on the comics page.
Armstrong was in his mid-20s when he met Schulz, whose advice and acceptance had a major impact on the younger cartoonist. Now, a veteran cartoonist himself — he turns 60 this week — he wants his connection to the Franklin Armstrong character, as well as his position on the Schulz Museum board, to make a difference. “Once you know the story about Schulz and I, it’s more than interesting — it’s deeply meaningful,” he says. “But I have to do something with it.”
“I want kids to feel that they have a road map provided to them,” notes Armstrong, who says he’s eager to visit both campuses and say in person to the students: “I’m looking for an intern — I need to see your work. I want to see what you’ve got!”
The Armstrong Project brings the educational origin of the Franklin character full circle. Harriet Glickman was a retired schoolteacher in Burbank in 1968 when, in response to the assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., she wrote to cartoonists to propose introducing Black characters. She had seen firsthand the power of comics among young readers, and she viewed the comics page as a positive forum amid the era’s sociopolitical turbulence. After some correspondence, Schulz decided to introduce Franklin.
Before he did, though, his syndicate said: “ ‘Are you sure you want to do this?’ ” Glickman, who died two years ago, told The Post in 2017. “If you know Sparky, you know what his response was. He said: ‘Either you run it the way I drew it, or I quit.’ ”
Glickman also recounted: “Schulz received some messages from the South from [editors], saying: ‘Please don’t send us any more strips with Black children in the classroom with White children. We’re going through forced integration in our schools and don’t want to see any more of these strips.’ ”
Franklin continued to appear in the classroom in the ’60s, paving the way for Franklin Armstrong to help endow classrooms in 2022 and beyond.
MORE ON COMICS AND CARTOONS
Emma Allen is redefining what a New Yorker cartoon can be
Newspaper cartooning is dominated by White men. Will a new White House spark change?
Three ‘lost’ Charles Schulz strips have been rediscovered. Do they show the adult Lucy Van Pelt? | null | null | null | null | null |
“She screamed, ‘Hurry! You’ve got to come and help — my friends down there are drowning!’” he said, recalling that she wildly pointed down a hill. “She was really panicked.”
“They were all screaming they were going to die,” he said. “And I told them, ‘No, that’s not going to happen today. I’ll get you out.’”
“The first kid, a boy, grabbed the stick and I pulled him out,” said Anthony. “But I couldn’t reach the other two.”
The three children were taken to a local hospital for evaluation and were released that evening to their families, he said.
“They were out playing on a nice, sunny day and this all happened in a matter of minutes,” said Kilroy. “There’s an educational lesson in here about not walking onto the ice on a nice day. It’s thinner than people realize.”
“When I got there, it was a scary scene, especially as a parent,” said Kilroy. “It’s a huge relief to know that everyone is okay.”
“When I got home that day, I told my dad, ‘I saved some lives today,’” he said. “I was glad I was there to help. It’s scary to think about what could have happened.” | null | null | null | null | null |
It wasn’t Richard Nixon who changed relations with China
The American public has played a key role in fostering engagement — and still can.
Chinese Communist Party leader Mao Zedong, left, and President Richard Nixon shake hands as they meet in Beijing on Feb. 21, 1972. (AP)
By Kazushi Minami
Kazushi Minami is an associate professor at the Osaka School of International Public Policy, Osaka University, where he is completing his book on "people's diplomacy" between the United States and China during the Cold War.
Fifty years ago today, on Feb. 28, 1972, President Richard Nixon was triumphant. After a week of meetings with the Chinese, he signed the Shanghai Communique. It declared that the United States and the People’s Republic of China, having collided over Korea, Taiwan and Vietnam in the 1950s and 1960s, were no longer enemies. The Cold War was never the same again. China, once a socialist “brother” of the Soviet Union, was becoming a “tacit ally” of the United States.
Before departing Shanghai for Alaska, Nixon gushed that his trip to China was a “week that changed the world.”
Not necessarily. The trip was certainly a breakthrough for many things — not least the relationship between the United States and China, made peaceful and stable. But it also marked a culmination of new trends in the United States that had emerged in the previous decade. Today, the U.S. opening to China serves as a reminder that the American public — not just the elite in Washington — shapes U.S. relations with China.
Following the Chinese Revolution of 1949, led by Mao Zedong, chairman of the Chinese Communist Party, the United States refused to recognize the new regime and supported the Republic of China in Taiwan, ruled by the Chinese Nationalist Party. Washington cut trade and travel ties with the mainland and barred “Red China” from the United Nations and other international institutions, hoping that the policy of “containment and isolation” would induce its collapse. Anyone who demurred was hounded during the era of McCarthyism.
Americans lost almost all contact with China, and the result was profound ignorance and fear about the country. According to a 1964 survey, 28 percent of Americans did not know that China was a communist country. Forty percent did not know that there were “two Chinas,” one on the mainland and the other on Taiwan. Yet 86 percent believed that the United States should be concerned about China as a Cold War adversary.
The escalation of the Vietnam War changed the mood. In a 1966 Senate hearing, A. Doak Barnett of Columbia University proposed “containment without isolation” as an alternative approach to China, which was sending hundreds of thousands of its soldiers to North Vietnam to assist the war efforts against the United States and South Vietnam. Barnett reasoned that incorporating China into the international community would defang its aggressive foreign policy, especially in Southeast Asia.
Shortly after, some Quakers, China scholars and business executives established the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations, a nongovernmental organization devoted to spurring a new national debate on China. Through scholarly conferences, public lectures and town hall meetings, it educated the public on Chinese culture, politics, and diplomacy, subjects that had been considered taboo just a few years prior. The National Committee, as well as universities, church groups and women’s organizations that hosted similar events, would have aroused significant conservative ire in the heyday of McCarthyism, but in the age of Vietnam, many Americans believed that the nation needed a new China policy.
U.S. government leaders agreed. President Lyndon B. Johnson invited the National Committee leadership to the White House in 1968, and he explained that his administration had implemented many of the measures that the group recommended, including gradual lifting of travel and trade restrictions. “We are not hidebound,” Johnson pledged, enshrining “containment without isolation” as a new principle of U.S. policy toward China.
Many Americans wanted even more. Some Black Power activists embraced China as a source of inspiration for their armed struggle against white supremacy. Robert F. Williams, author of “Negroes with Guns,” for example, extolled “the militant friendship” between the American people and the Chinese people while living in exile in Beijing between 1966 and 1969. Influenced by Williams, members of the Black Panther Party devoured “Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong” — or “Mao’s Little Red Book” — and sold copies for a dollar near the campus of the University of California, Berkeley.
They were not alone in their advocacy of Mao’s China. The Committee of Concerned Asian Scholars, a cluster of young Asian Studies scholars who criticized the academic establishment’s reticence about U.S. “imperialism” in Vietnam, wrote prolifically about China, the lodestar of anti-imperialist movements around the world. In 1971, the Committee became one of the first groups to be invited to China, and its book, “China! Inside the People’s Republic,” romanticized life under Chinese socialism. American ideas about China were growing more sympathetic.
This was most visible in the Gallup poll on China’s admission to the United Nations. In 1954, only 7 percent of Americans supported the idea. In 1971, on the eve of China’s entry into the U.N., that number had grown to over 50 percent, although few acquiesced in Taiwan’s expulsion. Nixon’s often-quoted line in his 1967 article in Foreign Affairs — “There is no place on this small planet for a billion of its potentially most able people to live in angry isolation” — reflected the collective wisdom of the time.
And so, as president, Nixon took action. As soon as he was sworn in, he began to seek a direct line of communication with China, through secret channels in Pakistan, Romania and France. A breakthrough came in April 1971, during the Table Tennis World Championship in Nagoya, Japan. In what would become known as the ‘Ping-Pong diplomacy,’ Beijing invited American players at the tournament to take a tour of China. Days after the U.S. team returned home, Premier Zhou Enlai extended an invitation to Nixon to visit Beijing.
National security adviser Henry Kissinger flew to Beijing twice in 1971 to lay the groundwork for the summit meeting. Kissinger and Zhou wrangled over many subjects, particularly Taiwan and Vietnam, but they did agree on one critical issue: the threat posed by the “polar bear.” At the time, the Soviet Union was challenging U.S. nuclear superiority while also amassing troops along its borders with China, a buildup that had accelerated after the 1969 border clash. The well-publicized photograph of a handshake between Nixon and Mao altered the global balance of power.
The U.S. opening to China was a skillful diplomatic stunt, but it was also made possible by broader shifts in American attitudes toward China since the 1960s. Even before the ‘Ping-Pong diplomacy,’ Americans were debating when, not if, the gate to China would swing open. As Mao said, “the world changed Nixon,” not the other way around.
This realization is important in today’s context.
Nixon’s trip to China is celebrated as one of the major milestones of Cold War history and the genesis of U.S. engagement with China. Critics say that this policy was predicated on the hope, shared by U.S. policymakers for almost half a century, that interactions with the United States would one day make China “more like us.” Today, the recent U.S.-China rivalry has diminished that hope. Indeed, Orville Schell, director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society, pronounced engagement “dead.”
But it is worth remembering that Americans from all walks of life, not just government officials, ushered in the era of engagement. Today, a tougher policy toward China has gained bipartisan consensus in Washington, but basic facts of American life — expanded trade with China even in the midst of a global pandemic, the number of international students from China exceeding that of other countries and Chinese cultural imprints such as Lunar New Year — demonstrate that engagement is still alive and well. | null | null | null | null | null |
Supreme Court could thwart EPA’s ability to address climate change
No matter the outcome of West Virginia v. EPA, the agency can take action to engage the public and make data more accessible
The Ramaco Resources Stonecoal Alma mine near Wylo, W.Va., on Aug. 8, 2017. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg)
By Leif Fredrickson
Leif Fredrickson is working with the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative to put the Trump administration's policies in historical context. He is also writing a book about the history of lead poisoning in Baltimore and the nation.
On Monday, the Supreme Court hears West Virginia v. EPA. The case could thwart the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to shift our country toward clean energy and has potential implications for subverting the basic functioning of virtually all federal regulatory agencies.
Whatever the outcome, one thing is clear: the EPA has entered a newly inhospitable era for regulatory action. Nowhere is this more true than in how the agency approaches the climate crisis. A look at the agency’s past shows how its opportunities to act on global warming have narrowed over time. But this history also reveals an important way the agency can still act: by taking a more rigorous, systematic and public-centered approach to data.
President Richard Nixon created the EPA in 1970s, designating it as an independent regulatory agency. This was by design, since some Nixon advisers worried that combining pollution control offices with the Department of Interior would allow the economic imperatives of natural resource agencies to undermine environmental protection.
It was a reasonable concern given the vulnerability of natural resources to industry influence. But it resulted in environmental protection operating as an outside regulatory force instead of being integrated into federal natural resource management and energy development.
Still, the EPA’s intended regulatory scope was expansive. Nixon gave the EPA a broad mandate to tackle new and emerging environmental problems. And with the 1970 Clean Air Act, Congress empowered the EPA to regulate all kinds of potential pollutants, including, presciently, those that threaten the “climate.”
But, initially, the agency didn’t take action on global warming. Indeed, in 1979, the eminent climate scientist and presidential adviser Gordon MacDonald argued before Congress that the EPA was neglecting its legal duty to regulate greenhouse gases (GHG). David Hawkins, head of EPA’s air division, acknowledged the need for federal action that same year. But Hawkins also indicated why the agency had taken no action: “We have all we can do keeping up with today's problems.”
Instead, the agency rolled up its sleeves attacking problems that people confronted every day, like smog and dirty rivers. Congress delegated ample regulatory power to the agency — but also saddled it with deadlines and hearings to ensure the agency stayed on track.
In the 1980s and 1990s, the EPA made progress on pollution control, but global warming began to loom even more ominously. Yet regulatory action was still off the table. What was on the table was information-gathering: EPA produced climate policy reports for Congress, and it helped establish international institutions for addressing and monitoring climate change. Domestically, it began inventorying and monitoring GHG emissions.
This information and data policy reflected a lack of political will for regulations. But it also reflected an emerging movement advocating for the public’s right-to-know about environmental threats.
Regulations did finally come because of outside pressure. In the early 2000s, a coalition of groups sued George W. Bush’s EPA, arguing it had a duty to regulate GHGs under the Clean Air Act. The controversial case, which tapped fundamental constitutional questions about Congress’s delegation of authority, went to the Supreme Court.
In a 5-to-4 decision in 2007, the court ruled that GHGs were “pollutants” under the Clean Air Act, and the agency was legally bound to regulate them if it found them to be a danger to public health. The EPA did find they endangered public health, and it issued regulations under President Barack Obama in the 2010s. The regulations targeting power plants have, however, subsequently been subject to a paralyzing mix of lawsuits and attempted repeals during the Trump administration. They’re now in a sort of regulatory limbo.
That’s why the changing conservative composition of the Supreme Court matters. It was the current right-wing supermajority that agreed to hear West Virginia v. EPA, a case in which the petitioners ask the court to preemptively tell the EPA how to craft regulations. That is not normal.
What will happen in this case? The court could use a narrow interpretation of the Clean Air Act to hobble the EPA’s options for cleaning up the power plant sector. It’s also possible that conservative justices could deploy radical legal doctrines to sabotage the normal functioning of federal agencies. A sweeping ruling like that is unlikely, but its possibility portends a new era for the EPA.
So what options exist if the EPA can’t take the broad regulatory action on climate change?
It could improve and elevate one of its important, if largely unsung, functions: collecting and disseminating data about emissions, violations and enforcement actions. Data collection has been integral to EPA regulation from the beginning. Since the 1980s, it has developed other data inventories with the explicit purpose of informing the public. And in the early 2000s, it launched web-based tools to allow public access to data.
Still, EPA data collection has many problems. Important data that could be automatically and electronically recorded is not. Data that should be passed from states to the EPA is not. And there are many questions about the quality of data that is recorded. In addition, much of this data is not practically accessible to the public. The agency is chipping away at some of these issues, but the long-term data issues indicate it has not sufficiently prioritized fixing this.
But if the agency is willing to prioritize and fund it, better data collection and dissemination can be a powerful, parallel strategy to regulation.
First, adopting better systems for monitoring and collecting data promote compliance and make enforcement more effective. GHG regulations that are on the books will be stronger. It will also strengthen other pollution regulations, some of which have GHG reduction co-benefits. And it will also create a dynamic data infrastructure necessary to implement future climate regulations.
Second, making this data more usable and relevant to the public can build support for EPA action on climate change. The EPA is a deeply technocratic agency, and its operation can seem arcane to people. Documenting, formatting and presenting data in ways that help the public to see how policy affects them, and how they can leverage the policy, can create stronger public advocacy.
The EPA’s current ecosystem is challenging but it has a potentially strong, consistent ally: the public. It was public protest and advocacy that pressured the environmentally ambivalent Nixon to create the agency. And it was public advocacy that forced the EPA to finally regulate greenhouse gases. The EPA should build on that history. | null | null | null | null | null |
Farm production — traditionally an area in which Russia has underperformed due to the low quality of its frigid, drought-prone agricultural land — has boomed over the past decade. That’s important, because food exports have long been a crucial contributor to security and diplomacy, and one in which the amply fed U.S. and European Union have an inbuilt advantage. Even if President Vladimir Putin is found to have overplayed a weak hand in his invasion of Ukraine, food is one area where Russia’s sway is set to increase rather than deteriorate in the coming decades.
Collectivization and the brutal famine that killed around 4 million Ukrainians in the the 1930s saw agricultural output stagnate, to the point where, by the 1970s, the U.S.S.R. was importing an unprecedented amount of grain. Moscow’s inability to pay for its cereal purchases when the mid-1980s oil price collapse reduced the value of its petroleum exports was a major factor in the fall of Soviet communism, amid rationing and renewed fears of starvation.
That situation has dramatically reversed in recent years. Since the 2014 invasion of Crimea, Russia has turned itself from one of the world’s major food importers to an exporter on a grand scale. Shipments of wheat overtook those from the European Union, U.S. and Canada in 2017 to return the country to its Tsarist-era status as the world’s biggest exporter of that grain(1). Chicago wheat futures on Friday hit their highest levels since 2008. | null | null | null | null | null |
Russia's currency tanks, stock market closes as Western sanctions shake the economy
Good morning, Early Birds! This is your daily reminder that New Jersey is the best state. No, you can't change my mind … but you can send tips: earlytips@washpost.com. [Jackie did not approve of this greeting].
🚨: The House and the Senate return to Washington this week, and will also make masks optional throughout the Capitol complex ahead of Tuesday's State of the Union address.
Russian ruble tanks, stock market closes as Western sanctions shake the economy
While you were sleeping: Less than a week after Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered his military to invade Ukraine, the ruble has plunged nearly 30% and the Bank of Russia has moved to defend the ruble and prevent a bank run.
"The bank more than doubled its key interest rate to 20%, the highest in almost two decades, and imposed some controls on the flow of capital," Bloomberg's Netty Idayi Ismail and Jana Randow report.
"At current levels the ruble’s slump is the biggest since 1998, the year the nation’s economy went into a tailspin and the government defaulted on its local debt."
Meanwhile, on the Belarus border, Russian and Ukrainian diplomats are set to begin talks, according to the office of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
“The key issue of the negotiations is an immediate cease-fire and the withdrawal of troops from the territory of Ukraine,” Zelensky’s office said on the Telegram app.
"Belarus is preparing to send soldiers into Ukraine in support of the Russian invasion as soon as Monday, a U.S. official said, in a move that increases tensions," our colleagues report.
Fierce resistance from Ukrainians could make for a protracted conflict with Russian forces:
“Lightly armed units propelled deep into the country without support have been surrounded and their soldiers captured or killed," our colleagues Liz Sly and Dan Lamothe report. "Warplanes have been shot out of the skies and helicopters have been downed, according to Ukrainian and U.S. military officials. Logistics supply chains have failed, leaving troops stranded on roadsides to be captured because their vehicles ran out of fuel."
In the White House: Biden is expected to host a call with allies this morning in the Situation Room to discuss Ukraine, according to the White House.
What we’re reading about the war:
Biden wanted to use the State of the Union to pivot to his agenda. Then Russia started a land war. By The Post’s Annie Linskey and Tyler Pager.
Historic sanctions on Russia had roots in emotional appeal from Zelensky. By The Post’s David J. Lynch, Michael Birnbaum, Ellen Nakashima and Paul Sonne.
Miles-long lines, the kindness of strangers, an uncertain future: Scenes from the Ukraine-Poland border. By The Post’s Max Bearak, Loveday Morris and Jon Gerberg.
Russian rouble plunges 28% after US and allies impose tighter sanctions. By the Financial Times’s Katie Martin, Tommy Stubbington and Hudson Lockett.
‘I’m a soldier now.’ Even in untouched villages, Ukrainians prepare to fight. By the New York Times’s Michael Schwirtz.
Ukraine invasion tests the ties that bind Putin and Xi. By the New York Times’s Steven Lee Myers.
A K Street mystery: How a lobbyist's name ended up on a research paper
A paper published earlier this month on “Amazon’s anticompetitive assault” on the U.S. Postal Service listed two staffers at the consulting firm EconOne as its authors.
The document’s metadata — which shows who created the file and when they did so — told a different story.
The metadata showed the file’s creator as Jessica Lowrance, a lobbyist at UPS — which has been at odds with Amazon over a bill to shore up the Postal Service’s beleaguered finances that the Senate is set to take up this week.
Both UPS and Hal Singer, a managing director at EconOne and the paper’s lead author, told The Early that Lowrance played no role in writing the paper. “Ted and I wrote every word of it,” Singer said, referring to his co-author, Ted Tatos.
But Lowrance, who did not respond to a request for comment, did review the paper before it was published and share feedback. Singer speculated that while reviewing it Lowrance might have pasted his paper into a new Word document that he later used to create the PDF of the final paper. The metadata was visible to anyone who downloaded the paper from EconOne’s website before it was replaced with a new version late last week after The Early inquired about it. (Amazon's founder, Jeff Bezos, owns The Washington Post.)
Lowrance “did not take part in any aspect of authoring this paper,” UPS said in a statement. “She, as a postal economist, as well as many other postal experts, was asked to comment on an embargoed draft of the paper and her actual comments were limited to an aspect of the appendix.”
Who funded the paper
UPS’ undisclosed role in reviewing a paper that criticized one of its rivals spotlights the sometimes-opaque process through which consulting firms are hired to produce research by advocacy groups.
The paper said in a footnote that a group called the Family Business Coalition, "which includes small family-owned businesses that ship parcels, provided research funding for this project.” Singer said the coalition approached him last year about researching Amazon’s relationship with the Postal Service.
“They were complaining about potentially having to pay higher prices for shipping as a result of Amazon’s special deals [with the Postal Service] but they weren’t sure how it was happening,” he said.
The coalition didn’t disclose its members when it hired him, and Singer said he didn’t ask. He looked at the coalition’s website, he said, and concluded that it appeared to be made up of family-owned businesses.
Alex Ayers, a spokesman for the coalition, also said it doesn’t reveal its members. But some of the trade groups that belong to the coalition have signed onto letters that it sent out, he said; they include influential Washington organizations that represent small businesses such as the International Franchise Association and the Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America.
The coalition — not Singer — sent a draft of the paper to Lowrance “because she is an expert on postal issues and former [Postal Service economist] to help us review the final report,” Ayers wrote in an email to The Early. “I assume that is how her name ended up in the metadata.”
UPS is not a member of the coalition, according to the company.
Singer also circulated the draft paper to others, including Matt Stoller, a former congressional aide who’s outspoken on antitrust issues and who shared feedback with Singer. Stoller said he understood how Lowrance’s name might have gotten attached to it.
“I sent those comments in email, but had I done line by line edits in Word and saved a new version, and had they worked off that draft, it would have listed me as the author even though I hadn't written it,” Stoller wrote in an email to The Early.
‘None of us works for free’
Singer's paper argues that the Postal Service's deal to ship packages for Amazon has forced it to raise prices for other customers to cover potential losses. When it came out, it made the rounds among Amazon critics. Stoller linked to it in his newsletter.
“Finally we have data!” Stacy Mitchell, the co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, who has researched how Amazon wields its market advantage, wrote on Twitter. “Amazon’s ultra-low prices from the US Postal Service are in fact below cost. And these sweetheart deals have prompted the USPS to RAISE prices to small & mid-sized businesses.”
Others — some of whom are aligned with Amazon in the dispute over the postal bill — took issue with that conclusion.
“Aside from the fact that it appears to be an anti-Amazon polemic, as far as I can tell it’s pretty out of touch with the actual facts,” said Art Sackler, the coordinator of the Coalition for a 21st Century Postal Service, which counts Amazon among its members.
Singer’s research on behalf of advocacy groups has been cited by lawmakers in policy battles in the past. Singer responded in a now-deleted tweet to criticism of a study he co-authored in 2014 that became the basis of an ad campaign run by the National Cable and Telecommunications Association (now known as NCTA — The Internet & Television Association).
“None of us works for free,” he tweeted. “So let’s focus on the merits & be nice to each other!”
But Singer said he didn’t write his new paper or release it shortly before the Senate took up the Postal Service bill this week with the intent of influencing the debate over the legislation, parts of which UPS has criticized and which Amazon is backing.
“I don’t think it has any bearing on the Senate bill, and that was not the intention,” he said.
Precision Strategies adds Rachael Hartford
New gig for Brown aide: The consulting firm Precision Strategies has hired Rachael Hartford as an associate vice president for communications. She was previously deputy communications director to Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.
Precision Strategies was co-founded by three Obama campaign alumni, including Jen O'Malley Dillon, who is now White House deputy chief of staff.
Guns, radicalization, and a father’s alleged threat: First Jan. 6 trial set to begin. By The Post’s Spencer Hsu.
Republicans make gains in the Rio Grande Valley ahead of Texas primary. By The Post’s Arelis Hernández and Michael Scherer.
Democrats try to regain footing for midterm elections. By The Post’s Michael Scherer, Sean Sullivan and Tyler Pager.
Four women on the Supreme Court would bring historic, near gender parity for institution long dominated by White men. By The Post’s Robert Barnes.
‘They seem so like us’: In depicting Ukraine’s plight, some in media use offensive comparisons. By The Post’s Sarah Ellison and Travis M. Andrews.
ICYMI: Trump and CPAC had a different war on their minds. By the Intelligencer’s Ben Jacobs.
Dancing with the War President | null | null | null | null | null |
The headquarters of Bank Rossii, Russia's central bank, in Moscow, on Wednesday, Feb. 23, 2022. U.S. President Biden's debut set of sanctions on Russia for its actions over disputed Ukrainian territory hit markets with a whimper and were quickly criticized as limited in scope. (Andrey Rudakov/Bloomberg)
Overnight, European leaders imposed new measures that effectively cut Russia off from its financial reserves. The U.S. Department of Treasury followed suit with similar steps on Monday morning. Under the new regime, all people in the U.S. and European Union are banned from trading with Russia’s central bank. The sanctions also apply to Russia’s finance ministry and its sovereign wealth fund, to prevent the Kremlin from using loopholes to continue to access the reserves.
“The unprecedented action we are taking today will significantly limit Russia’s ability to use assets to finance its destabilizing activities, and target the funds [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and his inner circle depend on to enable his invasion of Ukraine,” Secretary of the Treasury Janet L. Yellen said in a statement. “Today, in coordination with partners and allies, we are following through on key commitments to restrict Russia’s access to these valuable resources.”
“In one fell swoop, the U.S. and Europe have rendered Putin’s war chest unusable … That the U.S. and Europe have done this in unified fashion sends a crystal-clear message that Russia will face dramatic costs so long as Putin’s war of aggression continues,” said Edward Fishman, former Russian and Europe sanctions lead at the State Department. “This action represents a sea change in U.S. and European strategy. Just 72 hours ago, a step like this was unthinkable.”
“It has historically been viewed as almost beyond the plane — the thing to do when sanctions, and diplomacy, have been seemingly exhausted,” Smith said. “That the international community was willing to go this far, and suffer the consequences of doing so … suggests just how far this crisis has gone in just its first week.” | null | null | null | null | null |
The federal prosecutor whose office is pursuing participants in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol says there is no end in sight to perhaps the most sprawling criminal investigation in Justice Department history and that "it’s really hard to predict” how many people ultimately will be charged with taking part in the rioting.
In a written update early , the office said the FBI is trying to identify more than 350 people “believed to have committed violent acts on the Capitol grounds, including over 250 who assaulted police officers.” | null | null | null | null | null |
The federal prosecutor whose office is investigating participants in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol says there is no end in sight to perhaps the most sprawling criminal probe in Justice Department history and that "it’s really hard to predict” how many people ultimately will be charged with taking part in the rioting.
In a written update early this month, the office said the FBI is trying to identify more than 350 people “believed to have committed violent acts on the Capitol grounds, including over 250 who assaulted police officers.” | null | null | null | null | null |
While not a wholesale rewrite of the address, which will be delivered at 9 p.m. Eastern time Tuesday from the U.S. Capitol, the new version will reflect the way the crisis has added urgency to his longtime theme of defending democracies, according to one adviser, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private talks.
This new heavy dose of foreign policy is one of several ways the speech will depart from the typical State of the Union address, which modern presidents usually use to sell domestic ideas and exhibit sunny optimism. This year, Biden must also contend with a 40-year high in inflation — which he plans to address under the rubric of “lowering costs,” according to one person briefed on the address — along with voter angst driven by high crime and lingering coronavirus pandemic restrictions.
“This is a dicey one,” Christopher J. Dodd, former senator from Connecticut and a close Biden friend, said of Tuesday’s address. “He’ll appreciate that this is not the moment, given the events of the last few days alone — forget about covid and everything else — to go in and try ‘Happy Days Are Here Again.’ It would be a huge mistake.”
During Biden’s first speech to a joint session of Congress a year ago — which was not an official State of the Union address — lawmakers were prohibited from bringing guests because of the pandemic, a restriction that will be in force again Tuesday. Still, the audience will be significantly bigger than the 200 allowed last time in the House chamber.
Under new guidance from Congress’s Office of the Attending Physician sent out Sunday, lawmakers and other attendees will not have to wear masks. That office had said earlier in February that masks would be required, but since then, the Biden administration shifted health guidance to say face coverings are not needed in Washington.
“The magnitude of the visceral reaction to what’s going on there is so significant that it’s just hard for me to imagine him just relegating it to point number five,” said Michael Waldman, who helped write four of President Bill Clinton’s State of the Union addresses and is now president of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. “Biden needs to rally the democrats — with a small ‘d’ — against the autocrats worldwide, and he cares a lot about that.”
Climate activists have been pushing the White House to use the speech to elevate the need for clean energy incentives and renew his call for electrifying the country’s transportation system. But some said they recognize that Biden will also need to address the urgent spike in gas prices resulting from the war, which could require an increase in gas supply in the immediate future. | null | null | null | null | null |
Amid the roar of nationalism, lone antiwar voices in China emerge over Ukra...
The U.S. Treasury Department on Monday morning released details of its new economic restrictions against Moscow
The headquarters of Bank Rossii, Russia's central bank, in Moscow, on Wednesday, Feb. 23, 2022. Western allies took unprecedented aim at the institution on Monday. (Andrey Rudakov/Bloomberg)
Overnight, European leaders imposed new measures that effectively cut Russia off from its financial reserves. The U.S. Treasury Department followed suit with similar steps on Monday morning. Under the new regime, all people in the United States and European Union are banned from trading with Russia’s central bank. The sanctions also apply to Russia’s finance ministry and its sovereign wealth fund, to prevent the Kremlin from using loopholes to continue to access the reserves.
The restrictions amount to choking off Russia from the international financial system, depriving the country of assets that are likely necessary to stabilize its economy. Such a step has never been taken before against a country with nuclear weapons or one with as powerful a military as Russia, according to sanctions experts.
Treasury also announced sanctions Monday morning on entities tied to Russia’s sovereign wealth fund, including its management company and one of the sovereign wealth fund’s subsidiaries. It also sanctioned the leader of that management company.
“The unprecedented action we are taking today will significantly limit Russia’s ability to use assets to finance its destabilizing activities, and target the funds [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and his inner circle depend on to enable his invasion of Ukraine,” Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen said in a statement. “Today, in coordination with partners and allies, we are following through on key commitments to restrict Russia’s access to these valuable resources.”
Two senior administration officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe the White House’s announcement, said Monday that the freeze was immediately effective and intended to head off signs that Russia aimed to recall its international reserves from around the world.
The punishments reflect the extraordinary outpouring of support for Ukraine in the West, but they also carry the risk of a further escalation in hostilities with Moscow. Putin has responded to Western statements in recent days by putting the country’s nuclear forces on alert, although Ukraine and Russian officials planned Monday to hold their first diplomatic talks since the invasion began. The European Union has also announced it will shut down airspace to Russian planes and support Ukraine’s purchase of weapons.
As of June 30 last year, 32 percent of Russia’s foreign currency reserves were in euros and 16 percent were in U.S. dollars, according to its central bank. About 7 percent were in British pounds, 13 percent in Chinese renminbi, and 22 percent in monetary gold. The remainder was held in other currencies.
The United States said it is also simultaneously issuing an exemption allowing “certain energy-related transactions” with the central bank of Russia, as the West has tried to continue the flow of Russian energy exports to sustain the European economy and maintain gas prices.
“In one fell swoop, the U.S. and Europe have rendered Putin’s war chest unusable.… That the U.S. and Europe have done this in unified fashion sends a crystal-clear message that Russia will face dramatic costs so long as Putin’s war of aggression continues,” said Edward Fishman, former Russian and Europe sanctions lead at the State Department. “This action represents a sea change in U.S. and European strategy. Just 72 hours ago, a step like this was unthinkable.”
The United States had already announced sanctions targeting nearly 80 percent of the Russian banking sector’s total assets. Its steps include cutting Russia’s largest bank off from the U.S. financial system, in addition to cutting off many technological inputs necessary for parts of Russian industry. U.S. sanctions have also targeted members of Putin’s inner circle and other business leaders in Russia.
Putin’s bank reserves were intended to buffer the impact of such a blow. “The steps being announced will undermine Russia’s ability to prop up the ruble,” said Richard Nephew, a senior research scholar at Columbia University. “The Russians won’t be able to defend the currency easily, and its value will tank.”
Some critics have wondered how Putin may react to the attack on Russia’s economy. Mark Weisbrot, a liberal economist and a director at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, said the sanctioning of the reserves could lead to an “economic collapse.”
Adam Smith, a partner at Gibson Dunn and a former Obama administration sanctions official, said the attack on Russia’s central bank reflects just how quickly events have moved in Eastern Europe. Smith emphasized that such moves have typically been off the table because central banks play such a crucial role in a nation’s economy, noting that going after them includes “severe and potentially unknowable collateral effects.” In this case, Smith said it’s possible the sanctions make it more difficult for Europe to buy oil and gas while also hurting the average Russian economically.
“It has historically been viewed as almost beyond the pale — the thing to do when sanctions, and diplomacy, have been seemingly exhausted,” Smith said. “That the international community was willing to go this far, and suffer the consequences of doing so … suggests just how far this crisis has gone in just its first week.” | null | null | null | null | null |
A ‘once-in-a-lifetime’ find: Archaeologists discover rare mosaic floor at South London construction site
An image from the Museum of London Archaeology on Feb. 23 shows a mosaic that once decorated the floor of a Roman dining room. (Andy Chopping/MOLA/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)
MOLA conservators are expected to be on the site starting this week to assess the mosaics and later transport them to the museum for conservation. The long-term plan is for the mosaics to be put on display.
Antonietta Lerz, a senior archaeologist at MOLA who supervised the excavation with her colleague Dave Saxby, described the mosaics in an email to The Washington Post as a “once-in-a-lifetime” find because of their “size, rarity and preservation.”
The condition of the mosaic is “remarkable,” Lerz said, given the extent of the changes that have taken place in Southwark in the past 1,800 years, including “the 17th-to-19th-century development of the site.” | null | null | null | null | null |
Wang Di, chair professor at the department of history at the University of Macao who signed the statement by academics released on Saturday, said the volume of such warmongering views had motivated him to sign.
“There’s a worry that the international community may be misled into thinking there is only one voice in China,” he said. “Many people admire Putin because of nationalism or belief in 'strong men’ leaders, and this is what is most scary. If China one day is faced with a choice, will it choose peace or war?”
“What I am against is aggression. Ordinary people participate in war and their lives are ruined by war. War consumes real human lives,” said Huang, 25, working in biomedicine in Quzhou in Zhejiang province, who gave only her surname out of concern for security.
Sun Jiang, professor of history and political science at Nanjing University, who helped draft the open letter signed by professors, said that China must oppose the war or else it will be going against its own principles as well as that of the international system.
The letter he signed concludes with the line, “peace begins with the desire in one’s heart. We oppose unjust war.”
Censors appear worried about pro-peace views as well. Posts about antiwar protests in Russia have disappeared from WeChat and videos originally published on the news aggregator Toutiao appear to have been removed.
The statement Sun drafted has been removed and the account that posted it has been closed for “violating regulations.” | null | null | null | null | null |
Grading experts say that since the pandemic closed schools in March of 2020, they have been bombarded with requests for help from administrators seeking to change what has been common practice for generations. One of these experts is Joe Feldman, a guru whose 2018 book, “Grading for Equity: What It is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms,” has become a bible for many revising their practices. Feldman said that schools "perpetuate very antiquated and ineffective and even harmful ways of grading,” because there is no or little training on how to grade for students in teacher preparation courses.
Luo said that the most important change for him in Moreno’s grading system has been that, instead of focusing on formatting his assignments correctly and punctually, he has been forced to think about his learning more deeply and, as a result, he absorbs more information and gets graded on his best work. He observed that he witnesses kids ask their English teachers every year, “How do I write a thesis? How do I write a body paragraph,” even though they’ve ostensibly learned this skill every year starting in middle school. "With this, as we improve, we are internalizing this information better.”
Rick Wormeli, a former Nationally Board Certified teacher and now a consultant on classroom practice and grading systems, and others said that report cards should capture academic and nonacademic performance in different ways. A-F grades should be academic, and other habits and behaviors can be recorded through notes or other numerical or alphabetical symbols.
Another example is softening deadlines of assignments, allowing students to turn them in when they can. Opponents say this practice harms efforts to instill responsibility in students and leads to students falling behind in their work. Supporters say that students often don’t turn in work because they don’t understand it, or have after-school jobs, or lack adequate technology or Internet service to complete assignments. But in class, they are forced to move ahead with work they haven’t mastered, making things worse.
“As a teacher I would never want to remove the burden of a child’s learning from his shoulders,” Wormeli said. “If we read about executive function, and how you instill moral fiber, time management, perseverance, tenacity — well, none of it, not one bit of it, says 'yeah, use your grades to do it.” | null | null | null | null | null |
Five things to know about the new U.N. climate report
Good morning and welcome to The Climate 202! We hope you practiced some self-care this weekend.
🚨 The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today in a major climate case. More on that below. But first:
Five things to know about the U.N. climate report released today
The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change today released a sweeping report on the dangerous effects that rising global temperatures are already having — and the catastrophes that loom if humanity fails to make swift and significant cuts to planet-warming emissions.
Our colleagues Brady Dennis and Sarah Kaplan spent hours poring over the more than 3,500-page document, which is full of devastating details about the severe — and profoundly unequal — toll of the climate crisis on living things.
For an in-depth look at the report, we highly recommend reading Brady and Sarah's piece. But if you're short on time today, here are five main things to know about the panel's report:
1. Some climate effects are already baked in
Humanity has pumped more than a trillion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere since the late 19th century, fueling an average global temperature rise of more than 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) compared to preindustrial levels.
Even if those emissions were to stop tomorrow, they have already set in motion some unavoidable effects across the globe.
Fish are dying in oceans that have heated up and become more acidic. Climate disasters such as supercharged wildfires, hurricanes and floods have claimed lives and ravaged communities.
Even if humanity meets the more ambitious goal of the Paris agreement — limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels — scientists project the demise of most coral reefs and the irreversible loss of glaciers and polar ice by the end of the century.
2. It's not too late to prevent some of the potential suffering
Despite these irreversible effects, the report emphasizes that humanity still has time to act to stave off more suffering in the future.
In addition to mitigation, which involves making deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say humanity must make significant investments in adaptation, which entails coping with the consequences of a warming Earth.
For example, investments in infrastructure would reduce the damage inflicted by extreme weather. And investments in public health would prevent the spread of diseases such as malaria and dengue fever, which have flourished as the world warms and mosquitoes roam beyond their current habitats.
Scientists estimate that for every dollar spent on resilience and adaptation, countries could save at least $4 over time.
3. Warming is widening inequities between rich and poor nations
Many developing countries have released little carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, yet they are most vulnerable to the effects of the climate crisis. The report makes clear that these inequities will persist as the world warms.
Even under moderate scenarios for sea-level rise, the coastlines of most Pacific Island nations would be flooded. And under the worst-case scenario for global temperature rise, Africa — which is historically responsible for less than 3 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions — would see a 118-fold increase in exposure to extreme heat. By contrast, heat exposure in Europe would increase only fourfold.
So far, wealthy countries have failed to fulfill their promise to provide $100 billion annually to help poor nations green their economies and adapt to climate effects. Developed nations will probably face intense pressure to deliver on this pledge at the next U.N. climate summit in Egypt in November.
4. The climate crisis is intertwined with the biodiversity crisis
Global warming is already threatening plants and animals by shifting seasonal weather patterns and intensifying habitat-destroying disasters. If global temperatures rise by 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), 10 percent of all plant and animal species could face a high risk of extinction, the report says.
At 3.2 Celsius (5.8 Fahrenheit), a quarter of all salamanders could go extinct. By 4 Celsius (7.2 Fahrenheit), half of the Amazon rainforest could be lost.
5. The time to act is now
For all of the sobering statistics in the report, its overarching message is not one of hopelessness, but of urgency to act, our colleagues Brady and Sarah write.
Humanity still has a limited window to overhaul the way energy is generated, the way cities are designed and the way food is grown — changes that ultimately could save trillions of dollars and millions of lives.
“These are projections, they are not predictions,” Patrick Gonzalez, a lead author of the report and a climate scientist at the University of California at Berkeley, told our colleagues of the findings. “It’s all based on humans and our actions. The future is something we can change.”
Supreme Court to hear case that could limit EPA's climate authority
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today in a challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to mandate broad changes to the power sector, the nation's second largest source of greenhouse gases, The Washington Post’s Robert Barnes and Dino Grandoni report. The case, which was brought by coal mining companies and Republican-led states, is set to have major implications for the future of U.S. climate policy.
West Virginia v. EPA comes before a court that's even more conservative than the one that stopped President Barack Obama's plan to curb carbon emissions from power plants, known as the Clean Power Plan, in 2016. Many of the conservative justices have voiced suspicion that federal agencies are overstepping their authority without explicit congressional approval.
Climate advocates fear that the Supreme Court could limit the EPA's ability to cut emissions from power plants before there are even regulations to review, as the Biden administration is not slated to reveal a climate plan for the power sector until this summer. But West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey (R), who is leading the lawsuit, said in a recent interview with The Post that the court should not hesitate to rule before its term ends.
Russian official apologizes for war in Ukraine during major U.N. climate meeting
The head of the Russian delegation to the IPCC apologized for the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine during a virtual meeting Sunday, saying that “those who know what is happening fail to find any justification for the attack," according to two participants who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the closed negotiations, The Post’s Sarah Kaplan reports.
Oleg Anisimov’s remarks, which were an unusual public rebuke of the war by a Russian government official, came as scientists and officials from 195 nations worked to finalize the IPCC report yesterday. His apology followed an impassioned speech by his Ukrainian counterpart, Svitlana Krakovska, who linked the invasion of her country to global warming.
“Human-induced climate change and the war on Ukraine have the same roots – fossil fuels and our dependence on them,” one delegate recalled Krakovska saying.
“We will not surrender in Ukraine,” Krakovska added. “And we hope the world will not surrender in building a climate-resilient future.”
BP says it will divest $14 billion stake in Russian oil giant
British oil giant BP said Sunday it is “exiting” its $14 billion stake in Russian oil company Rosneft over Moscow's invasion of Ukraine, marking one of the biggest moves yet from the Western business world to cut ties with the Kremlin, The Post’s Jeanne Whalen reports. BP also said its current and former chief executive, Bernard Looney and Bob Dudley, have resigned from Rosneft's board.
Britain's business and energy secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng, had reportedly pressured Looney to sever the Rosneft relationship. The Russian government owns about 40 percent of Rosneft, which is chaired by Igor Sechin, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
BP had operated in Russia for more than 30 years and had a 19.75 percent stake in Rosneft, which accounted for a third of its oil and gas production. It's unclear whether BP will find a buyer for its shares or simply walk away from them.
Offshore wind lease sale raises more than $4 billion, setting a record
The Interior Department on Friday netted a record $4.37 billion from the auction of six offshore wind leases off the coast of New York and New Jersey, a major step toward fulfilling President Biden's clean energy goals.
The auction of more than 488,000 acres in the New York Bight, an area of the Atlantic Ocean south of Long Island, marked the first offshore wind lease sale under Biden. Once turbines are constructed and operating, they are expected to generate enough electricity to power nearly 2 million homes.
The sale sparked a bidding war among more than a dozen companies that lasted three days. Leases were ultimately sold at about $10,700 per acre, more than 10 times the previous record of $1,000 per acre. The Interior Department said it was the highest-grossing competitive offshore energy auction in U.S. history, including oil and gas lease sales.
Ali Zaidi, deputy national climate adviser, said in a statement that the auction was a “big step toward cleaner electricity and a stronger domestic energy sector."
Here’s what we’ve got on tap for this week
On Tuesday, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands will hold a legislative hearing on five bills. The Senate Energy and National Resources Committee on Tuesday will also hold a meeting to consider pending legislation. Later on Tuesday, President Biden will deliver his first State of the Union address.
On Wednesday, the House Space, Science and Technology Environment Subcommittee will hold a hearing on nature-based infrastructure. Also on Wednesday, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg will testify before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee about his department's implementation of the bipartisan infrastructure law.
On Thursday, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will hold a hearing on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s recent move to consider how pipelines and other natural gas projects affect climate change. All five commissioners will testify.
Watching Sonya at the Orphaned Wildlife Center is a nice break from today's intense news.
Sweet Sonya taking a satisfying soak in serenity at the Orphaned Wildlife Center. pic.twitter.com/8VL9e78d8r | null | null | null | null | null |
Pranshu Verma joins The Post’s Tech team to cover innovations
Announcement from Business Editor Lori Montgomery, Deputy Business Editor Zachary Goldfarb, Technology Editor Christina Passariello, Technology Policy Editor Mark Seibel and Deputy Technology Policy Editor Alexis Sobel Fitts:
We are thrilled to announce that Pranshu Verma is joining The Post’s Tech team to cover innovations.
Pranshu comes to us from the Boston Globe, where he was a technology reporter covering Boston’s startup scene. He also was founding co-anchor of the Globe’s technology newsletter, Innovation Beat, which launched last fall. While at the Globe, Pranshu dug into the tech industry’s slow progress on racial equality and chronicled the rise of prominent startups working on climate change, cybersecurity and health technology.
Before his tenure at the Globe, Pranshu was a David Rosenbaum reporting fellow in the New York Times’s Washington Bureau, where he reported on diplomacy and internet freedom, profiled targets of Trump administration sanctions and documented attempts to defund a prominent global internet access group. Prior to that, Pranshu was a Lenfest Fellow at the Philadelphia Inquirer, where he revealed that the Philadelphia jail was releasing thousands of prisoners late at night without their personal possessions -- coverage that prompted immediate reform of prisoner release procedures.
Born in India, Pranshu immigrated with his family to Newark, Del., home of the University of Delaware, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in finance in 2009. He started his career working in local government, helping manage the AmeriCorps programs for the Philadelphia mayor’s office. But Pranshu’s father had been a journalist in India, and he soon found himself tugged in that direction. He earned his master’s in journalism from Columbia University in 2019.
When he’s not working, Pranshu can be found dining at new restaurants and slowly getting back into golf. He’ll trade Boston for Washington in the spring of 2023, after his wife finishes up her graduate work.
Please join us in welcoming Pranshu to The Post. His first day is March 14. | null | null | null | null | null |
BERLIN — A panel of scientists convened by the United Nations has published a report on the impact that climate change has had, is having and will have on the planet, including on the natural world and human civilization. The report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concludes that nearly half the world’s population already faces significant risk from global warming.
“Today’s IPCC report is an atlas of human suffering and a damning indictment of failed climate leadership. With fact upon fact, this report reveals how people and the planet are getting clobbered by climate change (...) Unchecked carbon pollution is forcing the world’s most vulnerable on a frog march to destruction – now. The facts are undeniable. This abdication of leadership is criminal. The world’s biggest polluters are guilty of arson of our only home.” — Antonio Guterres, U.N. Secretary-General. | null | null | null | null | null |
It was just before 3 p.m. on Feb. 21, and the 16-year-old said he was getting ready to leave the park after a fun Presidents’ Day away from classes and homework in the Philadelphia suburb of Collingdale.
Anthony jumped up from the bench and called 911, then raced down the hill with the girl to a find a frightening scene: three children who appeared to be between the ages of 9 and 11 were crying and flailing in frigid water, struggling to keep from going under, he said. | null | null | null | null | null |
“I pray for Ukraine, and I wish them the best,” Boebert said in a Sunday interview with Fox Nation. “… But we also have neighbors to the north who need freedom and need to be liberated, and we need that right here at home, as well.”
Doug Eyolfson, a doctor and former politician who’s again running for Parliament as a Liberal in Winnipeg, tied Boebert’s comments back to the Freedom Convoy, noting that the protests were “part of a dangerous right-wing movement,” he tweeted. | null | null | null | null | null |
“There’s no place in either political party for this white nationalism or racism. It’s simply wrong,” Romney told Bash. “… Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar — I don’t know them, but I’m reminded of that old line from the ‘Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid’ movie where one character says, ‘Morons, I’ve got morons on my team.’ ” | null | null | null | null | null |
More than 500,000 people have fled the country in five days, and many more are still waiting, foreshadowing a refugee crisis in Europe
More than a half-million people have crossed into neighboring countries since the start of the conflict, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees said Monday. More than half have gone to Poland, the refugee agency said, and people are also streaming into Moldova, Slovakia, Romania and Hungary.
High traffic
Traffic data from Google showed severe backups at nearly every border crossing Sunday at 10:25 pm local time, particularly at crossings into Poland, where thousands of people are still waiting to leave. Google has since temporarily disabled live traffic data in Ukraine, amid fears for the safety of local communities. Ukrainians trying to leave by train and bus also struggled with crowds and service halts.
The Washington Post's Jon Gerberg reports lines of cars stretching 20 miles as Ukrainians attempt to flee to Poland. (The Washington Post)
Moldova’s border police said Monday that nearly 70,000 Ukrainian citizens had entered the country in the past five days, with the largest flows were coming from the Criva and Palanca crossings. | null | null | null | null | null |
A woman holds a sign as people gather at Tokyo's Shibuya area on Feb. 27 to protest Russia's invasion of Ukraine. (Charly Triballeau/AFP/Getty Images)
In an open letter published Saturday, a group of professors from universities in Beijing, Nanjing, Shanghai, Hong Kong and Macao called on Russia to stop the war. “As a country that was once ravaged by war, where families were destroyed, where everywhere people were dying of starvation, … [w]e sympathize with the pain of the Ukrainian people,” it said. | null | null | null | null | null |
Democracy May Depend on a New Partisan Battleground: Races for State Secretary of State
The once-sleepy, down-ballot elected office has suddenly become one of the most vital roles in the nation
By David Montgomery
In the turbulent weeks after the 2020 presidential election, Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger faced the media so many times that he felt he must have worn a groove in the marble between his office in a corner of the state Capitol in Atlanta and the grand atrium where he held news conferences. Now it was January 2022, a little more than a year after the infamous phone call in which defeated incumbent Donald Trump urged Raffensperger to “find” enough votes to overturn Joe Biden’s 11,779-vote victory in the state. And Raffensperger was making the same walk again.
Unlike those earlier tense encounters, when the fate of the nation seemed in the balance, today’s announcement was blessedly underwhelming. It was more in line with the dry, pre-insurrection secretary of state fare of normal times: Georgia was getting a new voter registration system. The change was administrative: It could help shorten lines at the polls, Raffensperger said, but otherwise voters would hardly notice a difference. It was called the Georgia Registered Voter Information System, “but that’s a mouthful, so we’re going to call it GaRVIS,” he added.
The other thing Raffensperger wanted to tell the public this week was that an entity impersonating his office was sending emails as part of a corporate registration phishing scam, trying to get people to click on suspicious attachments. In Georgia, the secretary of state does, in fact, handle such registrations. He also oversees investment securities, charities and cemeteries. He processes licenses for boxing and mixed martial arts. As in most states, the job evolved over two centuries from performing secretarial chores to being a jack of all bureaucratic trades — including elections, which in many years count for less than half the office’s annual budget, compared with all the other responsibilities.
“It’s a down-ballot ticket,” Raffensperger told me of his job later, back in his office. “It’s in the weeds, and a lot of people, before 2020, didn’t understand the importance of having a person of character, integrity and resolute determination to follow the Constitution, to follow the law.” A conservative Republican and a structural engineer by trade, Raffensperger voted for Trump, but he duly certified Biden’s victory. Trump called him an “enemy of the people.” “The challenge that you have is when you choose cause over character, you end up with neither,” Raffensperger continued. “And right now, people are so committed to their cause that they’ve thrown character out the window.”
Although the job has the same name in nearly every state, nowhere are the duties alike. In addition to supervising elections, depending on the state, the secretary may oversee bingo and raffles, take care of museums and libraries, or serve as chief protocol officer, schooling legislators on how to behave during missions abroad. In 10 states the secretaries don’t supervise elections.
One of Raffensperger’s responsibilities is to serve as Georgia’s keeper of the Great Seal. A giant likeness hangs in his office. The real seal is the about the size of a hockey puck, and Raffensperger uses it to emboss official documents as a glorified notary public. An antique press once used for the purpose stands prominently at the front of the office, but the real seal itself is no longer on display: Raffensperger put it in safe keeping when protesters were rallying at the Georgia Capitol after Trump lost the election. “It wasn’t as secure as it needed to be,” he told me. “We had a gentleman that actually broke into the Capitol.”
The day after our conversation, this week of routine bureaucratic announcements ended with another jarring reminder of how secretaries of state have emerged from their obscure shells to become the reluctant new superheroes — or villains — of democracy: The Justice Department announced the arrest of a Texas man for allegedly posting a message online on Jan. 5, 2021, that it was “time to kill” Georgia election officials.
The tumultuous past two years of American politics have made the job of secretary of state arguably a risky one — and one that’s suddenly coveted by both political parties, which see it as key to their future electoral success. These sleepy, paper-pushing positions were often dismissed by ambitious politicos as unreliable steppingstones to higher office (notable exceptions: Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp). But now they have become partisan battlegrounds, drawing a slew of competitors and a gusher of campaign cash for the posts on the ballot this year in 27 states. The winners, in most cases, will be strategically placed to supervise the 2024 presidential contest.
Some of the hottest races are in swing states Trump lost in 2020 — Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, Wisconsin — and feature candidates who deny Biden’s victory. (Pennsylvania doesn’t elect its secretary of state; nor, for that matter, do Florida or Texas, among others.) Trump has already endorsed primary candidates in Georgia, Arizona and Michigan — almost certainly the first time in history a former president has thrust himself so heavily, and so early, into these once-afterthought races.
“What’s at stake is the future of democracy in this country,” Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who chairs the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State, told me. “Secretary of state races boil down to a very simple choice in 2022: Do we as a nation believe that American voters should be able to choose their elected officials?”
Griswold’s counterpart chairing the Republican Secretaries of State Committee, Tre Hargett of Tennessee, says: “Americans want to know that their elections are being run with the utmost of integrity. As Republicans we’re committed to making sure that we continue to make it as easy as possible to vote while also making sure it’s hard to cheat.”
Recently I sought out current and former secretaries of state, as well as candidates for the job, to understand the breathtaking transformation of this quirky but decisive role, one embedded almost by accident within American democracy. The ongoing dramatic politicization of the job — in widespread perception if not always in fact — highlights an inherent tension: We elect partisans to supervise elections in a nonpartisan way. That tension now threatens to tear the job apart, and raises a vital question that’s on the ballot in these races: Will we ever be able to believe an election again?
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger voted for Donald Trump, but he duly certified Joe Biden’s victory. Trump called him an “enemy of the people.” (Brynn Anderson/Associated Press)
In 2000, as Florida secretary of state, Katherine Harris, a Republican, moved to certify the results of the Al Gore-George W. Bush presidential election before recounts could be completed. (Lucian Perkins)
LEFT: Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger voted for Donald Trump, but he duly certified Joe Biden’s victory. Trump called him an “enemy of the people.” (Brynn Anderson/Associated Press) RIGHT: In 2000, as Florida secretary of state, Katherine Harris, a Republican, moved to certify the results of the Al Gore-George W. Bush presidential election before recounts could be completed. (Lucian Perkins)
The origins of the position go back to the American Revolution, when Charles Thomson, secretary of the Continental Congress, certified the authenticity of documents, including the Declaration of Independence. As states entered the Union, they eventually hired secretaries. Here’s how the Maine Constitution of 1820 describes the job: “The records of the State shall be kept in the office of the Secretary. … He shall carefully keep and preserve the records of all the official acts and proceedings of the Governor and Council, Senate and House of Representatives, and, when required, lay the same before either branch of the Legislature. …”
It was “a pretty light lift,” says Matthew Dunlap, who served 14 years as Maine’s secretary of state, interrupted by an unsuccessful run for U.S. Senate. “I mean, you just put the journals of the House and Senate on a shelf, and if they say, ‘Hey, do you happen to have the journals?’ you bring them over. That was really what it amounted to.”
But there was one additional note to the job description, as written in Article V, Part Third of the state Constitution: The secretary shall “perform such other duties as … shall be required by law.” There it was, the marvelously vague carte blanche to basically make the secretary of state do anything. In Maine, says Dunlap, when corporate formation acts got adopted after the Civil War, the secretary was tasked with keeping track of corporations. After automobiles were invented, the secretary kept the records. Ditto elections, as the state centralized and modernized election tabulation.
A similar pattern of piling on tasks was followed in other states. “It was a functionary job for two centuries,” says Gabriel Sterling, chief operating officer in the Georgia secretary of state’s office. “Essentially, if you go around the country, it’s like, ‘We have something we want to do with government. … Let’s give it to the secretary of state. We gave him everything else.’ That’s literally how most states have dealt with secretaries of state.”
The job remained a quiet bureaucratic backwater until November 2000, when Katherine Harris of Florida burst into the nation’s consciousness. George W. Bush’s Florida margin over Al Gore was 537 votes; whoever won the state would become president. Harris insisted on sticking to the state deadline for certifying the results — effectively derailing a chaotic recount process. At the time, she said that she was using her “discretion” to deny requests to extend the deadline for amending county tallies, saying there was insufficient justification to grant an exception — despite widespread ballot problems in Democratic strongholds. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected Gore’s attempt to continue the recounting.
When I reached Harris in Florida, she was reluctant to talk about that election, or make comparisons to 2020. “I guess the clearest point I could say to you and for any secretary of state … is that your only safe harbor is following the law,” she said. The certification deadline was the law, she said. “I had just as much pressure from Republicans to take things one way as I did Democrats in those first few days.” She says she resisted the pressure. When I reminded her that she had been perceived as partisan in part because she was co-chair of Bush’s campaign in the state, she said that was an honorary function that Florida secretaries of state had filled before. As for 2020, without commenting on particular secretaries’ conduct, Harris questioned whether changes in voting procedures during the pandemic were enacted with proper authority — a critique that tracks with Trump supporters’ complaints.
Some Democrats had flashbacks to Florida 2000 in 2004, when they saw how John Kerry lost Ohio to Bush. They placed some of the blame on Republican Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell — co-chair of Bush’s Ohio campaign — for long lines, insufficient voting machines and controversial policy decisions, which they said suppressed the vote, especially in African American precincts. On Jan. 6, 2005, 32 Democrats in Congress objected to Ohio’s electoral votes — not to overturn the election, they said, which Kerry (unlike Trump today) had conceded, but to raise the issue of “electoral justice.”
We elect partisans to supervise elections in a nonpartisan way. That tension raises a vital question that’s on the ballot in these races: Will we ever be able to believe an election again?
The perceived motivations of Harris and Blackwell, and the Democrats’ reaction, marked the beginning of the job’s politicization. Democratic activists and funders formed the Secretary of State Project to try to elect Democratic secretaries in key states. By 2009, the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State was formed with similar aims.
The Republicans responded in kind, formalizing a loose association of secretaries into the Republican Secretaries of State Committee, housed within the larger Republican State Leadership Committee.
Heightened partisan attention meant a certain loss of innocence over the person who was simply supposed to supervise clean elections — when they weren’t registering corporations or regulating bingo. “There was this sort of [realization], like, ‘Huh, the rules might matter,’ ” says Trey Grayson, former Kentucky secretary of state. “And who’s [secretary of state] matters, because sometimes the rules aren’t clear.”
“I tried to be nonpartisan in the work, and it didn’t make me a lot of friends,” says Dunlap, a Democrat. “I can remember many Democratic legislators literally hissing at me as I walked down the hall. ‘You’re supposed to be helping us!’ No, I’m supposed to be supporting the efforts of the little blue-haired old ladies at the county fair, collecting signatures on a petition. You make policy; I run the process.”
Over the past two years, the politicization of the job went into overdrive — a result of pandemic-forced voting adjustments, narrow margins in multiple battlegrounds, and Trump’s attacks on the process before and after the election. Across the country, secretary of state races have turned into expensive, marquee showdowns — not over who’s the most competent administrator, but who’s on the correct side of the bitter national divide over the last presidential election and fundamental civil rights. The Democratic secretaries group raised a record $4.5 million last year and set a goal of $15 million for this election cycle. The Republican state leadership group — which bills itself as “America’s only line of defense against socialism in the states” — and an affiliated foundation raised $33.3 million, an unspecified portion of which will be pumped into secretary of state races. Meanwhile, individual candidates are raising record sums on their own, according to an analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice.
The transformation of the job into a prized partisan trophy has consequences, David Becker, executive director and founder of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, told me. “I am very concerned that in the future — and this is not going to be solely limited to Republicans — but that as chief election officials, as secretaries of state, start using more partisan rhetoric, making it appear as if the job is really important to be held in a particular political party’s hands toward the good of the country, that there will be a natural delegitimization of the work of those offices. That perception is likely to be false, but the risk of it is real.”
It wasn’t long ago that simply being impartial was the most partisan thing a secretary of state could do: Their competence spoke well of their party. “I was a Republican, I wanted Republicans to win, but I also thought it was good politics for me to do a good job and be perceived as doing a good job,” Grayson says. “The guidepost now is, you know, pleasing a former president or doing the party’s bidding. … I look at some of the candidates who are running, and it does bother me because some of what they’re saying leads me to think that if they don’t like the count, or they don’t like the law, they might not do the job.”
A man in a white cowboy hat strode to the lectern in an outdoor arena in Florence, Ariz., and invited the audience to gaze west and behold another gorgeous desert sunset. “Look at the welcome Donald Trump is getting from God!” Mark Finchem told the cheering crowd at Trump’s Save America rally in mid-January. Finchem, a term-limited Arizona state legislator and former public safety officer was granted the honor of opening for Trump because Finchem is running for secretary of state.
“Ladies and gentlemen, we know it and they know it: Donald Trump won!” he declared, provoking more cheers. Finchem is unpersuaded by multiple analyses and rulings debunking claims of fraud in Arizona, including a 93-page report issued 10 days before the rally by GOP officials in the state’s largest county. “I look forward to the day that we set aside an irredeemably flawed election,” Finchem continued. “With all the evidence we have, the Arizona election should be decertified with cause by the legislature. … This is how the people can get justice.”
When it was Trump’s turn to speak, he pointed to Finchem seated in the front row. “The next Arizona secretary of state — a man who’s tough and smart and loves our country. A man who you must get elected,” Trump said. “He’ll get to the bottom of everything. Do you think you’ll get to the bottom of it, Mark?” Finchem leaped to his feet and waved two thumbs up.
Finchem, who attended the protest Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington, is a leading example of a new category of candidate drawn to the job: the election deniers, those who dispute Trump’s defeat. If elected to the seat being vacated by Democrat Katie Hobbs, who’s running for Arizona governor, Finchem favors using paper ballots with currency-style protections, making ballot images a public record, and making it easier to audit elections, according to his campaign website and interviews he’s given to conservative media. (He didn’t respond to my requests for an interview.) He’s a strong contender for the post, having raised nearly $700,000 — more than any of the Democratic candidates, and more than all but one of the Republicans, according to state campaign finance records. In mid-February, the congressional Jan. 6 investigation committee subpoenaed Finchem for information on efforts to overturn the election. Finchem responded in a tweet: “Kangaroo court speaks. LOL.”
As of late January, at least 21 election deniers were running for secretary of state in 18 states, according to new research by States United Action, a nonpartisan election protection advocacy group co-chaired by former Republican New Jersey governor Christine Todd Whitman. “It’s important that we pay attention, and early, to the rhetoric about our election system happening in these down-ballot races,” she said in a statement upon releasing the report in early February.
When election denialism gets injected into campaigns for secretary of state, the job itself can be undermined. “It’s certainly okay from a policy perspective to advocate different levels of voter ID or whether people need to request a mail ballot,” says Becker of the Center for Election Innovation & Research. “What we have now is several candidates … who seem to be running on a platform of election denial, on the idea that their role as the state’s chief election officer is not to give voice to the voters of their state, regardless of whether they agree with it or not, but rather to ensure that their preferred candidate takes office. That we’ve never seen before, and to see it on a scale like we are right now, where it’s a feature of their campaign, not a flaw … is an entirely new thing that’s very concerning.”
The election deniers argue that they are the true democracy defenders who want to pick up the pieces after a botched election. “I have been aware of, and fighting against, election fraud here in Nevada for a long time,” Jim Marchant, a Republican candidate vying to succeed the term-limited Barbara Cegavske, told me. Cegavske, a Republican, was censured by her party after she certified Biden’s victory. Added Marchant: “Once I get in there, I can start to whittle away at the ways that they cheat, to the point where the people that get elected here in Nevada are who the people of Nevada really want. We haven’t elected anybody here since 2006. They have been installed and selected by the cabal.”
Marchant is a former member of the state legislature who ran for Congress in 2020 with Trump’s endorsement. He lost the race by about 5 percentage points and sought a revote, alleging election fraud. A judge denied his request. So far Trump hasn’t endorsed him in the secretary of state race. But he told me he was asked by people in the “Trump orbit” last year to help form a coalition of like-minded secretary of state candidates from around the country. Dubbed the America First Secretary of State Coalition, the candidates listed on its website include Marchant, the three candidates endorsed by Trump — Finchem, Kristina Karamo in Michigan and Rep. Jody Hice in Georgia — plus candidates in Colorado and California. Marchant said he is meeting candidates in other states to add to the coalition.
Several states with election deniers on the ballot also have more traditional Republican candidates seeking the GOP nomination, making this year’s races the most unpredictable in history, says the dean of secretary of state political handicappers, Louis Jacobson. For about 20 years Jacobson has been reporting on down-ballot races; for the past 10 he’s been writing tipsheets on secretary of state races for various publications. It was lonely work, but he owned the beat. “My stories on secretaries of state … were really obscure,” Jacobson, who’s also a senior correspondent for PolitiFact, told me. “Up until very recently, it’s been pretty hard to get enough people to focus attention on the secretary of state.”
Now his expertise is in demand, and he’s been engaged to write regular analyses of down-ballot contests for the newsletter Sabato’s Crystal Ball out of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics. In a recent piece Jacobson described how election denialism could boomerang against the GOP contenders: “Will the Republican simply coast to victory based on party affiliation alone, especially in a midterm election that is looking favorable to the GOP? Or will voters be turned off by a strongly Trump-aligned candidate whose opponent is painting them as a threat to democracy?”
The Republican secretary of state establishment is cool to the election deniers but reluctant to challenge them head-on. (A spokesman for the Republican State Leadership Committee didn’t respond to my question about the America First Coalition of candidates.)
Kentucky Secretary of State Michael Adams, vice chair of the Republican Secretaries of State Committee, pointed to his efforts to expand voting while ensuring security as a Republican model of making it easy to vote and hard to cheat. “Republicans for the moment have a better message because what you see on the Republican side … is we are talking about election integrity, we’re talking about verifying voter accuracy,” Adams told me. “But we’re also talking about ease of voting. … The Democrats are really focused almost exclusively on the easy-to-vote part, and I think that leaves them a weakness because voters do care about election integrity.”
As for campaigns built on claims that Trump won, speaking for himself and not the committee, Adams said: “I think it’s really hard for someone to run on a platform like that and then be able to win the confidence of not just the Republicans who vote in the primary, but also all of the voters who vote in the general election. I just think it’s a bad message. Even if you personally believe that, most people don’t. And that’s a great way to lose the election and not ever make a difference.”
Jocelyn Benson, Michigan’s Democratic secretary of state, went to law school with the purpose of becoming a voting rights attorney and enforcing the Voting Rights Act. (Paul Sancya/Associated Press)
Republican Mark Finchem, who was at the Jan. 6, 2021, protest in D.C., has raised nearly $700,000 in his campaign to be Arizona’s secretary of state. (Steve Helber/Associated Press)
LEFT: Jocelyn Benson, Michigan’s Democratic secretary of state, went to law school with the purpose of becoming a voting rights attorney and enforcing the Voting Rights Act. (Paul Sancya/Associated Press) RIGHT: Republican Mark Finchem, who was at the Jan. 6, 2021, protest in D.C., has raised nearly $700,000 in his campaign to be Arizona’s secretary of state. (Steve Helber/Associated Press)
Just as Republican election deniers depart from the stolid administrator types who used to aspire to these positions, a new profile of Democrat is jumping into the races: voting rights advocates who, in another era, might have pursued their passion as civil rights lawyers or state legislators.
“I consider it the chief democracy officer,” says Reginald Bolding, one of the Democrats running in Arizona. “In 2020, had Arizona not had a Democratic secretary of state, there is no guarantee that the rightful electoral votes from Arizona would have been awarded to Joe Biden.”
Bolding, who serves as Democratic leader in the state House of Representatives, is the founder of what his campaign says are the largest Black-led voting rights and community engagement groups in the state. They registered more than 50,000 voters and filed federal lawsuits to protect voting rights. Bolding told me he thinks the secretary of state’s office is the most effective place for him to continue his work seeking to expand access to the polls while ensuring the people’s voice is heard.
The battleground state of Nevada, too, has several Democrats who feel called to defend democracy as secretary of state. “I started to see who was running in that field on the Republican side, and it’s not your normal Republican. It’s the extremist,” says Cisco Aguilar, a former state athletic commissioner and sports management lawyer who’s the founding chairman of a Catholic high school for economically marginalized students in North Las Vegas.
He began to see secretary of state as a perch where he could move the needle on societal problems he wanted to solve. “I can continue to spin my wheels doing the work we’re doing as a community, but we are never going to get anywhere if we don’t have access to the polls,” he told me. “And I thought: Here I am fighting for the fundamental right of education, when the fundamental right to vote is being challenged.”
In Michigan, another swing state targeted by Trump, incumbent Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson was a pioneer of the new wave of aspiring Democratic secretaries. She went to law school with the express purpose of becoming a voting rights attorney and enforcing the Voting Rights Act. But after she saw the power secretaries of state had in elections in Florida and Ohio in the early 2000s, she had an epiphany. “Instead of trying to sue secretaries of state to compel them to do the right thing, what if I just ran for the position and tried to do the right thing?” she told me in a telephone interview.
“I tried to be nonpartisan in the work, and it didn’t make me a lot of friends,” says Democrat Matthew Dunlap, who served 14 years as Maine’s secretary of state.
Benson lost her first try for the job in 2010, the year she published a book profiling estimable Democratic and Republican secretaries of state titled “State Secretaries of State: Guardians of the Democratic Process.” She was elected in 2018 and is running for reelection against Kristina Karamo, the Trump-endorsed Republican. Karamo’s campaign denied my request for an interview but referred me to her website, which includes an interview in which she claims Benson was “strategically placed” in office by liberal interests to get their friends elected. Since Trump’s defeat in Michigan, Benson has endured similar evidence-free attacks on what she says was “the most high-turnout and secure election in our state’s history.” This year around the country, she adds, “Democracy is on the ballot in November.”
In Colorado, Jena Griswold became the nation’s youngest elected secretary of state, at 34, in 2019, and the first Democratic one in Colorado since the early 1960s. Griswold ran in response to rhetoric about voter fraud that Trump started using three years before he faced reelection. “It just became clear to me at that point that the foundation of the country as we knew it was being shaped in a different way,” she told me. “And so I decided to run.”
Now she’s being challenged by several Republicans. “We see in every swing state, including in Colorado, someone who … says 2020 was taken from President Trump, in the face of all the facts to the contrary, running to oversee elections,” she says. “That’s like giving a bank robber the keys to the vault.”
However, Democratic advocacy for voting rights and against ballot suppression can shade into what might sound like a liberal form of election denialism. Stacey Abrams initially refused to concede her 2018 loss in the Georgia governor’s race to Brian Kemp — in part because of actions Kemp had taken as secretary of state overseeing the very election he was competing in, such as purging more than a million voters from the rolls. Kemp argued that the pruning, conducted over several years, was a routine part of keeping the rolls up to date. The following year Abrams told the New York Times that, while Kemp got enough votes to win, she still had “legally sufficient doubt about the process to say that it was not a fair election.”
In January during a news conference, Biden cast potential doubt on the reliability of the 2022 elections if stalled voting rights measures, which Democratic secretaries of state also support, weren’t passed. (Senate Republicans later blocked the measures.) “I’m not going to say it’s going to be legit,” Biden said. “The increase and the prospect of being illegitimate is in direct proportion to us not being able to get these — these reforms passed.”
The idea that elections might be unreliable unless Democrats get their way — or unless Democrats get elected secretary of state — is a strain of the same poison being peddled by people who say Biden didn’t win.
The White House later tried to recast Biden’s remarks as saying what would happen if the states do in 2022 what Trump wanted them to do in 2020. Either way, the damage was done. Back in Georgia, Raffensperger tweeted: “President Biden should not be undermining the integrity of our elections. Pushing these claims is a threat to the security of American democracy.”
Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.), now in his fourth term in Congress, has been endorsed by Trump in the race for secretary of state in Georgia. (Emil Lippe)
Jena Griswold became the nation’s youngest elected secretary of state, at 34, in 2019, and the first Democratic one in Colorado since the early 1960s. (David Zalubowski/Associated Press)
LEFT: Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.), now in his fourth term in Congress, has been endorsed by Trump in the race for secretary of state in Georgia. (Emil Lippe) RIGHT: Jena Griswold became the nation’s youngest elected secretary of state, at 34, in 2019, and the first Democratic one in Colorado since the early 1960s. (David Zalubowski/Associated Press)
The last time a Georgia secretary of state had to hide the Great Seal was in 1947, when Ben Fortson held the job. The governor-elect died before he could be inaugurated, and three rivals claimed the position, prompting the so-called Three Governors Controversy. One of the pretenders seized the governor’s office and changed the locks. While the courts sorted out the crisis, Fortson knew that none of the ersatz governors could sign legislation without the Great Seal. So Fortson, who used a wheelchair, hid the seal under his cushion and sat on it for two months until a legitimate governor was named.
Fortson is Raffensperger’s role model for a secretary of state rising above the political fray and maintaining “unquestioned integrity.” Now Raffensperger finds himself in a lonely reelection battle with challengers on the right and the left questioning his impartiality.
Trump has endorsed Rep. Jody Hice, now in his fourth term in Congress. That a sitting member of Congress would leave to run for secretary of state shows how the political gravitas of the job has spiked. “Yes, I believe Trump won,” Hice told me in a telephone interview. “If we were to get an accurate count of the votes in Georgia, I believe absolutely Trump won Georgia.”
Hice maintains that steps Raffensperger took during the pandemic opened the election to fraud. When I asked about the multiple recounts, the spot check of signature matches and other reviews that found no evidence of fraud, he said: “If you have a hundred dollars of counterfeit money and you recount them over and over and over, you may get the same count, but you still have counterfeit money. The question was not the count. The question was whether or not the ballots were legal.”
The other main Republican challenger is lawyer David Belle Isle, who lost to Raffensperger in a primary runoff in 2018. We met in his office in Alpharetta, a small city outside Atlanta, where he had been mayor. He told me he’s not in a position to identify the specific tainted votes that gave Biden the victory but added: “I believe on statistics alone that Trump won Georgia.” As proof, he points to what he says is a sharply higher rejection rate for absentee ballot signatures in past elections compared with 2020. (Raffensperger’s office disputes that there is such a large discrepancy.)
“Brad had a colossal failure to be curious,” Belle Isle says. “He came up with a conclusion just two days after the election that it was the fairest, most secure election in Georgia’s history. … His conclusion came first, and everything that has happened after that has been to support the conclusion.”
On the other side of the aisle, Raffensperger obliterated much of the goodwill he may have enjoyed with Democrats when he supported an election bill passed in Georgia last year that addressed many of Trump supporters’ complaints. “I recognized it was the same man who I’ve always known, who would always come to committee and not be a friend for voting rights,” says Bee Nguyen, a state legislator who is one of the top Democrats seeking Raffensperger’s job.
Nguyen holds Stacey Abrams’s old seat and is an outspoken advocate for voting rights. She told me running for secretary of state “was not part of my plan” until the aftermath of the 2020 election, when she saw how decisive the job could be in securing the right to vote. To her, Raffensperger now merely wants “to placate this base that has rejected him — this base that continues to double down on the ‘big lie.’ ”
If none of the Republicans prevail in the primary in May, there will be a runoff in June. Hice and Belle Isle say Raffensperger can’t win a one-on-one Republican runoff. Raffensperger, for his part, says he’s the only Republican who can win the general election against Nguyen or another Democrat.
As I surveyed the secretary of state landscape, I kept bumping into examples of how this infinitely elastic job has been shaped and tugged and sometimes twisted to meet the needs of the moment. Given the intense partisanship of today, we probably should have expected the job to be hammered into its latest incarnation: crusader.
Near the end of my exploration, seeking the consolation of experience, I consulted America’s longest-serving secretary of state currently in office, who, until recently, thought he had seen it all. Doug La Follette, 81, was elected to the job in Wisconsin in 1974; except for a four-year break, he’s held it ever since. He imagined it might be a steppingstone to higher office but, predictably — nope. He lost races for lieutenant governor, U.S. Senate and U.S. House. So he settled in for the long haul, trying to modernize the office, using it as a bully pulpit for his environmental activism as one of the organizers of the first Earth Day.
Before he took office, the legislature removed election authority and handed it to an outside election board. Then, during Democrat La Follette’s long tenure, Republican governors stripped away nearly all the remaining grab bag of duties. In the early 1970s, La Follette had nearly 50 employees. Today he has two and is relegated to a tiny office in the basement of the state Capitol.
“How do I feel?” La Follette asked during a Zoom call. “To be quite honest, I feel damn s---ty about it, because it means that in my tenure, the office has been emasculated.” The main thing he does now is authenticate documents for foreign transactions. “I can do the office with both hands tied behind my back, and it’s not a very exciting thing if you like to do stuff.”
Then the 2020 election happened. Trump supporters refused to accept Biden’s 20,000-plus vote victory in Wisconsin. That December, someone delivered to the basement office a list of electors — in support of Trump. One of La Follette’s other duties, every four years, is to authenticate the official list of electors transmitted by the governor to Congress. In 2020, of course, it was a list of Biden electors.
“They said, ‘We met and we chose these electors supporting President Trump’s reelection,’ ” La Follette recalled. “Of course, it didn’t come from the governor, and it wasn’t authentic. So I just kind of smiled. … I put them in a drawer and forgot about it.” Now the Jan. 6 committee in Congress and other investigators are digging into the scheme to submit Trump electors from multiple swing states. “People have now gotten interested in those fake electors,” La Follette said. “So I got them out of the drawer.”
Suddenly his job looms larger than it has in decades. For the first time in memory, the race for Wisconsin secretary of state really matters. Four Republicans and a Libertarian candidate have signaled interest. At least two of the Republican candidates want to restore election authority to the office after all these years. That defies the trend in some other swing states, where Republican legislatures have sought to weaken the secretary of state. But it perfectly fits the politicization of the office: Since Trump’s loss in Wisconsin can’t be blamed on the secretary of state, but allegedly on the outside election commission, why not give power back to the secretary of state and elect a Republican?
“The biggest applause line I get is when I say the Wisconsin Elections Commission has to be fired,” Jay Schroeder, one of the Republicans campaigning for the nomination, told me. He calls himself an America First candidate, and he’s a serious contender in the race. When he ran against La Follette in 2018, he got 47 percent of the vote. “The secretary of state was a sleepy position, kind of in hibernation — but it isn’t now.”
After more than 40 years in office, La Follette could easily consider retiring, but now he’s not so sure. “If they can elect a Republican secretary of state, and if they can elect a Republican governor this year, and we’re going to have a Republican legislature — that’s fixed in stone by gerrymandering … then they can fuddle with the election the way Trump might like them to,” he says.
With his statewide name recognition, La Follette would be a strong candidate, but when we talked in late January, he still hadn’t decided on running. What gave him the most pause was the requirement to get thousands of signatures for his candidacy. That’s a risky activity for an 81-year-old during the pandemic. But then, serving as secretary of state these days is a risky activity. Like everyone aspiring to be secretary of state in 2022, Republicans and Democrats, La Follette thought the state — and the nation — just may depend on his taking the chance.
David Montgomery is a staff writer for the magazine. Washington Post researcher Alice Crites contributed to this report. | null | null | null | null | null |
McLEAN, Va. — Security firm Alarm.com says it’s expanding its northern Virginia headquarters and will create 180 additional jobs.
Youngkin’s office said the company will invest to $2.6 million to expand its technology research and development division at its headquarters.
Alarm.com, which provides security systems to homes and businesses, currently employs about 700 workers in Virginia and was named one of America’s 100 fastest growing companies earlier this month by Fortune magazine. | null | null | null | null | null |
Ordinary people in Russia are shouldering the economic consequences of Putin’s war.
People stand in line to withdraw U.S. dollars and euros from an ATM in St. Petersburg, Feb. 25, 2022. (Dmitri Lovetsky/AP)
By Kristy Ironside
Kristy Ironside is an assistant professor of Russian history at McGill University and author of "A Full-Value Ruble: the Promise of Prosperity in the Postwar Soviet Union" (Harvard University Press, 2021).
After new Western sanctions were imposed in response to Russia invading Ukraine, the ruble appears to be on the verge of collapse. The sanctions aim to limit the Russian Central Bank’s access to its massive foreign currency reserves (around $630 billion in U.S. dollars), and it will remove several of the country’s main banks from the SWIFT payment messaging system, isolating the Russian economy. The official exchange rate of the ruble, as of Sunday night, was over 84 rubles to the dollar, while one online bank gave an unofficial exchange rate of 152 rubles. As trading markets opened on Monday, the exchange rate dipped by almost 30 percent before stabilizing at about a 20 percent loss.
The Central Bank continues to try to soothe investors and depositors’ worries. It claims it has been planning for this. It promises it can maintain liquidity and the domestic payment messaging system — developed as a fail-safe after Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded Crimea in 2014 — will allow credit cards to work even if the banks are cut off from SWIFT. It has supplied extra cash to ATMs. But that has clearly not calmed those standing in hours-long lines to pull money out of the bank.
Such experiences are nothing new to Russians. They have had to act quickly in these kinds of economic crises before. The ruble has repeatedly collapsed in Russian history, taking people’s savings with it and leaving them to contend with the fallout. In the Soviet era, the weakness of the ruble contributed to low living standards and, over time, undermined popular support for communism itself. As in the past, Russia’s ordinary citizens will shoulder this war’s direct and indirect consequences for the value of their money.
During World War I, Tsarist Russia’s economy was wracked by hyperinflation caused, in part, by excessive currency printing. As the war bled into the Russian Revolution and then into civil war, the Bolsheviks deliberately brought on the ruble’s collapse by printing even more money. They did so to try to annihilate the bourgeoisie’s power and bring the country one step closer to the utopian money-free economy promised by Karl Marx. Bank notes became so large, and so useless, that the million-ruble notes were sometimes called “lemons” (limony, a play on miliony). This caused everyday hardships for the very workers whose lives the socialist revolution was supposed to improve, who often responded by walking off the job.
The Bolsheviks quickly realized this was an unsustainable strategy and reversed course. They launched a currency reform that introduced a new ruble for domestic use and a gold-backed currency, the chervonets, for foreign trade. By the end of the currency reform, the 1924 ruble was worth 1/5,000,000 of a 1922 ruble. This helped to stabilize the money economy and workers’ wages and living standards.
As he rose to power, Joseph Stalin argued that the country needed a strong currency, especially as a labor incentive. Yet unacknowledged inflation still affected the money economy he created because the government continued to resort to excessive currency printing. The ruble’s purchasing power remained severely limited heading into World War II. In the meantime, anybody caught holding more stable foreign currencies could be accused of “speculation,” a catchall term for economic crime that warranted steep penalties.
Immediately after Nazi Germany attacked the Soviet Union in June 1941, the ruble collapsed yet again. A halt on withdrawals was announced to prevent a run on the banks, allowing citizens unlimited withdrawals only from funds deposited subsequently. Deposits all but ceased. The purchasing power of the ruble was decimated due to shortages and rationing, and further limited by the government quadrupling the money supply to cover war expenses. Money became much less important than goods to barter, with access to scarce food and resources distributed through workplaces. Prices in what was left of the free market skyrocketed.
The currency reform of December 1947 aimed to take excess cash out of circulation and penalize war profiteers. But news of it was leaked in the days leading up to the reform, first to Communist Party members who took full advantage of this knowledge. This led to a run on the banks, then a run to the banks, after it was revealed that a better exchange rate would be given to savings. People rushed to invest old cash rubles in material goods and nonperishable foods before they lost 9/10 of their value overnight. The reform allowed the state to renege on much of its debt to the population after years of semi-forced investments in state bonds. Ordinary people lost millions of rubles as their savings were “converted.”
Stalin’s successor, Nikita Khrushchev revalued the ruble once again in 1961, scaling all transactions down by a factor of 10. Unlike in 1947, this plan was announced well in advance and citizens were promised no losses. Regardless, they lost out due to the way prices and wages were rounded. Market prices rose again. Citizens pulled their money out of the banks and invested in goods, with ripple effects for the already-low consumer supply.
After a period of relative prosperity under Leonid Brezhnev, the country’s economic problems could no longer be glossed over under Mikhail Gorbachev. As his perestroika reforms upended the planned economy, the ruble’s purchasing power tanked again, necessitating money rationing in some areas and another currency reform in January 1991. If they could get their hands on them, many citizens preferred to hold their savings in the dollars that began to enter the country as it opened up. When the Soviet Union collapsed in December 1991, it took many citizens’ savings with it. Some Russian citizens have since taken the government to court to recover their losses.
The ruble was insulated from external economic shocks during the Soviet period. It finally became convertible in 1992. Russia launched another confiscatory currency reform in 1993 amid the dismantling of the “ruble zone,” aiming to stop newly independent post-Soviet independent states from using, and undermining, the ruble.
The ruble’s exchange rate was nevertheless extremely volatile in the 1990s. Goods were often priced in both rubles and dollars because of its unpredictable value. Russians often transacted and saved in hard currencies to avoid losses. The ruble then crashed in 1998 due to an escalating balance-of-payments problem and the knock-on effects of the Asian financial crisis. Russians lost out yet again, as the ruble was devalued.
The most recent collapse occurred in 2014 when the ruble’s exchange rate to the dollar plummeted from the mid-30s to around 80 in December that year due to falling oil prices, the impact of Western sanctions over Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the start of the war in the Donbas and declining investor confidence. ATMs stopped dispensing dollars. Some popular foreign firms in Russia, like Ikea, even stopped selling certain products there because of the currency’s volatility.
At the time, the Russian Central Bank stopped the ruble’s free fall by propping it up with hard currency reserves it gained by selling off assets. Although today’s sanctions aim to limit the Central Bank’s ability to deploy this strategy, the Russian government is promising its citizens that they will not lose big once again. It raised the interest rate on Monday from 9.5 to 20 percent partly in an attempt to “protect citizens’ savings against depreciation.”
Decades of failed promises about the value of the ruble sapped popular confidence in communism and in Soviet and post-Soviet power. It remains to be seen if the Central Bank can live up to its promise that Russians’ rubles will not be affected by sanctions, and if not, what effect this will have on confidence in the Putin regime.
Alongside sanctions on the banks, there has been much talk in recent days about sanctioning Russian oligarchs by going after their wealth and property abroad, as well as their notorious “golden passports.” Ordinary Russians’ economic lives are also now more intertwined with the rest of the world than in any previous era: they travel abroad, order goods online, pay with Visa and Mastercard and shop in foreign chains and ‘hypermarkets’ that will find it harder to do business in Russia going forward. They stand to suffer a massive dip in their living standards.
Back in 2014, on the day the ruble collapsed, the website “Russian Zen” was launched, displaying the ruble’s declining exchange rate and the price of a barrel of crude oil against a looped image of crashing ocean waves set to new age music.
The website still displays exchange rates and oil prices, with the same calming soundtrack, but it now features the statement “No to War!” and a yellow and blue landscape of wheat fields. It also has a clock listing how long Vladimir Putin has been in power. That clock may soon run out if the Russian government’s economic promises to the Russian people are broken another time. | null | null | null | null | null |
And how did the U.S. and its allies respond?
Russian missile launchers move during the Victory Day military parade marking 71 years of the victory in World War II in Red Square in Moscow in 2016. (Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP)
By James J. Cameron
Russian President Vladimir Putin announced on Sunday that he had ordered the country’s nuclear forces to “high combat alert.” Here’s what you need to know.
What does Putin’s command mean in practice?
Experts are unsure as to the practical implications of Putin’s order, because the literal Russian translation of the president’s command — “special regime of combat duty” — does not conform to any of Russia’s known alert levels.
The United States and its allies have not observed any major changes in the deployment of Russia’s nuclear forces. The meaning of Putin’s order is “not completely clear yet,” a U.S. defense official told journalists. U.K. Defense Secretary Ben Wallace said that his country had not detected any “significant change” in Russia’s nuclear force posture.
This indicates that Moscow has not taken steps consistent with a higher alert level, such as sending its ground-based mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles out on patrol, more ballistic-missile submarines to sea or arming its nuclear bombers — all things that the United States and its allies could see from reconnaissance satellites.
There are some measures that Russia could take that may not be visually detectable, such as bringing its nuclear command and control system to a higher state of readiness, enabling Russia’s forces to launch more rapidly, especially if under nuclear attack. However, there has been no confirmation that Russia has taken such a step.
Why would Putin do this?
Putin’s nuclear threat is directed primarily at the United States and Europe, but beyond that his specific aims are unclear.
Putin cited “aggressive statements” and economic sanctions from the West as the reasons for his move. Sanctions have already inflicted significant economic damage on Russia. The value of the Russian ruble has crashed, and the Moscow Stock Exchange did not open Monday morning in anticipation of a rout.
The Russian president may be attempting to dissuade the United States and its allies from further increasing the economic pressure. Putin may be concerned that the Russian economy could collapse under the weight of sanctions and ultimately place the viability of his regime in doubt.
While Russia’s nuclear declaratory policy does not include economic sanctions as grounds for nuclear escalation, it does list attacks with “conventional weapons that place the very existence of the state in jeopardy.” Caitlin Talmadge has pointed out in her TMC analysis that the personalist nature of his rule may make Putin more willing to take significant risks to save his regime.
Putin may also feel pressured by the faltering campaign in Ukraine. Western governments and independent analysts assess that Russia’s further invasion of its neighbor has fallen short of the Kremlin’s initial objectives. Meanwhile, the United States and Europe have increased their supply of weaponry to the Ukrainian government and agreed to deploy additional conventional forces to NATO’s East European members.
Putin may be trying to deter the United States and its allies from taking further steps to influence the outcome of the war in Ukraine, either through increased arms supplies or direct military intervention. He has already made implicit nuclear threats designed to dissuade NATO from intervening in the conflict. The Russian president may not fully believe U.S. and NATO assurances that they will not deploy combat forces to Ukraine, especially if — as seems possible — the Russian military responds to its initial failures by increasing the violence of its attacks on Ukrainian cities and civilians.
The Biden administration has not responded to Putin’s move by raising the alert level of the United States’ nuclear forces. The U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) issued a statement saying that it “remains at an appropriate posture,” indicating that its combat readiness has not increased.
There is no need for the United States or its allies to put their weapons on a higher alert. The United States, as well as U.K. and France, maintain forces capable of surviving and retaliating against any Russian attack. This second-strike capability should act as a significant deterrent against any precipitous Russian moves, while any increase in force readiness could raise fears on the Russian side of a Western strike, thereby contributing to crisis instability.
Diplomatically, the Biden administration has pushed back against Putin by stigmatizing his attempts at nuclear coercion. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield condemned the Russian president’s move as “completely unacceptable.” White House press secretary Jen Psaki accused Putin of “manufacturing threats that don’t exist in order to justify further aggression.”
What are the implications of Putin’s move?
This is not the first time Putin has issued nuclear threats during the Ukraine crisis, but by making them more explicit he has succeeded in increasing the influence of nuclear weapons over the war’s course and eventual outcome. Western policymakers may dismiss or condemn Putin’s rhetoric while attempting to coerce Moscow into changing course, but they will have to take his words into account when deciding how far to increase the economic, military and political pressure on the Russian regime.
James J. Cameron is a postdoctoral fellow at the Oslo Nuclear Project in the Political Science Department at the University of Oslo. He is the author of “The Double Game: The Demise of America’s First Missile Defense System and the Rise of Strategic Arms Limitation” (Oxford University Press, 2017). | null | null | null | null | null |
The IOC urged organizations to sanction Russian teams, athletes and officials. (Roman Pilipey/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)
With pressure intensifying for sports organizations to sanction Russia because of the invasion of Ukraine, the International Olympic Committee’s executive board recommended Monday that international federations and organizations “not invite or allow the participation of Russian and Belarusian athletes and officials” in competition and to move events from those countries.
The IOC’s executive board said in a statement that it was moving “to protect the integrity of global sports competitions and for the safety of all the participants.”
The IOC stopped short of an outright ban, however, and has not suspended either country. That aligns with action taken by FIFA, soccer’s international governing body. It has not banned Russia from World Cup competition, but its team will be required to compete as Football Union of Russia. It had been scheduled to host Poland on March 24 in a World Cup qualifying playoff, but Poland and Russia’s next possible opponents, Sweden and the Czech Republic, have said they would refuse to take the field.
The International Ice Hockey Federation has also been the target of calls to move events from Russia and bar its athletes from competition. Federations in Switzerland, Latvia and Finland urged the IIHF to take those measures concerning and Belarus, with Wayne Gretzky lending his voice to the growing din.
Calling the invasion “a senseless war,” Gretzky went on to say on the “NHL on TNT,” “I was so glad to see the Polish soccer team step up and say we’re not going to play against them [in World Cup qualifying next month]. And I think international hockey should say, ‘We’re not going to let them play in the world junior hockey championship.’ I think we’ve got to, as Canadians, take that stance since the games are going to be played in Edmonton.”
Besides the World Junior Championships, upcoming IIHF tournaments include the men’s and women’s World Championships and the men’s and women’s U18′s. The 2023 world juniors, set for Novosibirsk and Omsk in Russia, and the 2023 Men’s World Championship in St. Petersburg would also be under consideration.
Perspective: Alex Ovechkin's voice could help pressure Russia
Calls for punishment and protests have spread across sports. The Swiss soccer federation said its women’s team would not play Russia in the European Championship and Schalke, a German soccer club, ended its long-standing partnership with Gazprom, Russia’s state-owned energy giant.
On Sunday, Dinamo Riga, a hockey team based in Latvia, withdrew from Russia’s Kontinental Hockey League because of the invasion. A part of the KHL since the league’s inaugural 2008-09 season, it was one of five teams in the 24-team league based outside Russia entering the season.
Alex Ovechkin, the Russian star of the Capitals, says, 'Please, no more war'
Dinamo Riga’s withdrawal leaves three teams based outside of Russia that were still participating in the league as of Sunday — Barys Nur-Sultan of Kazakhstan, Dinamo Minsk of Belarus and Kunlun Red Star of China. Barys Nur-Sultan and Dinamo Minsk are scheduled to take part in the playoffs; Kunlun Red Star did not qualify.
Last week, Finland’s Jokerit announced it would not be take part in the KHL playoffs and its future in the KHL beyond the postseason is uncertain. | null | null | null | null | null |
In this 2019 photo, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, center front left, speaks with then-president Donald Trump, after a group photo at a NATO leaders meeting at The Grove hotel and resort in Watford, Hertfordshire, England. (AP Photo/Francisco Seco)
— Former President Trump, in a statement, Feb. 28
Only days ago Trump lauded Russian president Vladimir Putin as “very savvy” for making a “genius” move by declaring two regions of eastern Ukraine as independent states and dispatching Russian armed forces to seize them. “Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said Feb. 22 on the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton show, referring to the troops as “the strongest peace force I’ve ever seen.”
Of course, it turns out Putin launched an invasion of all of Ukraine. With Ukraine putting up a gallant fight and the United States and its allies imposing harsh sanctions on Russia, Trump today issued a defensive statement repeating falsehoods he regularly made during his presidency.
With Trump, it’s hard to know if he’s willfully ignorant or if he has simply swallowed his own spin. Far from being a savior of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, he frequently sought to undermine it. Here’s a quick guide to what’s wrong or misleading in his statement.
“It was me, as President of the United States, that got delinquent NATO members to start paying their dues, which amounted to hundreds of billions of dollars.”
During the 2016 presidential election, Trump consistently inflated the U.S. contribution to NATO. Once he became president, his inaccuracy persisted, but with a twist. Nearly 150 times during his presidency, he claimed that “hundreds of billions” of dollars have come into NATO because of his complaints. Sometimes, as president, he even suggested this money might be coming directly to the United States.
This is all poppycock.
There are two types of funding for NATO: direct funding and indirect funding. The amount of direct funding provided by each NATO member, for military-related operations, maintenance and headquarters activity, generally is based on gross national income — the total domestic and foreign output claimed by residents of a country — and adjusted regularly. The United States and Germany currently each underwrite 16.34 percent of direct spending; the U.S. share had been previously been slightly higher, as it had the biggest economy, but its share was reduced under Trump at his insistence.
A significant portion of the U.S. share is operating the Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AWACS) fleet operations, according to the Congressional Research Service. The United States contributed about $406 million in Trump’s last year, though Biden sought to boost that to $482 million in fiscal year 2022.
Those numbers are a rounding error in the Pentagon’s $700 billion budget. What Trump is really referring to is indirect spending — what NATO members spend on their own defense,.
Trump claimed NATO members were “delinquent” but that was not the case. NATO members are supposed to meet a guideline of spending at least two percent of their gross domestic product on defense by 2024 — a process that had started before Trump’s became president.
He also often asserted NATO spending was at a low point when he came into office, but that’s also not true. It had fallen after the end of the Cold War but had started rising sharply after 2014, after Russia seized Crimea from Ukraine. NATO estimates that European NATO and Canada added $130 billion in cumulative defense spending through 2020, in 2015 dollars, as an increase over 2016 spending. NATO also estimates the cumulative figure will rise to $400 billion through 2024.
“There would be no NATO if I didn’t act strongly and swiftly.”
In reality, Trump repeatedly told aides he wanted to leave NATO.
“Trump told his top national security officials that he did not see the point of the military alliance, which he presented as a drain on the United States,” the New York Times reported in 2019. That reporting was confirmed then Trump’s former national security adviser John R. Bolton published a memoir in 2020 that described Trump as repeatedly saying he wanted to quit the alliance, saying at one point “I don’t give a s--- about NATO.” In 2018, Bolton, said, he had convince Trump not to quit NATO in the middle of the 2018 summit.
Trump’s former Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, a retired four-star Marine general, was also quoted as saying that “one of the most difficult tasks he faced with Trump was trying to stop him from pulling out of NATO.”
When Trump ran for reelection, it was generally feared he would pull out of the alliance if he was reelected. In a fit of pique at Germany, Trump in 2020 ordered the withdrawal of 12,000 U.S. troops, about one-third of the force based there. When Biden became president, he quickly reversed the plan and kept the troops there.
“Also, it was me that got Ukraine the very effective anti-tank busters (Javelins) when the previous Administration was sending blankets.”
Trump yet again exaggerates the material provided to Ukraine by Barack Obama’s administration. While the Obama administration did not send lethal aid, it in 2015 provided Ukraine more than $120 million in security assistance for Ukraine and had pledged an additional $75 million worth of equipment including UAVs, armored Humvee vehicles, counter-mortar radars, night vision devices and medical supplies, according to the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency.
Many of these same items were provided by the Trump administration but in March 2018, the White House also approved the sale of Javelin missiles, a shoulder-fired precision missile system designed to destroy tanks, other armored vehicles and helicopters. One issue the Obama administration faced is that some U.S. officials were concerned the Ukrainian military did not have the capability to handle weapons such as Javelin anti-tank missiles, but it achieved that capability by the time Trump became president.
Ironically, Foreign Policy magazine reported, Trump initially did not want to provide Javelins to Ukraine, but eventually aides convinced him that it could be good for U.S. business. Nevertheless, the sale was mostly symbolic. The Trump administration insisted that Javelins could not be deployed in a conflict zone, so they are stored in western Ukraine, far from the front lines of the ongoing conflict against pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine.
In a call on July 25, 2019, Trump asked for “a favor” after President Volodymyr Zelensky said Ukraine was ready to buy more Javelins. That favor involved launching an investigation of Joe Biden — which led to Trump’s first impeachment. As part of his effort to pressure Zelensky, Trump placed a hold on aid to Ukraine — $250 million in aid through the Defense Department or $141 million in aid through the State Department — that had already been appropriated.
U.S. officials became increasingly frantic about the Ukraine aid freeze because the 2019 fiscal year ended on Sept. 30, after which the appropriation would expire. The hold was finally lifted in mid-September, only after intense pressure from members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, but it takes time for the U.S. government to transfer such funds. It turned out that about $35 million of the aid could not be disbursed by the Sept. 30 deadline. For the money to go through, Congress had to pass a law extending the deadline to the fiscal 2020 year. | null | null | null | null | null |
Opinion: What will be legal to teach in Virginia?
A person holds a draft of a speech before entering the Loudoun County School Board Building in Broadlands on Sept. 28. (Eric Lee for The Washington Post)
By Monte Bourjaily IV
Monte F. Bourjaily IV teaches Advanced Placement U.S. Government, U.S. History, and Law & Society at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Fairfax County.
What happens when it becomes “unlawful” to teach? This sounds like a philosophical question, but it is chillingly practical to teachers reading HB 787, pending now in the Virginia legislature, which would make it “unlawful and discriminatory practice … to teach any … student to believe or promote to any students as valid” views grounded in the superiority or right to discriminate on the basis of race or sex.
Though the laudable goal of this bill might be to prevent indoctrination, its actual effect would be to criminalize the discussion of competing views on topics central to American political discourse. Research and discussion of competing views, including those about which people vehemently disagree, is an essential component of effective pedagogy. In a social studies or English classroom, materials and engagement that force adolescents to question assumptions and beliefs provide students with the most effective means of developing the analytical and critical-thinking skills that prepare them for college, careers and civic life. In the shadow of HB 787, I must ask myself as a teacher: Would I be guilty of a crime if one of my students comes to believe a view or sees as valid a perspective that I did not espouse but that a full and balanced discussion revealed or that a student’s biases reinforced?
Hopefully, we all can agree that teachers should not profess the inherent superiority of one race or sex. We also likely share serious reservations and will consider closely any effort to assert that a person, by virtue of their race or sex, is “inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive,” or that “individual[s] should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment” on the basis of their race or sex. But what is really being silenced by prohibiting instruction in what the original version of this bill defined as “divisive concepts”?
Much of the professed political concern is about instruction related to critical race theory, but let’s consider instruction centered around gender. As a high school social studies teacher, I am required to teach family life education. One of the elements of that curriculum requires focus on “the prevention of dating violence … sexual harassment … [and] sexual violence.” Generally, the focus of concern is the safety of girls and women against potential harm by boys and men. Though this does not mean women do not sexually assault men or that same-sex sexual violence does not occur, our curriculum focuses on threat by men against women. HB 787 could impair instruction on the topic of sexual assault and violence, because in emphasizing the risk to women, we are highlighting the threat posed by men. This appears to be a form of discrimination on the basis of sex (violating A.(iii) of HB 787), implies that a gender is “consciously or unconsciously” “sexist or oppressive” (violating A.(ii) of HB 787), and places responsibility on present day males for the “actions committed in the past by other” males (violating A.(v) of HB 787).
Let’s consider another question: Could I have a discussion with my students about underlying issues possibly affecting gender inequality in STEM fields or in elected offices? As a government teacher, I ask my students to examine the demographic makeup of Congress, the role of women in positions of power in American society and the effect that demographic factors might have on legislating and other forms of policymaking. What am I to do if, as a result of this instruction, some of my female students conclude, as do groups like Emily’s List and Susan B. Anthony List, that men dominate politics and that this reflects a historical bias against women that continues today? Though one may be dismissive of this example, the bill makes it “unlawful … to teach … to believe or to promote … as valid the belief” that “an individual, by virtue of the individual’s … sex, is inherently … sexist or oppressive.” By conducting a lesson that reveals the demographic imbalance in favor of males in public office, as a result of which my female students come to believe that women experience discrimination on the basis of their sex at the hands of men and understand that mainstream women’s groups have formed to address this discrimination, would I be I guilty of violating HB 787? Will I have allowed a “divisive concept” to enter my classroom?
These examples show that HB 787 lays down a minefield for teachers both with curriculum they must teach and for issues about which they have a choice. As someone who teaches Law & Society, I know this bill is a clear example of rule by law, rather than rule of law. The difference between the two is that rule by law imposes laws that can be used against citizens to punish behavior the government doesn’t like, whereas rule of law creates a shared set of rules that allow society to operate free from the tyranny of those with power. It is ironic that those who profess a preference for limited government would legislate an increase in governmental power that isn’t definable until the blow falls on the unwary. The pragmatic teacher will choose not to teach anything that could be considered controversial regarding race and sex, but also regarding other topics out of a concern for misinterpretation or simple convenience of not having to hazard the scrutiny of an unpredictable overlord.
Virginians can work together on the climate crisis | null | null | null | null | null |
Grading experts say that since the pandemic closed schools in March 2020, they have been bombarded with requests for help from administrators seeking to change what has been common practice for generations. One of these experts is Joe Feldman, whose 2018 book, “Grading for Equity: What It is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms,” has become a bible for many revising their practices. Feldman said that schools "perpetuate very antiquated and ineffective and even harmful ways of grading,” because there is no or little training on how to grade for students in teacher preparation courses.
Luo said that the most important change for him in Moreno’s grading system has been that, instead of focusing on formatting his assignments correctly and punctually, he has been forced to think about his learning more deeply and, as a result, he absorbs more information and gets graded on his best work. He observed that he witnesses kids ask their English teachers every year, “How do I write a thesis? How do I write a body paragraph?,” even though they’ve ostensibly learned this skill every year starting in middle school. "With this, as we improve, we are internalizing this information better.”
Rick Wormeli, a former National Board Certified teacher and now a consultant on classroom practice and grading systems, and others said that report cards should capture academic and nonacademic performance in different ways. A-F grades should be academic, and other habits and behaviors can be recorded through notes or other numerical or alphabetical symbols.
Another example is softening deadlines of assignments, allowing students to turn them in when they can. Opponents say this practice harms efforts to instill responsibility in students and leads to students falling behind in their work. Supporters say that students often don’t turn in work because they don’t understand it, or have after-school or night jobs, or lack adequate technology or Internet service to complete assignments. But in class, they are forced to move ahead with work they haven’t mastered, making things worse. | null | null | null | null | null |
It should go without saying that a potential halt to hostilities would most likely have been unthinkable without the extraordinary tenacity and bravery of the Ukrainian people. But the mere fact that such an aggressive multilateral sanctions effort has taken place is itself a surprising turn of events.
It suggests Putin has provoked far more concerted international efforts in the face of aggression from one of the world’s most powerful militaries than many expected. | null | null | null | null | null |
A pragmatic liberal. (Photographer: Pool/Getty Images North America)
The judicial name most closely associated with the commission is Justice Stephen Breyer, whom Jackson clerked for and whom she would replace. But Jackson’s close ties to the commission point up the influence of another mentor who has arguably been more directly influential in her career, Judge Patti Saris, who chaired the commission from 2010 to 2017.
Saris has long served as a judge on the federal District Court in Massachusetts, and was chief judge of that court for years. Like Jackson, Saris went to Harvard College and Harvard Law School. She is widely recognized throughout the federal judiciary as a legal thinker who can be trusted to make thoughtful, pragmatic and wise decisions on a wide range of issues. In all this, she is reminiscent of Jackson herself.
Jackson clerked for Saris straight out of law school, before spending a year as a clerk to appellate judge Bruce Selya, clerking for Breyer at the Supreme Court and serving time in private practice. Then she spent 2003-05 as special counsel to the sentencing commission. Those were complex and important years for the commission, during which its task rationalizing criminal sentencing was under intense criticism from left and right. And those years culminated in the Supreme Court striking down the idea that the guidelines were binding on federal judges. Jackson had a front-row seat.
Remarkably, she returned to the commission as its vice chair in 2009, just four years after working as a lawyer on staff. Jackson got the chance to work as an equal alongside Saris, for whom she had been a law clerk. Serving on the commission then required balancing its remaining prestige with the practical need to make sure the guidelines still had meaning in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision.
This was Jackson’s breakthrough public service appointment, and it led to her being appointed to the federal District Court, again like Saris. As a judge, she was liberal but also a pragmatic centrist — once more like Saris and Breyer. (Saris and Breyer have also been colleagues, incidentally.)
• Every Supreme Court Nominee Deserves Firm Opposition: Ramesh Ponnuru
• Breyer’s Supreme Court Pragmatism Will Be Missed: Noah Feldman
• Conservative Justices Are Walking Into Their Own Trap: Noah Feldman
• Gorsuch Versus the Administrative State Is Really Heating Up: Noah Feldman
(Corrects spelling of Judge Patti Saris’s name.) | null | null | null | null | null |
Chris Licht will replace Jeff Zucker as head of CNN
The CBS executive, who also co-created ‘Morning Joe,’ is tasked with helping the network overcome a recent series of controversies.
Chris Licht, seen here in 2019, has been named the new head of CNN, replacing Jeff Zucker. (Evan Agostini/Invision/APe)
Discovery Inc., which is set to take control of the media conglomerate WarnerMedia in the spring, has tapped television veteran Chris Licht to run CNN once the deal is done.
Licht, a programming executive for CBS who also oversees “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert,” will replace Jeff Zucker, who abruptly resigned from CNN on Feb. 2 after failing to disclose a romantic relationship with a longtime colleague, Allison Gollust. She later resigned, under pressure, as well.
Before joining CBS, Licht distinguished himself at MSNBC, where he was the co-creator and original executive producer of “Morning Joe,” the network’s flagship morning show.
Licht’s new title will be chairman and chief executive officer of CNN Global, and he is expected to begin in the role in early May. Discovery shareholders are expected to approve the merger during a meeting on March 11.
“Chris is a dynamic and creative producer, an engaging and thoughtful journalist, and a true news person,” said David Zaslav, who will serve as chief executive of the combined Warner Bros. Discovery. “He is a highly principled individual who is trusted, hard-working and makes every organization stronger, more innovative, and more cohesive.” | null | null | null | null | null |
Fire officials: 3rd person dies after Delaware blaze
LITTLE CREEK, Del. — A third person has died more than two weeks after a fire at a home in Little Creek, fire officials announced Monday.
When firefighters arrived at the house on Main Street just before noon on Feb. 6, flames were shooting from the two-story home and people were trapped inside, the Office of the State Fire Marshal said in a news release.
Firefighters rescued several people and five people were taken to a hospital, where a 42-year-old woman and 9-year-old girl died, officials said. Three others remained in critical condition at the time. Two of those people have been released from the hospital but the third, a 38-year-old woman, died Thursday because of her injuries, fire officials said.
State fire investigators, Delaware State Police and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives are investigating the blaze, but officials said the fire’s origin and cause has yet to be determined.. | null | null | null | null | null |
Opinion: Maryland’s marijuana legalization plan is thoughtful and likely to succeed
A sticky coat of cannabis terpenes build on the gloves of Michael Anderson as he trims cannabis leaves from the plants' flowers at Maryland's first legal outdoor marijuana harvest at Culta on Oct. 1, 2019, in Cambridge, Md. (Jahi Chikwendiu/The Washington Post)
By Richard B. Karel
Richard B. Karel is a freelance writer in Baltimore.
A set of proposals to legalize recreational marijuana in Maryland in two phases — a statewide referendum on a constitutional amendment and then administrative implementation — passed the Maryland State House of Delegates Friday. The state Senate is expected to take up the legislation shortly.
The bill — crafted by Del. Luke H. Clippinger (D-Baltimore City) — appears to have carefully addressed many issues that have plagued recreational legalization in other states. Though the disposition of the legislation remains to be seen, Democrats have a veto-proof majority and strong support in both chambers, so the prospects for success are very good.
Maryland has lagged behind some of its neighbors, including D.C. and Virginia, in the legalization of marijuana, although the state legalized medical use in 2014.
Polls of Maryland residents taken in 2021 found high support for legalizing recreational marijuana, although there was a slight decline from 67 percent to 60 percent between March and October 2021.
If citizens approve the constitutional amendment, Maryland would become the 19th state to legalize recreational marijuana. Effective Jan. 1, possession of up to 1.5 ounces would go from a criminal to a civil offense with a fine not exceeding $100, and, after July 1, 2023, possession of that amount would become legal.
Smoking marijuana in public would still be prohibited and subject to a $50 fine on the first offense and a $150 fine per incident thereafter. Sale of marijuana would be limited to people 21 years of age and older. People would be allowed to grow up to two plants at home, provided they were in an area not accessible to children or the public. A person charged only with simple possession before implementation of the law would have that charge automatically expunged on Jan. 1.
In addition to addressing the disproportionate impact of cannabis arrests on minorities, recreational legalization would result in substantial savings to Maryland taxpayers from reduced arrests and prosecutions, and generate significant tax revenue.
During the pandemic, for example, medical marijuana dispensaries experienced booming business in Maryland and elsewhere. States where recreational marijuana is legal saw meaningful revenue increases. In the first three quarters of 2021, for example, California took in approximately $1 billion in tax revenue from recreational cannabis — a 21 percent increase over the same period the prior year.
According to a report by the Marijuana Policy Project released in December, recreational legalization of cannabis in Colorado and Washington has generated more than $10 billion in tax revenue.
There is, unfortunately, a continuing conflict between federal and state law. Marijuana remains an illegal (Schedule 1) drug under federal law. Although there was great optimism (and bipartisan backing) for federal decriminalization of cannabis in 2021, legislation languished. But as a report published Feb. 25 in the National Law Review observed, momentum for meaningful change on the federal level remains, and perhaps 2022 will at last be the year in which federal law legalizes regulation and taxation of marijuana. That would allow businesses to use standard banking procedures. Now few banks are willing to work with state-legal dispensaries (medical or recreational). As the American Bar Association observed in a February 2020 article: “It is a familiar trope from bank heist movies that the robbers gleefully open the bag stuffed with stolen cash in the get-away car, only to have a hidden canister explode and mark all of the proceeds of their crime with indelible ink. For many marijuana-related businesses (MRBs) in the United States, it must seem that the revenues generated by their businesses bear a similar, if invisible, mark of condemnation, as many MRBs have struggled to find a bank willing to provide basic depositary and other financial services to them. This is due to the curious legal status of marijuana as a federally prohibited controlled substance but a legal and highly sought-after commodity under the laws of most U.S. states.”
In 2021 five states — Virginia, New Mexico, New York, New Jersey and Connecticut — legalized recreational marijuana, showing that the wave of recreational legalization is growing and unlikely to be stopped. That Maryland is at last likely to join the fraternity of states taking a more sensible approach to cannabis is surely a good thing. And, when the federal government finally decriminalizes marijuana, Maryland and other states can generate tax revenue and address cannabis-related problems as public health issues, not crimes.
Maryland’s marijuana legalization plan is thoughtful and likely to succeed
Maryland can’t wait for traffic relief | null | null | null | null | null |
The state of the union, according to President Biden’s worried supporters
Even among those who — reluctantly or enthusiastically — voted for Biden, there is concern that things are not going as they’d hoped
In President Biden's first speech to a joint session of Congress on April 28, 2021, he declared: “America is on the move again. Turning peril into possibility. Crisis into opportunity. Setback into strength.” (Melina Mara/The Washington Post)
Rose Hansen
Barry Yeoman
President Biden is expected to deliver his first formal State of the Union address before a packed joint session of Congress on Tuesday night. But his true audience lies well beyond the halls of the U.S. Capitol, in the divided nation he leads.
With war intensifying in Europe and Biden’s domestic agenda stagnating, will the president’s assessment of the state of the country match what tens of millions of Americans see and feel when they turn away from the screen? Are their lives better than a year ago, when Biden vowed to “preserve, protect and defend” a divided, pandemic-ravaged nation? And can he address their worries and fears as Russia attacks Ukraine?
The answers to those questions often reflect the partisan lean of the people asked. But even among those who — reluctantly or enthusiastically — voted for Joe Biden over Donald Trump, there is growing worry that things are not going as they’d hoped. For similar reasons, party leaders are increasingly concerned about losing their House and Senate majorities in the midterm elections just eight months away.
Biden’s approval rating hit a new low this month, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll released Sunday, with 37 percent approving of his job performance. The president fared better among Democrats, 77 percent of whom approved, but that support has weakened over the past year, down from 90 percent in April and 94 percent in June.
‘Frustration is at an all-time high’: The voices behind Biden’s falling poll numbers
Despite Biden’s lofty campaign promises to unite the country, many communities seem more divided than ever. There are fights over vaccines and masks. Race continues to be a wedge, everything from protests about the teaching of critical race theory to heated disagreements over what, if anything, should be done to root out bias in policing and society. Congress reflects the divided country that forms it, with even Democrats unable to agree on a sweeping social spending bill.
Still, for Biden’s supporters, there are things to celebrate. Last year, Biden signed a $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package and a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill, sweeping policies that promised help for every community in America. While the pandemic has continued, coronavirus vaccines are widely available, millions received free rapid tests in the mail, most schools and many workplaces have reopened, and federal officials eased mask recommendations for the vast majority of the country. And last week Biden nominated Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, putting her on a path to be the first Black woman to sit on the court in history.
But the past year has also brought disappointments, including an inability to federalize voting rights protections and much-called-for changes to policing. Biden’s Build Back Better agenda — a massive climate and social spending package — sputtered and now feels forgotten. Only 65 percent of the country is fully vaccinated, which experts say has prolonged the pandemic. A chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan shook Americans’ confidence in the president’s competence. And now war has broken out in Europe, and the world faces an uncertain future.
In the Milwaukee suburbs, Steve Doering — a 58-year-old cement truck driver and longtime Democrat — feels the division every time he chats with his friends, who he says are all “serious Republicans.” There are both quiet disagreements and obscenity-laced arguments. Many of his buddies don’t recognize that Biden won the election. Most aren’t vaccinated, and Doering says he’s usually the only one who regularly wears a mask. One friend recently gifted him a subscription to the Epoch Times, a pro-Trump publication that has circulated misinformation.
“I’m with Biden on the masks and vaccines, in that we should do what the science tells us to do,” Doering said, but he concedes that the meandering path out of the pandemic hasn’t done much for his side of the political argument.
“Just gives the naysayers a whole lot more ammo,” he said.
Now, as the United States navigates Russia’s war against Ukraine, he has new fears for a leader whom he still supports but can’t always defend.
“No one wants to pay six or seven bucks a gallon for gas,” Doering said. “But I got a feeling that’s coming real soon because of the world economy. It’s just bolstered my buddy who said, ‘Yeah, the first thing that Biden did was shut down the Keystone Pipeline well, and now we’re back to being dependent on foreign oil.’ ”
Doering plans to watch Biden’s address Tuesday night.
‘To me, it’s like a ghost year’
Antoine Miller, a 33-year-old IT project manager for a Philadelphia hospital, was optimistic as he set up a vaccine clinic for front-line responders in early 2021. The shots, he hoped, were the first steps out of a pandemic that had flooded his hospital with patients, isolated him in his home and made him miss Christmas with his grandmother.
Biden wasn’t his first choice, or his second, but Miller voted for him because he wanted Trump out of the White House above all else.
Biden’s campaign was based in Philadelphia, and the candidate spent a lot of time in the city. Miller remembers feeling optimistic during the summer of 2020 when Biden took a knee during nearby protests after the death of George Floyd.
But Miller said he finds himself in a rerun of 2020. Few of the changes he had hoped Democrats would usher in — curtailing the pandemic, changes to policing, voting rights, student loan relief — have yet to materialize. And the omicron variant meant another Christmas away from grandma.
He views the president as “someone who has the power and clout and could make tangible changes to the lives of Black people but chooses not to.”
Miller has no plans to watch the State of the Union.
“I mean, I can say that I haven’t moved on,” Miller said of his past year. “Ultimately I think things are not progressing in any area. It just feels like there has not really been any progress on anything. To me it’s like a ghost year.”
‘We may not see the real benefits … until he’s gone’
Nearly a year ago, Bonita Green, 61, took notice when Biden proposed a $2.3 trillion infrastructure plan that could help “disinvested communities” like hers that she says have long been overlooked by both parties.
Green lives in her childhood home in the Merrick-Moore neighborhood in Durham, N.C., a suburban community of single-story houses built by Black veterans returning from World War II, including her father.
The neighborhood sits at the edge of the city, surrounded by metal fabricators, tire dealers, scrapyards, a solar farm and a major highway. The main thoroughfare is a rural-style two-lane road without sidewalks or shoulders. There are no traffic lights, crosswalks or calming structures to slow drivers, who Green said wreck with regularity.
“They’re just not like little dust-ups,” she said. “There was one car that went head-on, T-boned a tree in a neighbor’s yard, and they had to call out the Jaws of Life to cut him out.”
It’s a clear example of America’s infrastructure needs, so when Green learned that Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Vice President Harris planned to visit Charlotte, two hours away, to promote the plan, she said she filled out a Web form calling Buttigieg’s attention to Durham. Buttigieg, she said, did not respond.
Green, who heads her neighborhood association, watched the debate over the infrastructure bill with anger and frustration. As Republicans tried to shrink it and liberal Democrats tried to tie it to a concurrent social spending agreement, she wondered why Congress couldn’t just approve a plan that was so evidently needed.
“Why can’t a thing just be a thing?” she said. “Why does everybody have to try to roll other stuff underneath the bill?”
The final plan, passed in November, is $1.2 trillion, just over half the original size. Green is not ready to celebrate. “It could be a good thing,” she said. “Let’s see what happens, because there are always those that are looking to redirect the funding.”
Green acknowledges that it’s still early in the Biden administration, too soon to gauge the effect he’ll have on communities like hers. She plans to watch his address on Tuesday night.
“I understand your first year you’re in office, you spend it more cleaning up … from the last administration,” she said. “We may not see the real benefits of Biden being in office until he’s gone.”
Green’s attention this weekend turned to the “very frightening situation” unfolding in Ukraine. She was glad to see the United States and its allies impose heavy sanctions on Russia, but she thinks that the strongest actions going forward will need to come from European nations and maybe China.
“On one hand, you want some nation to go in physically and help support the people,” she said. “But then, on the other hand … nobody wants a World War III. Nobody wants to be drawn into that.”
What scares her most is what she has been hearing from some Republicans, including Trump.
“I’m most fearful of support of Putin in this country, and the support of authoritarianism in this country, and how that movement is continuing to grow,” she said. “That’s the scariest thing of all is how that movement is being encouraged in this country.”
Trump ‘was dividing the country and still is’
When assessing the Biden administration’s progress over the past year, Paola Mejia, an accountant for a title company in suburban Chicago, automatically goes to numbers.
There’s the price of her favorite grapefruit juice at Whole Foods: up $1.04. The gas for the 30-minute commute to work has jumped by about 50 cents a gallon.
“It’s not necessarily because of them,” the 30-year-old said about Biden and Harris. “But I did notice a shift in prices when it comes to, you know, food and gas since he’s been in office.”
Mejia chose Biden because she thought he’d change the temperature in Washington after four years of Trump, who she said “was dividing the country and still is.” Mejia, who is of Mexican descent, was turned off by Trump’s tone toward people like her, and she applauds Biden for softening the rhetoric about immigrants.
Trump put up walls to immigrants, with stinging rhetoric and barriers made of steel and regulation
“I obviously voted for him because we need to change in this country,” she said. “I don’t regret my vote. I just feel like it could be doing a little better to help us middle-class people.”
She has mixed feelings on how Biden has tried to pull the nation out of the pandemic. She got vaccinated but disagrees with Biden’s push to mandate the vaccine by employers and require masking in public places because “I don’t think you should force anybody,” she said.
Mejia supports U.S. involvement in Ukraine, including deployment of troops.
“We cannot sit back and watch Russia invade Ukraine and harm innocent civilians,” she said. “The U.S. has the resources to fight and stop Putin’s invasion.”
She didn’t realize that the State of the Union is on Tuesday but now plans to watch. She’s hopeful the next year will bring more relief and change than the past year.
“We’re just gonna have to, I guess, have faith and trust that they keep their word and, you know, move forward,” she said.
‘We came out the other side … better off’
When Ray Hammon looks out the window of the brewery he co-owns in Colorado City, Ariz., he sees a tourist-dependent community accelerating out of a pandemic — but few people willing to give the president any credit.
His brewery shut down for five months in the early days of the pandemic in 2020, something he worried would be his business’s death sentence. But it recovered and business was even robust last summer, as more people traveled to this town of 5,000 that sits between the Grand Canyon and Zion National Park. He credits a Small Business Association loan and a pandemic response spearheaded by Biden.
“As the vaccines rolled out, we started to see tourism come back,” said Hammon, who plans to watch Biden’s address. “People had trepidation about traveling when transmission rates were high. As people got vaccinated and boosted, they were more confident that they could go out without getting sick. … We came out the other side of that whole deal better off.”
His city has a new coffee shop, a new winery and two new chain restaurants. A grocery store and a health clinic are two other recent additions, meaning residents don’t have to drive 30 miles on a two-lane highway to get food and medicine. Thanks to $2.5-million funding for infrastructure projects from Biden’s American Rescue Plan Act, the city is exploring sites for a new well.
Still, Hammon said, “the vast majority of people in my community have no idea it’s going on or who’s responsible for it. How many Republicans in the Senate voted for ARPA? The answer, I believe, is zero.”
Hammon said that hasn’t stopped Republicans — including his local representative Rep. Paul A. Gosar (R-Ariz.) — from taking credit for region’s successes.
Behind the taps, Hammon is not particularly vocal about those points. In Arizona’s Mohave County, Republicans outnumber Democrats 3 to 1. Trump flags fly everywhere. And pointing out the partisan flaws in customers’ logic isn’t necessarily a recipe for success in his rebooted business.
“I just see the potential for it to be a wedge between people in my personal conversations,” he said, “so I try to steer away from that.” | null | null | null | null | null |
NATO can’t send troops to Ukraine. Here is what it will probably do instead.
The security and defense of alliance members that border Russia and Ukraine will be a top priority.
In this photo provided by Lithuanian Ministry of National Defense, Norwegian military vehicles move off trailers as they arrive at an airport in Kaunas, Lithuania, Feb. 27, 2022. (AP)
Following last week’s announcement by Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg that NATO has activated its Response Force, many are wondering what this means for Ukraine.
On Friday, as Russian forces continued their drive toward Kyiv, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky took to the airwaves to declare that his country had been “left alone” to mount a defense against one of the most powerful countries in the world. “Who is ready to fight alongside us? I don’t see anyone.”
Ukraine is a NATO partner — but it is not a member of the 72-year-old military alliance. As such, NATO’s Collective Defense pledge (Article 5 of the Washington Treaty) doesn’t apply. In his Feb. 25 televised address, Zelensky pleaded that Ukraine be granted admission to NATO so that the alliance’s 30 members might provide his country desperately needed military assistance.
NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg (and others) are calling the Ukraine invasion the “gravest threat to Euro-Atlantic security in decades.” However, both President Biden and Stoltenberg have made it clear that NATO will not send forces to fight in Ukraine, which is not a NATO ally — because such a move would mean a direct military confrontation between the world’s two largest nuclear powers.
With military intervention ruled out, what might the transatlantic military alliance do next? My research suggests that NATO will continue move swiftly to address Russia’s latest infringement on the sovereignty of another state.
NATO’s goal is to protect the alliance
In the days and weeks ahead, NATO’s actions will be focused almost entirely on enhancing the security and defense of the Central and Eastern European alliance members that border Ukraine and/or Russia. This is a continuation of NATO’s pledge to member countries, and the security organization’s principal task. Since Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, the military alliance has adopted a series of defensive measures along its easternmost border.
NATO’s actions are designed to accomplish three objectives. A primary goal is to deter Russia from taking any steps to violate the territorial integrity of any NATO member. Alliance forces are positioned so that Russia would incur significant cost in the case of any incursion into NATO territory.
Second, these measures are designed to reassure Poland and the Baltic nations — NATO allies that border Russia — that the transatlantic alliance is committed to their defense. By placing other allies’ troops in harm’s way, NATO has made a credible commitment to fight on behalf of its easternmost members.
Third, NATO’s measures are designed to defend these countries in case of Russian aggression. Deployments are deliberately positioned in a way that buys the alliance time to organize follow-on-forces.
Taking a stand against Russia
In the face of renewed Russian aggression against Ukraine, NATO is doubling down on these objectives. Following Russia’s invasion of Crimea in 2014, NATO established four multinational battlegroups — totaling approximately 4,500 personnel — known collectively as Enhanced Forward Presence. Based in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, and led by the U.K., Canada, Germany and the U.S., respectively, the battlegroups include troop contributions from some dozen NATO member countries.
Several allies recently announced plans to send additional personnel and military assets to boost the alliance’s presence in the east. Expect more of this in the coming days.
NATO allies are also committing additional assets to the Baltic Air Policing mission, a 24/7 aerial overflight operation launched one day after the Baltic states joined the alliance in 2004. Since NATO itself owns very few military assets, NATO members must contribute their own jets to the mission to protect an airspace frequently violated by Russian military aircraft. Some allies, like Germany, will find it harder to contribute hardware, as their closets are “bare.”
In addition, the alliance will continue to rely on the NATO Airborne Early Warning and Control Force (AWACs) — one of the few examples of “alliance-owned” military hardware — to monitor alliance airspace. The Boeing E-3 Sentry planes, which provide surveillance and can be used for battle management, are the same assets NATO headquarters deployed to help protect U.S. skies following the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
As anticipated, NATO has already taken steps to prepare for the possible deployment of one element of the response force, the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force, a rapidly deployable multinational brigade currently led by France, by activating the NATO Response Force.
Elements of the response force assisted in NATO’s withdrawal from Afghanistan last summer and could now be deployed for a similar humanitarian mission to help Ukraine’s NATO neighbors prepare for large numbers of refugees already arriving in Poland, Hungary and Romania.
Other potential steps NATO could take include providing Ukraine with communication and information support about Russian troop movements.
But here, too, NATO is likely to proceed with caution because, as a defensive alliance, it cannot take actions that could be construed as offensive in nature. In addition, the U.S. government has long had concerns that Russian agents have infiltrated Ukraine’s defense and other government services, meaning the allies are likely to be judicious when it comes to sharing the latest intelligence with Kyiv.
Apart from these moves, which are taken by the organization collectively, individual NATO allies have increased their arms deliveries to the Ukrainian military. Over the weekend, Sweden — like Ukraine, a NATO partner — announced it would also send military aid (including weapons) to the Ukrainian government.
In short, NATO has lots of tools designed for addressing exactly the scenario that is unfolding in Ukraine. But, for now, expect NATO to continue to prioritize actions that will simultaneously signal its resolve while avoiding steps that could inadvertently lead to a military confrontation with Russia.
Professors: Check out TMC’s ever-expanding list of classroom topic guides
Sara Bjerg Moller is an assistant professor (on leave) at Seton Hall University’s School of Diplomacy and International Relations and a former Eisenhower Defense Fellow at the NATO Defense College. | null | null | null | null | null |
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is remaking Europe
No one expected the European Union to overturn its cautious approach to foreign policy so quickly
Demonstrators take part in an antiwar protest on Thursday after Russian President Vladimir Putin authorized a military operation in eastern Ukraine, in front of the European Union headquarters, in Barcelona. (Nacho Doce/Reuters)
By Kathleen R. McNamara
R. Daniel Kelemen
The European Union has long been criticized as ineffective on foreign policy. But Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has created a crisis of epic proportions. Will it prompt the E.U. to finally come together as a real geopolitical power?
While it is still early, the E.U. is showing signs of new political resolve and unity in response to Putin’s aggression. The organization is implementing hard-hitting sanctions and offering military assistance to Ukraine, surprising those who have dismissed it as an irredeemable geopolitical weakling.
Our own research on political development suggests this moment has the potential to create a turning point in the E.U.’s path. History suggests that only in the crucible of war do obstacles to dramatic centralization of power melt away. This could happen — although it is by no means certain — across a wide range of policy areas.
The E.U. looks dysfunctional
Despite many virtues, the E.U. is nobody’s ideal of a robust and effective system for solving problems. Nor is it loved unreservedly by its citizens, who share only a thin sense of European identity. These dysfunctions have caused a lot of problems over the years. And that doesn’t even start to get into its shortcomings in foreign and security policy.
E.U. member states have been unwilling to allow the E.U. taxing, borrowing, and spending powers. That contributed to the euro’s economic and political crises in the 2010s. The E.U.’s unbalanced development also worsened the humanitarian costs of its refugee crises. The E.U. had dismantled its internal borders while failing to centralize control over its external borders or asylum policy.
It doesn’t look any better in foreign and security policy. While the E.U. has created a dense network of diplomatic and security ties, military spending has lagged far behind the levels needed to ensure that the E.U. can protect its own security. A strongly held taboo has prevented it from taking any overt actions to create a genuine European security force. Finally, the E.U.’s limited collective identity means that it has often lacked the solidarity to do hard things together as a political community.
War in Ukraine may change this
The E.U. is not a state — a government that has unquestioned authority over a given part of the world — and will probably never be one. Even so, the scholarly literature on state-building can help us understand why the E.U. has developed so unevenly, with robust legal institutions but weak or sometimes nonexistent abilities to raise money through taxes or use military force.
Raising taxes and armies requires the centralization of power, which is almost always politically contentious. Across history, political projects aimed at centralizing power have worked best when security pressures push a government to consolidate authority and encourage its constituent parts to come together as one community. Until now, the E.U. has been shaped much more by market forces than military threats or war fighting.
While the global pandemic did push the E.U. to centralize some key new powers, the threat of illness was no match for the more existential threat of war, which has often brought states together. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine appears to be pushing the E.U. to centralize more rapidly than before in its history.
The Russian threat is remaking Europe
Putin’s invasion of Ukraine presents a clear and present danger to the collective security of the E.U.’s member states. What’s more, Putin’s authoritarian regime — which is perpetrating an unprovoked attack on a peaceful democracy — presents exactly the sort of common enemy that can help sharpen Europeans’ sense of shared identity.
NATO and U.S. military dominance has long given the E.U. a security umbrella, allowing it to avoid building up its collective defense or act together when facing tough foreign policy decisions. Even up to a few days ago, some observers still deplored Europe as the “free-rider continent.”
In the last 24 hours, however, the E.U, has taken unprecedented steps to use its collective weight to punish Russia for its aggression. These include financial sanctions, including removing some Russian banks from the SWIFT international payments system, instituting a no-fly zone over the E.U. for all Russian aircraft, banning Russian state-owned broadcasters from the E.U., and finally, financing weapons deliveries and sending its member states’ fighter jets for Ukraine’s use. The E.U. has never done any of this before.
All these actions are underpinned by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s watershed speech to the German Bundestag on Saturday. Scholz announced a dramatic increase in German defense spending and a new role for Germany in the world. His speech overturned decades of German postwar reluctance to assert military power. Germany’s changed approach fits well with French President Emmanuel Macron’s long-standing emphasis on the E.U.’s need for “strategic autonomy.” Together, they are likely to remake E.U. foreign policy. If history is any guide, this will probably have consequences across a variety of policy areas, perhaps reducing the weakness of E.U. policymaking.
War is horrifying and history-making. It may also be the only thing that will finally push the E.U. forward as a polity.
Don’t miss any of TMC’s smart analysis! Sign up for our newsletter. And check out TMC’s new topic guide: Russia and its neighbors.
Kathleen R. McNamara (@ProfKMcNamara) is professor of government and foreign service at Georgetown University, where she co-directs the Global Political Economy Project.
R. Daniel Kelemen (@rdanielkelemen) is professor of political science and law and the Jean Monnet Chair in European Union Politics at Rutgers University. | null | null | null | null | null |
The James Harden-Philadelphia lovefest is already under way
James Harden has averaged 28 points, 14 assists and nine rebounds in his first two games with the 76ers. (Frank Franklin II/AP)
James Harden doesn’t always leave on good terms, but he clearly understands the power of a first impression.
The 10-time all-star guard has found himself in another post-trade honeymoon, making fast friends with Joel Embiid and shining in his first two appearances for the Philadelphia 76ers following a blockbuster deal with the Brooklyn Nets.
When Harden was traded to the Houston Rockets by the Oklahoma City Thunder in 2012, he launched what would become his first all-star campaign with 37 points and 12 assists in his opener. After successfully forcing his way out of Houston to Brooklyn in Jan. 2021, he posted 34 points, 12 rebounds and 14 assists in his debut.
Predictably, that rosy history has repeated with the 76ers, who welcomed Harden back to the court on Friday for his first action in more than three weeks. Showing no ill effects from a hamstring injury that led him to sit out in the days before the trade deadline, Harden finished with 27 points, 8 rebounds and 12 assists in a 133-102 blowout win over the Minnesota Timberwolves. Then, he posted a triple-double — 29 points, 10 rebounds and 16 assists — as Philadelphia bludgeoned the New York Knicks in a 125-109 victory at Madison Square Garden on Sunday.
The two victories have set the stage for Harden to receive a rousing introduction when he makes his home debut on Wednesday, as the reinvigorated 76ers eye a late-season push for the East’s top seed.
Watching Philadelphia’s star duo hit the ground running, it was easy to forget that Harden had mentally checked out during Brooklyn’s unsightly loss to the Sacramento Kings on Feb. 2, managing just four points on 2-11 shooting while committing six turnovers. His reported tension with Kyrie Irving and his snubbing by Kevin Durant in the all-star draft both already felt like old news, replaced with pretty pocket passes to Embiid, a never-ending stream of drives to the rim and news conference declarations that it’s time for everyone to move on.
“I feel like I’m one of the best teammates the NBA has seen,” Harden said Friday. “On the court and off the court. Just because the current situation happened, that doesn’t mean I’m a bad teammate. I needed to do what was best for my career and help myself and be happy.”
Embiid enthusiastically agreed, and couldn’t seem to care less about Harden’s friction with past co-stars like Dwight Howard, Chris Paul, Russell Westbrook, Durant and Irving. The 27-year-old center and leading MVP candidate appears enamored with his new partner, whose arrival has completely reoriented Philadelphia’s offense and erased all memories of Ben Simmons.
Concerns that Harden and Embiid might step on each other’s toes have yet to manifest, as they plowed through the overmatched Knicks for a combined 66 points and 37 free throw attempts. Embiid has found himself facing less help defense, while Harden’s playmaking skills have addressed spacing concerns that have existed in Philadelphia for years.
“Unstoppable,” Embiid said Sunday. “What are you really going to do? He’s a great passer. Obviously, I’ve got someone that attracts a lot of attention too. Do you stay on me or stay on him? If you want to guard both of us with the other guys, you’ve got Matisse [Thybulle] diving to the rim and wide open shooters. … I can’t imagine what’s going to happen when we all put it together.”
With Harden in the fold, Embiid shouldn’t need to create for himself in the post, settle for bailout shots or risk turnovers by passing through traffic as often as he has in the past. Similarly, Harden should enjoy less attention playing alongside Embiid, who is far more versatile and dynamic than the likes of Howard and Clint Capela.
“I feel very comfortable,” Harden said. “[Embiid] likes to pop, he likes to roll, he likes to mix it in a little bit. As long as we continue that communication … things will be great.”
Although Harden cautioned Sunday that the 76ers have “a long way to go” and that he was “out there winging it” because he hasn’t had time to master his new playbook, the conversation has already started to turn. Rather than working through his fit with Embiid, Harden was focused on better utilizing Tobias Harris, who shot 2-for-9 against the Timberwolves and 3-for-9 against the Knicks. The 29-year-old Harris has seen his efficiency slip this season, but he should be a major beneficiary of Harden’s arrival given his spot-up shooting experience.
“Tobias had four or five catch-and-shoot opportunities that he passed up and tried to dribble past somebody,” Harden said Sunday. “I’m going to stay in his ear about it. I don’t care if he misses 20 of them, those are shots we need you to take.”
Meanwhile, Tyrese Maxey has settled into the new configuration nicely. When Harden sits, Maxey moves onto the ball more often and works his own two-man game with Embiid. When Harden and Maxey share the court, Coach Doc Rivers has encouraged his second-year guard to run the floor in transition and be prepared to shoot from deep when he’s left open.
Harden’s midseason arrival keyed Brooklyn’s No. 1 ranked offense last year, and Philadelphia appears poised for a move up the offensive efficiency charts from 12th as it approaches the playoffs. While it’s only been two games against mediocre defenses, the 76ers posted a 124.6 offensive rating in the victories and outscored their opponents by 54 points in Harden’s 74 minutes.
Tougher defensive tests are coming this week thanks to the Cleveland Cavaliers and Miami Heat. Still, one can’t help but wonder whether Harden’s true signature move is his step-back three-pointer or his ability to inspire amnesia after a breakup.
“I really don’t care at all what people say,” Harden said. “I know how skilled and the work I put in to be one of the best basketball players. Nothing was given to me. I wasn’t one of the best basketball players growing up. I had to work every single day to be in the position I am today. There’s nothing somebody can tell me about my game.” | null | null | null | null | null |
Kjetil Jansrud of Norway reacts after finishing the the men’s super-G at the 2022 Winter Olympics, Tuesday, Feb. 8, 2022, in the Yanqing district of Beijing. (AP Photo/Luca Bruno)
OSLO, Norway — Five-time Olympic medalist Kjetil Jansrud will end his ski racing career at home in Norway on Saturday.
“I am, however, very glad I get to choose to retire in Kvitfjell, where I won my first in 2012 and where I’ve raced in front of family and friends every year since,” Jansrud wrote.
He took gold in super-G at the 2014 Sochi Olympics and also won two silvers and two bronzes between 2010 and 2018 — twice sharing a podium with friend and teammate Aksel Lund Svindal.
“In these perilous times, my retirement — and this post — feels meaningless,” Jansrud wrote in his post. “My thoughts and hopes are with the Ukrainian people. Stay strong.” | null | null | null | null | null |
NFC quarterback Kyler Murray, of the Arizona Cardinals, stands on the field during introductions before the Pro Bowl NFL football game against the AFC, Sunday, Feb. 6, 2022, in Las Vegas. (AP Photo/David Becker)
TEMPE, Ariz. — For the Arizona Cardinals, one of the perks of Kyler Murray’s three years as the team’s franchise quarterback is an absence of off-the-field distractions or drama.
In a somewhat unexpected storyline early in the NFL offseason, Murray and the Cardinals have been engaged in a passive-aggressive public squabble after the team’s late-season fade ended in a 34-11 loss on the opening weekend of the NFL playoffs to the Los Angeles Rams on Jan. 17.
Burkhardt’s statement said that Murray’s contract request is “in-line with the current QB market.”
For comparison’s sake, Allen signed a six-year, $258 million deal with the Bills last year that includes $150 million guaranteed. Allen, though, has led Buffalo to some postseason victories, while Murray has not won a playoff game with Arizona.
Now it’s up to the Cardinals to decide if Murray is worth that kind of cash.
The Cardinals started 10-2 but then lost four of their last five, falling from the No. 1 overall seed in the NFC to the wild-card round, where they were unceremoniously dumped by a Rams team that went on to win the Super Bowl. Murray’s first playoff performance was an ugly one: 19 of 34 passing for 137 yards and two interceptions.
But there was little doubt the quarterback’s steady ascension into the NFL’s elite had hit a snag.
Then the offseason drama began. First, there were reports that Cardinals owner Michael Bidwill was upset with the team’s late-season collapse, which wasn’t particularly surprising. A few weeks later, Murray scrubbed his social media accounts of all references to the Cardinals, prompting speculation he was unhappy.
Murray eventually posted a message to social media that featured him in a Cardinals uniform. He wrote that “all of this nonsense is not what I’m about, never has been, never will be. Anyone who has ever stepped between those lines with me knows how hard I go. Love me or hate me but I’m going to continue to grow and get better.”
The Cardinals have undoubtedly improved since Murray came to Arizona, going from a 5-10-1 record in 2019 to 8-8 in 2020 and finally 11-6 in the most recent season. Murray was the NFL’s Offensive Rookie of the Year and has made two Pro Bowls.
But Murray’s introverted, sometimes brooding personality isn’t typical for a quarterback. On a Phoenix radio show last week, Bidwill tried to clear the air and said he’s had “good conversations” with Murray.
“Put me in the category of I love him,” Bidwill said. “And I know he’s going to get better.” | null | null | null | null | null |
Chesky directed those interested in hosting to Airbnb.org’s website. Those unable to host can donate money to help cover the cost of temporary lodging. The company said Airbnb.org will work with other nonprofits on the ground, who will handle booking and coordinate stays for refugees. Chesky tweeted that more details would be provided in the coming days. | null | null | null | null | null |
Chesky directed those interested in hosting to Airbnb.org’s website. Those unable to host can donate money to help cover the cost of temporary lodging. The company said Airbnb.org will work with other nonprofits on the ground, which will handle booking and coordinate stays for refugees. Chesky tweeted that more details would be provided in the coming days. | null | null | null | null | null |
NFL will consult with special teams coaches on rules to make punts safer
The Rams' Johnny Hekker punts during the Super Bowl. (Mike Segar/Reuters)
INDIANAPOLIS — The NFL plans to seek input from special teams coaches this offseason as it attempts to make punt plays safer.
It’s a process similar to the one followed by the league four years ago, when recommendations made by special teams coaches were incorporated into a set of rule changes implemented to make kickoffs less hazardous.
“We’re going to be working with all the special team coaches,” Troy Vincent, the league’s executive vice president of football operations, said Monday at the NFL scouting combine. “We really need to figure out that play, not just from an injury standpoint [but] penalties as well. But we have to break that down at every level — every block, every position — to see what we can come up [with] and do the analysis like we did a few years back on kickoffs.”
Members of the NFL’s competition committee met Monday morning with Allen Sills, the league’s chief medical officer, as well as other health and safety officials. Sills and other NFL health officials said during Super Bowl week that addressing the disproportionate injury risks to players on punt plays was a top priority for this offseason. About one in six concussions and approximately 30 percent of major knee injuries occurred on special teams, they said.
The NFL addressed kickoffs in 2018, making rule modifications that included banning players on the kicking team from getting a running start on their way downfield before the ball is kicked and eliminating all forms of “wedge” blocking by the receiving team, with multiple blockers linked together. Those rule changes dictated where players could line up for kickoffs and barred hitting within 15 yards of the spot of the kickoff.
Now the punt is in focus.
“When we just think about where we were, it was the concussions at that particular time that we just said, ‘Hey, we have to do something,’ ” Vincent said Monday. “The video showed: That play needs to be out of the game. That block needs to be out of the game. We have to go through that same kind of analysis. And I just remember pulling information back from 1937 and the evolution of the kickoff. We have to do the same thing with the punt play.”
Four years ago, the league had threatened to eliminate kickoffs from the game entirely if the play could not be made safer. Special teams coaches from several NFL teams were brought to the league offices in New York to discuss the issue and make suggestions.
“The special teams coaches were critical,” Vincent said. “They were critical at that time of figuring out what we can do to reduce injuries and reduce penalties.”
It’s not immediately clear what rule changes might be proposed related to punts.
Competition committee members also spent part of their meeting Monday discussing last season’s enforcement of taunting as a point of officiating emphasis.
“The taunting inside of sportsmanship is not new,” Vincent said. “But we will talk about: Are we where we want to be? Because the coaches really pushed us in this direction a year ago, in particular the competition committee. Did we officiate it from the beginning to the end based off of their direction? … Sportsmanship has to be at the core. It has to be at the core of our game.”
Some players and other observers were critical of the crackdown on taunting. But many coaches and the league defended the strict enforcement of the previously existing rule.
“It was officiated based off of what was shared with us on how the [competition] committee and the coaches wanted officiating to officiate,” Vincent said. “So we’ll see if that philosophy has changed.” | null | null | null | null | null |
Headstones toppled, damaged at Ukrainian cemetery in Md.
Ola Kulnich looks at the overturned marker for her brother, Jozef Poliszczuk, one of 49 vandalized tombstones at the St. Michael Ukrainian Catholic Church cemetery in Dundalk, Md. (Amy Davis/Baltimore Sun)
Some 49 headstones were knocked over and damaged at the St. Michael Ukrainian Catholic Cemetery in Dundalk last week just as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was about to begin, church officials said Sunday.
Brown could not say whether the incident is being investigated as a hate crime, but the timing is difficult to ignore, said cemetery administrator Stephen Humeniuk. He received a call from a neighbor of the cemetery Wednesday alerting him to the damage, just hours before Russia began attacking Ukraine.
“The first thing you think is a hate crime, but you can’t prove it,” Humeniuk said. There was no note, he added. “There was no spray paint. Nothing to indicate that. It was just the timing of the incident and the crisis in Ukraine.”
“I thought to myself: ‘What else could go wrong?’ ” said Humeniuk, who serves on the church council for St. Michael the Archangel Ukrainian Catholic Church in Baltimore, which operates the cemetery.
The damage was concentrated in a back corner of the cemetery, he said, relatively far from the road. Dozens of headstones were toppled, and some of them cracked as a result. Some adornments on the stones were shattered.
“To me, it was unprecedented and it was intentional and it was a hate crime — I’ll say it,” church trustee John Wojtowycz said.
On Sunday, family members surveyed the damage.
“We heard about the desecration of the cemetery earlier this week, and a number of us just wanted to go out there and see,” said Bohdan Oleksiuk, whose parents and grandparents are buried there. “It’s just so many headstones.”
His family’s headstones were not damaged, but others weren’t so lucky. Dressed in a long black coat, Ola Kulnich stood near the cemetery fence, looking at her brother’s headstone, which had toppled backward, severed from its base.
“It’s been a tough week,” Oleksiuk said. “And it’s not going to get any easier.”
Loeblein Memorials, located close to the cemetery, has offered to repair the damaged stones at no cost. The company, a division of Tegeler Monument, placed many of the headstones in the cemetery, said company president Walter Tegeler.
The cemetery is not open to the public and is protected by a locked gate, Humeniuk said, but there was a hole in its fencing. Church officials had patched previous holes, which they believed were created by children aiming to cut through the cemetery on their way to a middle school close by. Now, the church is looking into installing security cameras on the premises, Humeniuk said.
Sunday morning, a Baltimore County police officer contacted Humeniuk to say that investigators planned to search for fingerprints on the stones, he said. Now, Humeniuk is trying to notify as many affected families as he can.
Though his parents emigrated to the United States in the years following World War II, Humeniuk still has several cousins in Ukraine. The messages from one of his cousins in western Ukraine, recounting the family’s experience, have been chilling.
Huge explosions lit up the sky early Sunday south of the capital, Kyiv, where people hunkered down in homes, underground garages and subway stations in anticipation of a full-scale assault by Russian forces. Russia has said its attack is aimed only at military targets, but bridges, schools and residential neighborhoods have been hit. Hundreds of Ukrainians and Russians have died, according to Ukrainian officials.
Humeniuk said support from the community in Baltimore has provided a much-needed lift to the church, located just south of Patterson Park. As he lingered outside St. Michael on Sunday morning while a service was underway, several passersby approached him to offer support and asked where they could direct donations.
The church plans to accept offerings through its website, Humeniuk said. The response to a recent fundraising pierogi sale was so overwhelming that many would-be customers were placed on a waitlist, according to the church’s Facebook page.
“Due to the overwhelming response and outpouring of support, we received an overabundance of orders and therefore cannot take anymore,” the post read.
Sunday morning at the church, after a supportive visit from William Lori, the Catholic archbishop of Baltimore, parishioners boarded a bus bound for a Washington rally in support of Ukraine. | null | null | null | null | null |
José Andrés and his World Central Kitchen feed refugees fleeing Ukraine
Chef José Andrés and volunteers from World Central Kitchen serve hot food to Ukrainian families that crossed into Poland on Feb. 27. (World Central Kitchen)
Ukrainian people crossing into neighboring Poland as they flee the violence from the Russian invasion of their country face an uncertain future.
But first, they’re being greeted by cups of hot tea and chicken-and-vegetable soup, as chef José Andrés and his World Central Kitchen operation have mobilized to feed the thousands of refugees streaming into Poland, Romania, Moldova and, beginning Monday, Hungary.
Nate Mook, the group’s chief executive, on Monday described a chaotic scene and freezing temperatures at the border crossings in Poland, where he was helping to marshal an “ad hoc” group of volunteers. In the few days since the invasion began, upending life for Ukrainians fleeing the Russian forces, Mook had seen a group of farmers handing out eggs and kielbasa along a road. A ramen food truck was ladling out soup. One volunteer he met was a young man from London who had traveled to the area to join the fight against Russian troops in his native country.
“He had never fired a gun in his life, and he decided the best way to fight was to serve meals,” said Mook, who spoke from the town of Ustrzyki Dolne. “We’re seeing people who are passionate about helping.”
I volunteered at World Central Kitchen to feed the hungry. I ended up finding the meaning I needed.
World Central Kitchen, which deploys resources around the globe to areas hit by natural disasters and conflict, will serve 10,000 hot meals Monday, Mook says, and 25,000 Tuesday. “We’re ramping up really quickly,” he said.
In a video he posted Sunday on Twitter from a WCK facility in Poland, Andrés said, “People are cold, families are cold.” He described the location as being along a road about a third of a mile from the Ukrainian border. “They are bringing children. It’s freezing cold — I don’t know how they make it.”
In addition to the operation assisting refugees, WCK is also helping local restaurants in the Ukrainian cities of Odessa and Lviv feed those who have stayed in the country. Andrés described reaching out to people inside Ukraine. “We are telling them, ‘Guys, there are many ways to fight. Some people fight making sure people are fed,’ and those are our people, and we are going to be supporting them in many ways.”
In the video, he described a three-phase plan that first addresses feeding refugees as they cross at the borders and those remaining in the country. After that, the organization plans to focus on helping feed people at refugee facilities in neighboring countries. Finally, he said, the third phase would take place once the fighting has stopped in Ukraine, and WCK would help organize trucks to enter Ukraine and establish community kitchens in various communities.
“I will make sure we don’t fail,” he said.
Mook said the organization had already entered the second phase and has begun feeding people at shelters, including a pop-up facility in a nearby grocery store that had been converted to a temporary shelter.
He said the organization plans to step up efforts to get more food into Ukraine for the duration of the fighting, as supplies inside the country dwindle because of blocked roads and shuttered stores, making it difficult for people to feed themselves. Andrés, he said, is possibly going to go into Ukraine himself to deliver flour to a group of nuns in Lviv who were preparing meals.
He said the organizers are hoping that the conflict ends quickly, but they are ready for a prolonged stay. “We have a plan for the worst,” he said. “We can be here as long as we’re needed.” Mook said additional aid is arriving from the United Nations and the World Food Program. But he said the fast-moving Ukrainian conflict demanded something at the heart of the WCK model: speed.
“We’re good at moving quickly,” he said. “A lot is being done at the institutional level, but we know the need is here on the ground and it’s immediate.”
Elsewhere around the world, the food community rallied to help support the Ukrainian people.
Bakers Against Racism, a collective originally formed to support the Black Lives Matter movement, launched an online bake sale in which members are selling cookies, pies and cakes, with proceeds going to humanitarian groups including Save the Children, International Rescue Committee, Sunflower of Peace and WCK.
Co-founder and pastry chef Paola Velez said more than 200 members, who include restaurant chefs, home bakers and caterers, have participated so far. The organization doesn’t track the donations, she said, but every contribution counts. She said she was surprised by the response, given how difficult things are for many people in the food industry. “Anyone running a restaurant is doing it by the skin of their teeth right now,” she said. “But bakers — they don’t ever not amaze me.”
A group of chefs and food writers in the United Kingdom has organized #CookforUkraine, which encourages people to hold supper clubs or bake sales to raise money for UNICEF. So far, the effort has raised about $12,000. “As my heart breaks to see my native country forging a war with its close neighbour, I turn to food for its power to heal, to educate, to unite and to support,” wrote organizer Alissa Timoshkina, a London-based food writer and podcast host. “Like millions of Russians, I too have Ukrainian roots, and grew up on a beautiful diet of Ukrainian and Russian dishes. These countries have shared a complex and rich history, and the culinary language reflects this relationship in the most powerful and relatable way.”
Restaurants, too, have become fundraising hubs. In Washington, Dacha Beer Garden is holding events and specials to support humanitarian aid. And D Light Cafe, which is owned by a pair of Ukrainian-native sisters, is holding a trivia night to raise money.
Thank you #dc for coming out to Dacha yesterday and your overwhelming support for #ukraine. We raised almost $3100 in donations and our efforts will continue this week. #StandWithUkraine
— Dacha DC (@DachaDC) February 27, 2022
Others are reaching out to fellow chefs among the refugees. Damian Wawrzyniak, a chef at the modern Polish restaurant House of Feasts in the British city of Peterborough, offered two U.K. work visas and flights to Ukrainian chefs fleeing their home country, an offer he said on Twitter that he had discussed with his local member of Parliament, who was helping arrange it. He has since also organized transportation to take donated clothing and other supplies, including hand sanitizer collected from another Polish restaurant, to Ukraine.
To Ukrainian chefs who are looking for work in the UK, I will pay for two visas and your flights from Poland/Ukraine to UK.
We can also help with accommodation 🙏
If you know anyone already, please do get in touch via restaurant number or reservations@houseoffeasts.co.uk
— Damian Wawrzyniak (@ChefConsultant) February 26, 2022
Ukrainian eateries in the United States have seen an outpouring of support from customers hoping to show solidarity with Ukraine. Local news reports and social media posts noted people lining up to dine at Veselka, the longtime Ukrainian diner in New York, this weekend. The restaurant was selling a special edition of New York’s iconic black-and-white cookies in the colors of the Ukrainian flag.
“Line around the block for NYC’s amazing Ukrainian restaurant Veselka,” says @laurenpeikoff, with this photograph: pic.twitter.com/tlb8M3UVT8 | null | null | null | null | null |
6 Mardi Gras recipes to let the good times roll
(Tom McCorkle for The Washington Post/Food styling by Lisa Cherkasky for The Washington Post)
Mardi Gras is here! If you’re not going to a celebration, there’s plenty of time to draft up a festive menu to enjoy at home.
King Cake, pictured above. You’ve got to have this fluffy, yeasted cake for Mardi Gras! A simple dough and filling means you can spend your energy decorating and eating it. You might even want this Mardi Gras Punch with it; it’s decorated with the same colored sugars. Or, The Night Tripper cocktail, which gets its name from a nickname for New Orleans musician Dr. John and has a cinnamon syrup to match the flavor of a king cake.
Shrimp Étouffée. Make this meal in just 30 minutes! From our very own recipes editor Ann Maloney, you’ll get this ultra-quick, weeknight friendly dish with the fundamentals of Creole and Cajun cooking: making a roux and harnessing the power of the “trinity” (onion, celery, green bell pepper). And if you’d like to take the trinity in a different direction, make Gumbo z’Herbes.
Oyster Soup. This soup hails from Melissa M. Martin’s cookbook, “Mosquito Supper Club,” named after her restaurant. It’s a recipe passed down from her mother to her and now, to you!
Sazerac. The official drink of New Orleans is a must! And it really is the official drink — legally.
The iconic New Orleans Sazerac, served three ways
Brennan’s Caribbean Milk Punch. Skip dessert and make this gorgeous punch instead from Brennan’s, a luxurious restaurant in the city.
Red Beans and Rice. Keep it classic, but keep it easy with this simplified version of red beans and rice that comes together in under an hour. | null | null | null | null | null |
Chris Licht, named new head of CNN, is expected to restore hard-news sensibility
The CBS executive, who also co-created ‘Morning Joe,’ is tasked with helping the network overcome a recent series of controversies
Chris Licht, seen here in 2019, has been named the new head of CNN, replacing Jeff Zucker. (Evan Agostini/Invision/AP)
Chris Licht, a CBS executive who has been tapped to lead CNN, hopes to steer the network back to its hard-news roots and away from the opinionated tone that flourished in cable news during the Trump era, according to people who have talked to the veteran producer.
At a time when the nation’s chief executive declared media to be an “enemy of the state,” many CNN hosts and reporters felt empowered to speak their minds. But Licht did not think the heated rhetoric that ensued always served the audience, these people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.
“There’s a difference between standing up for yourself,” Licht told a friend recently, “and becoming part of the resistance.”
Licht, 50, was announced Monday as CNN Global’s new chairman and chief executive, a role he is expected to take up in early May, after a deal is completed for the television conglomerate Discovery Inc. to take control of CNN’s parent, WarnerMedia.
He will replace Jeff Zucker, who abruptly resigned from CNN on Feb. 2 after failing to disclose a romantic relationship with a longtime colleague, Allison Gollust. She later resigned, under pressure, as well.
Before joining CBS, Licht distinguished himself at MSNBC, where he was the co-creator and original executive producer of “Morning Joe,” the network’s flagship morning show. He also helped launch CBS’s morning show, now called “CBS Mornings,” and more recently is credited with turning around the ratings performance of “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” which he currently oversees.
Licht has been friendly for 15 years with his new boss, David Zaslav, who will serve as chief executive of the combined Warner Bros. Discovery; the two briefly overlapped at NBCUniversal before Zaslav became CEO of Discovery in 2007. Licht frequently turned to Zaslav for career advice, friends say — and Zaslav, in turn, sought out Licht’s counsel as he looked ahead to the challenges of overseeing a major news network after a career in the entertainment sector.
In a statement, Zaslav called Licht “a true news person” who he said “makes every organization stronger, more innovative and more cohesive.”
In his own statement, Licht praised CNN’s journalistic reputation and said he is “honored to have this opportunity, especially at such an important time for our country and the world.”
Licht’s appointment was widely praised by CNN journalists when plans for the pick were leaked on Saturday and first reported by Puck.
“He’s the right guy for this job, undeniably,” said Jay Sures, co-president of talent agency UTA, who represents many of CNN’s top anchors and correspondents. “People are going to want to follow his direction because he has real news chops.”
Jonathan Klein, who served as president of CNN U.S. before Zucker, praised Licht as an innovator who crafted “Morning Joe” with “smart substance that proved engrossing to audiences,” instead of the cooking segments and soft-focus celebrity features that were a hallmark of morning TV. Licht cheered on co-host Mika Brzezinski in 2007 when she dramatically fed a news script into a shredder rather than read the latest developments on Paris Hilton’s legal woes to the audience — helping to set the tone for the show early in its run.
“He hasn’t pandered,” Klein said. “He’s elevated every program he’s touched.”
Klein noted that some of the programs he created at CNN 15 years ago are “still pretty much what they’ve always been” and that it’s “time for some new approaches, which Chris will bring.”
Ahead of Licht’s appointment, CNN employees and observers looked to Zaslav’s appointment of a new president for hints of what editorial direction he wants the network to take — particularly after Discovery shareholder John Malone said in a November interview that he “would like to see CNN evolve back to the journalism it started with.”
Over the past decade, CNN’s once-studiously neutral tone gave way to something more opinionated and emotional, as Zucker gave top on-air talent the leeway to speak their minds — a development that unnerved some news traditionalists, said Mark Whitaker, a former CNN executive and editor of Newsweek magazine.
From May: The new CNN is more opinionated and emotional. Can it still be ‘the most trusted name in news’?
Whitaker noted that Licht showed a knack for reframing brands at CBS’s morning show, where he signaled a renewed dedication to serious news.
“He ended up creating an interesting show, but it was very much in the spirit of what CBS stood for,” he said. “If he comes in at CNN and that’s his approach, that would be the right approach.”
In a memo to CNN employees on Monday morning, Zaslav described himself as a “news junkie at the core” and praised the network’s coverage of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, saying they have fulfilled the original mission of its founder, Ted Turner, by building “the foremost newsgathering organization in the world.”
In his memo to CNN staff, Licht said he knows many are wondering how CNN will change. “The honest answer is that I don’t know yet,” he wrote. Zaslav, he said, wants him “to ensure that CNN remains the global leader in NEWS” and that they will “double-down on what’s working well and quickly eliminate what’s not.”
Since Zucker’s abrupt departure, CNN has been run by a trio of longtime executives, Michael Bass, Amy Entelis, and Ken Jautz. Each executive was considered a potential candidate for the role of president, though Zaslav ultimately decided to go with an outside pick.
CNN, which was briefly the most-watched network in cable news in January 2021, during a tumultuous presidential transition, has fallen back to third place when considering total average viewers. It still outperforms MSNBC in total day viewers among the 25-to-54 age demographic valued by advertisers.
But colleagues say when Licht expressed concern about taking a job that would throw him into a cutthroat ratings battle, Zaslav reassured him that he is more interested in bolstering CNN’s reputation — something that could be key as CNN launches a streaming service that will rely more on viewer subscriptions than advertising revenue.
CNN Plus, as the streaming service has been dubbed, is expected to launch by the end of March with shows built around several high-profile new hires, including former Fox News anchor Chris Wallace, former NPR “All Things Considered” co-host Audie Cornish and former MSNBC anchor Kasie Hunt.
One of Licht’s first big challenges will be filling the 9 p.m. slot that was vacated by former star anchor Chris Cuomo, who was fired by the network in December for crossing ethical lines to help his brother, then-New York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, battle sexual misconduct allegations.
While Cuomo often took an emotional and opinionated edge, Licht has told people he appreciated that the show was infused with passion and unpredictability — and did not seem to cleave to one particular political perspective.
“That’s a huge decision and will say a lot,” said Josh Gropper, a television agent who previously worked in programming and content strategy at CNN. | null | null | null | null | null |
Opinion: ‘Stand your ground’ doesn’t save lives. It leads to needless killing.
Demonstrators hold signs in support of Trayvon Martin in Union Square on March 21, 2012, in New York. Ten years ago when Trayvon Martin was fatally shot, Florida was one of the few states with "stand your ground" laws that eased use of deadly force in the face of danger. Now, upward of 30 states have some form of the law. (Mary Altaffer/AP)
The disagreements start over the most mundane of matters. An argument over someone texting in a movie theater; a customer at the check out in a grocery store being jostled; a driver getting cut off by another car. But then someone pulls a gun and what could have — should have — been resolved with a little calm, and some plain common sense, ends in needless tragedy. Fueling the spiraling escalation of violence that has made the United States a global outlier in gun violence are laws that give license to people to shoot first.
“Stand your ground” laws, which allow individuals to use deadly force in public as a first resort rather than a last, came into vogue in the United States in the early 2000s and, according to a new study, are linked to a rise in gun homicides. Florida was a pioneer, enacting in 2005 a measure that essentially eliminated a citizen’s duty to retreat before using deadly force if they “reasonably believe'' their lives are threatened. Stand-your-ground was a factor in George Zimmerman’s acquittal in the 2012 fatal shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin. It was the reason the original prosecutor in the Ahmaud Arbery case initially decided not to bring charges against the three men ultimately convicted of fatally shooting Arbery. And it loomed over the trial of a Florida man recently acquitted for shooting to death a moviegoer with whom he had quarreled about cellphone use.
Proponents of stand-your-ground laws, put in place in some 20 states that followed Florida’s lead, say the laws enhance public safety by reducing barriers that prevent people from exercising their right to self-defense. They also claim that such laws deter crime. But a study published last week in JAMA Network Open, a peer-reviewed medical journal, found stand-your-ground laws are associated with an 11 percent increase in monthly homicide rates. That monthly increase alone, the authors wrote, is greater than total rates of homicides in most Northern and Western European countries.
The authors of the study analyzed 23 states that enacted stand-your-ground laws between 2000 and 2016, and 18 states that did not have the laws during the full study period, from 1999 to 2017. Their analysis found that stand-your-ground laws could be linked to 700 additional homicides each year. Most striking was the rise in southern states — Florida, Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana — that were early adopters of the laws. The study’s findings also echo a 2020 review by the Rand Corp. about strong evidence linking stand-your-ground laws with an increase in firearm homicide rates.
No doubt other factors have contributed to an increase in gun violence, but laws that encourage people to grab a gun and shoot when they think they are being threatened — rather than counting to 10, walking away, calling 911 — are not an effective means of self-protection. They should be recognized as what they are: a prelude to tragedy. | null | null | null | null | null |
Russia, Ukraine and the NATO question
Today, on the ground in Kyiv, where the battle for control continues. And NATO 101: how NATO came to be, how its mission has evolved since the end of the Cold War, and why two nonmembers are challenging the way the security organization is seen.
Ukrainians are taken by a truck to the front line to fight after joining the Territorial Defense Forces in Kharkiv, Ukraine.(Salwan Georges/The Washington Post)
Ukraine is not a member of NATO, the military alliance of mainly Western countries united by a mutual defense treaty. But post-Cold War tension between the West and Russia over NATO is at the heart of the current crisis. On today’s episode of Post Reports, we ask where NATO fits into global conflict, and how the history of the organization informs geopolitical relations today.
Since 1999, 14 nations have joined NATO, including Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria and the Baltic states. Russia has demanded that the alliance stop expanding eastward — and that it bar Ukraine from joining. Ukraine’s government has said that it would like to enter the alliance, along with other nations that were once part of or allied with the former Soviet Union.
In speeches this month, President Biden has vowed that the United States would meet its commitments under Article 5 of the NATO treaty, which says that an attack on one is an attack on all. But, since Ukraine isn’t a member, what does that even mean for the country? And for the rest of the world?
“As these countries have grown in number, it’s even more questionable whether we would send our troops to defend these countries,” says Sarah Kreps, professor of government, law and public policy and director of the Tech Policy Lab at Cornell University. “We would need some real leadership to help the public understand what the issue is, and explain the consequences of inaction.”
Follow the latest from Ukraine here. | null | null | null | null | null |
Visitors walk outside the Supreme Court building on Capitol Hill in Washington on Feb. 21. (Patrick Semansky/AP)
The Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of a federal law intended to rectify past abuses of Native American children being removed from their homes and tribes, the justices announced Monday.
The court consolidated four cases about 1978′s Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), which prioritizes placement of Indian children with relatives, other Native Americans or a tribe. The act was intended to stop past practices in which hundreds of thousands of Native American children were removed from their homes by adoption agencies and placed with White families or in group settings.
Native Americans say the law is essential to them, and have pledged to defend it.
“We know the importance of keeping our children connected with their families, communities, and heritage. ICWA has proven itself as the gold standard of child welfare law, which is why both Republican and Democratic administrations, tribes and tribal organizations, and child welfare experts continue to defend it,” Cherokee Nation Principal Chief Chuck Hoskin, Jr. and three other tribal leaders said in a statement.
“We will never accept a return to a time when our children were forcibly removed from our communities, and look forward to fighting for ICWA before the Court.”
Does a law meant to keep Native American children within their tribe pass legal muster?
The law is being challenged by seven individuals and three states, led by Texas. The plaintiffs contend the law requires state officials to put aside the traditional standard of doing what is best for the child. And they say it violates the Constitution’s promise of equal protection.
“ICWA operates as a unified scheme that places ‘Indian children’ in a disfavored position, depriving them of a placement decision based on their best interests, and instead requiring placements” based on the child’s biology, the individual plaintiffs told the court in their filing.
Non-Indian adoptive parents, such as the challengers, end up “last in line to adopt an Indian child,” the filing said, behind a member of the child’s extended family, other members of the child’s tribe and other families “from any one of the other 573 Indian tribes, regardless of whether the tribe has any connection to the child.”
Louisiana and Indiana are also among the challengers. The law is being defended by the Biden administration and tribal leaders.
All sides asked the Supreme Court to get involved after the entire U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit delivered a 325-page ruling on the law that split evenly on some issues and included opinions from six judges.
In a high-profile 2013 case, the Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 that the ICWA did not command that a child who became known as “Baby Veronica” must remain with her birth father, a member of a tribe, after the child was given up before birth. But the case did not call for the court to decide the constitutionality of the law.
How President Biden came to nominate Ketanji Brown Jackson for the high court
Native American law has played a larger role in the Supreme Court’s decisions of late.
The court announced in January that it will consider limiting a controversial 2020 decision that greatly expanded the amount of Indian land in Oklahoma and disrupted criminal prosecutions in the area.
But the justices declined the state’s request to overturn its decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma, which sided with tribal leaders in finding that a large portion of land in the eastern part of the state qualifies as an Indian reservation.
The four cases in the fight over the ICWA are consolidated under Haaland v. Brackeen. | null | null | null | null | null |
Alexander Shalal, 5, grabs an American flag as antiwar demonstrators and Ukrainians in the United States protest Russia's invasion. (Shuran Huang for The Washington Post)
For the better part of five-plus years, Donald Trump attempted to inject some nuance into the GOP’s posture toward Russia. It was partially a strategy of necessity — given how Russia’s 2016 election interference loomed over his presidency — and partially a symptom of both Trump’s penchant for provocation and admiration for authoritarians. But the result was the same: As Vladimir Putin inched toward an invasion of Ukraine, he had plenty of isolationists, conspiracy theorists, rationalizers and even apologists in prominent positions on the American right arguing for averting our eyes.
Their argument, though, has clearly run into reality and fallen badly out of favor. And many of those who downplayed or dismissed Russia’s threat have been forced to reckon with the rather black-and-white view that has now registered with the American people.
Yahoo News and YouGov are the latest out with a poll testing Americans’ views of the war in Ukraine. It shows that Americans — and particularly Republicans — are edging away from the kind of neutrality that seemed prepared to creep into the mainstream.
Three weeks ago, the same poll showed that Americans were about evenly split on whether to take Ukraine’s side in the conflict, with 46 percent favoring that view and 49 percent favoring neutrality. It was a striking finding given Ukraine’s status as an ally and Russia’s as an antagonistic foreign power (no matter how many tried to pretend otherwise). Today, the American people are more than 2-to-1 in favor of siding with Ukraine, 57 percent to 25 percent.
The shift has been the most pronounced on the GOP side. While their side favored neutrality by eight points three weeks ago, the latest shows them favoring siding with Ukraine by a whopping 34 points, 58 percent to 24 percent.
Perhaps most strikingly, just 5 percent of Republicans said they sided with Russia — a position Fox News’s Tucker Carlson adopted in 2019, before saying he was joking, and then saying he would pick Russia if forced to decide.
Two other polls released last week also show this kind of Russia neutrality and foreign policy agnosticism fading.
A Washington Post-ABC News poll released Friday showed a post-Cold War high in terms of anti-Russia sentiment, with 80 percent saying Russia is “unfriendly” or an “enemy.” That included at least three-quarters of both Democrats and Republicans.
The poll was conducted both before and after the invasion began last week. But a Gallup poll conducted even earlier showed that this kind of reaction was largely baked-in.
The Gallup poll also showed a post-Cold War record 85 percent of Americans viewed Russia unfavorably, while just 15 percent viewed it favorably — down from around one-third early in Trump’s tenure.
The same poll showed clear majorities of both Republicans (56 percent) and Democrats (61 percent) saying the situation in Ukraine constituted a “critical” threat to the vital interests of the United States. And Republicans were actually more likely to see Russia’s military power, overall, as a critical threat — 72 percent. This, again, was before the invasion.
You see these numbers — along with the images out of Ukraine — and you begin to see why some have developed buyer’s remorse about downplaying Putin’s nefariousness and/or Russia’s threat.
Fox News hosts and others who cast U.S. intelligence on the imminent Russian invasion as dubious or even an elaborate ruse have reverted to decrying the thing they suggested might be a hoax. Carlson has acknowledged that the piddling “border dispute” spearheaded by the not-necessarily-a-bad-guy Putin, which was of no concern to us, is now worthy of sanctions amid a potential “world war.” Former Trump secretary of state Mike Pompeo went full Russia hawk days after echoing Trump’s praise for Putin’s formidability and saying he had “enormous respect” for Putin. Even Trump, after praising Putin’s strategy in the run-up to the invasion and declining to warn him off it, on Friday alluded going further than sanctions. “There are things you can do that could be very powerful if you want to get it ended,” Trump said, while declining to get into specifics for some reason.
Exactly how this manifests itself moving forward in the still-nascent war remains to be seen. It’s possible to think that the United States has plenty at stake and that Russia is the bad guy without supporting the most extreme measures in response. But what’s evident is that Americans of all stripes now believe that we have something at stake and that Putin and Russia are the bad guys.
That was a pretty likely conclusion for anyone who was paying attention as of early last week, with Russia having an estimated 190,000 troops on the border; even if an invasion weren’t as imminent as it turned out to be, these were the tactics of a bully. But the official narrative had to be questioned, because Trump spent five years assuring everyone that any anti-Russia narrative was a personal attack against him and his supporters. It was questioned, and then the question was answered pretty emphatically, with an assist from Putin himself. | null | null | null | null | null |
A guide to early March Madness: NCAA conference tournaments get going this week
Drew Timme and Gonzaga are among the teams that have early conference tournaments. (Jeff Chiu/AP)
Selection Sunday still is more than a week away in men’s college basketball, but March Madness gets going in earnest on Saturday with the Ohio Valley Conference tournament championship game. A number of other tournaments also get going this week, mainly on the low- and mid-major side of things before the blue-blood tournaments tip off next week.
Here’s a quick look at what to expect from the early conference tournaments.
Championship game: Saturday, 8:30 p.m., ESPN2
Team to beat: Playing its final season in the OVC before departing for the Missouri Valley Conference, Murray State has only two losses this season, and one of them was at No. 5 Auburn. The Racers also won their four games against conference foes Belmont and Morehead State — their two closest competitors in the standings and the only other two OVC teams with winning records — by an average of 17.5 points. K.J. Williams (18.2 points, 8.5 rebounds per game) is one of the nation’s top big men, while Tevin Brown (16.4 ppg) and Justice Hill (13 points, 5.1 assists per game) shore up the backcourt.
Watch out for: Belmont (which also is leaving for the Missouri Valley) has lost only three games since Dec. 2, and two of them were against Murray State. The Bruins shoot a national-best 61.5 percent from two-point range. Morehead State, which lost four of six to end the regular season, features Johni Broome, whose 22 double-doubles rank third nationally. He also averages 4.0 blocks per game (third in the nation).
Eight teams that can make a surprise run to March Madness
Championship game: Sunday, noon, ESPN2
Teams to beat: It’s a toss-up between Longwood, the tournament’s top seed, and second-seeded Winthrop. The Lancers won the lone regular season meeting by four points on Jan. 29 and are one of the better three-point shooting teams in the nation (37.3 percent). The Eagles won their final eight games after the Longwood loss. Their offense revolves almost entirely around forward D.J. Burns, who has taken 38.1 percent of the team’s field goal attempts this season — only two players have a higher percentage nationally.
Watch out for: Third-seeded Gardner-Webb actually rates out better than Longwood or Winthrop, per Ken Pomeroy’s rankings, thanks almost entirely to a defense that held opponents to 28.2 percent shooting from three-point range (eighth nationally).
Championship game: Sunday, 2 p.m., CBS
Team to beat: An overtime loss in the regular season finale at Northern Iowa kept Loyola (Chicago) from being the tournament’s top seed — it fell to fourth after the defeat — but the Ramblers have what it takes to win the MVC tournament for a final time before departing for the Atlantic 10 after this season. The Ramblers rank eighth nationally in three-point percentage (38.8 percent) and 11th in two-point percentage (56.5 percent).
Watch out for: Top-seeded Northern Iowa, No. 2 Missouri State and No. 3 Drake all could come out on top. Missouri State features Isiaih Mosley, who this season became only the third player since 1993 to shoot better than 50 percent on field goal attempts, 40 percent on three-point attempts and 90 percent on free throw attempts while averaging at least 20 points per game.
Championship game: Monday, 7 p.m., ESPN
Teams to beat: Top-seeded Chattanooga swept the season series with No. 2 Furman, but there’s little else separating the two teams. Both like to slow things down. The Mocs are the better defensive team, holding opponents to 30.6 percent shooting from three-point range, while the Paladins get 51.4 percent of their scoring from three-pointers (only fellow SoCon team VMI is higher nationally).
Watch out for: Wofford went 0-4 against Chattanooga and Furman but 10-4 against everyone else in the conference. The Terriers are yet another SoCon team that relies heavily on three-pointers, getting 39.8 percent of their scoring from three-point range (16th nationally).
Championship game: Monday, 7 p.m., ESPN2
Team to beat: No. 1 seed Texas State, which last played in the NCAA tournament 25 years ago, won nine straight to end the regular season, which featured three canceled games because of the coronavirus pandemic (only two Sun Belt teams played a full 18-game conference schedule). The Bobcats operate at a plodding pace but shoot 38.1 percent from three-point range, which ranks 14th nationally.
Watch out for: South Alabama rates out better than Texas State in Pomeroy’s rankings, but the Jaguars didn’t even earn a bye in the conference tournament and will need to win four games in five nights to take home the title. They’ll also be without senior guard Jay Jay Chandler (15.3 ppg), who broke his finger in the first half of South Alabama’s regular season finale Friday and is done for the season.
Championship game: March 8, 5 p.m., ESPN
Team to beat: Liberty suffered double-digit losses for the first time since the 2017-18 season but still earned a top seed in the conference tournament. As usual, Ritchie McKay’s team lives and dies by the three-pointer, shooting 39.3 percent from long range (fourth nationally) and getting 43.1 percent of its points from beyond the arc (fifth nationally). Senior Darius McGhee, a 5-foot-9 guard, is the nation’s second-leading scorer with 24.7 points per game.
Watch out for: If both teams win their quarterfinal games, we could get a Jacksonville-Jacksonville State matchup in Saturday’s semifinals (the former is located in Florida, while the latter hails from Alabama). Only three teams nationally operate at a slower pace than Jacksonville, which last made the NCAA tournament in 1986. Jacksonville State shoots three-pointers even better than Liberty, ranking third nationally.
Teams to beat: The Horizon tournament is about as wide open as they come, with seven of its 12 teams winning at least 10 games in conference play. Cleveland State is the top seed but fourth-seeded Wright State might be considered the favorite, as the Raiders rebounded from a dismal 2-7 start thanks in part to Tanner Holden and Grant Basile, who ranked third and fourth, respectively, in Horizon League scoring this season. The Vikings swept Wright State in the regular season, however.
Watch out for: Oakland failed to secure a tournament bye and will have to play an extra game, but the Grizzlies swept Cleveland State during the regular season and feature Jamal Cain, the Horizon’s second-leading scorer (20.1 ppg), and Jalen Moore, has the second-most assists per game (8.0) in the nation.
Championship game: March 8, 7 p.m., ESPN2
Team to beat: Top-seeded Bryant suffered a program-worst 67-point loss to Houston on Dec. 3. Since then, the Bulldogs have lost only four times. Bryant, which is looking for its first-ever NCAA tournament bid at the Division I level, operates at one of the fastest tempos in the country. Guard Peter Kiss, a Rutgers transfer, is the nation’s leading scorer at 25.1 points per game, and he and Charles Pride (17.8 points per game) form a potent backcourt combination.
Watch out for: Thanks in part to a late-season knee injury suffered by third-leading scorer Elijah Ford, Wagner dropped three of its final five regular season games to finish second in the standings but actually fares better than Bryant in Ken Pomeroy’s ratings because of a defense that limits three-pointers and forces turnovers in bunches.
Championship game: March 8, 7 p.m., CBS Sports Network
Team to beat: Towson’s only NCAA tournament appearances came all the way back in 1990 and 1991, but the Tigers seem poised to make their long-awaited return: As of this writing, they rank 63rd nationally in Pomeroy’s overall rankings, which would be the highest finish for a CAA team since UNC Wilmington in 2017. It’s pretty unexpected, as Towson was picked to finish eighth out of 10 CAA teams in the conference preseason poll and did not have any players on any all-CAA preseason teams.
Watch out for: Coached by Hofstra legend Speedy Claxton, the Pride took Houston to overtime in its season opener and upset Arkansas on Dec. 18. Guard Aaron Estrada led the conference in both scoring and assists. Hofstra ranks fifth nationally in free throw percentage at 80.2 percent.
Team to beat: Who else? Defending national runner-up Gonzaga stormed through conference play until a hiccup against Saint Mary’s in the regular season finale. The Bulldogs held opponents to a national-low 42.7 effective field goal percentage, which gives added weight to three-pointers. On offense, they shot 59.2 percent in that category, second only to South Dakota State. Gonzaga received a quadruple bye in the West Coast tournament bracket and will only need to win two games to take home the title for the 19th time over the last 24 years.
Watch out for: Either Gonzaga or Saint Mary’s has won the WCC tournament title over the past 13 years, and this season probably won’t be any different (the Gaels also received a bye into the tournament semifinals). But keep tabs on San Francisco, which probably will earn its first NCAA tournament bid since 1998 no matter what it does in the WCC tournament. Belarusian big man Yauhen Massalski is one of the nation’s most well-rounded players. | null | null | null | null | null |
FAA will expand use of independent panels to help review aircraft safety
The agency previously used outside experts to help ensure that the 737 Max could fly safely after two deadly crashes
A Boeing 777X test aircraft at Changi Airport in Singapore on Feb. 13. (Bryan van der Beek/Bloomberg News)
The Federal Aviation Administration said Monday that it will make more widespread use of expert independent safety panels to help it review new aircraft designs, a change that grew out of the agency’s response to the 737 Max crashes.
The teams will serve as an additional check on the FAA’s regular certification process, which has been faulted for missing flaws in the design of the Max.
The FAA used such a panel, known as a Technical Advisory Board, to review changes to the Max as it worked to re-approve the plane as safe, drawing on staffers from elsewhere in the Transportation Department, the Air Force and NASA. It is also using one to help with the review of Boeing’s new long-range 777X jet.
The agency said the approach goes beyond changes to aircraft safety oversight that Congress required after the crashes, which claimed 346 lives.
The board’s responsibilities will vary but could involve analyzing the risks posed by new technologies and determining whether the right FAA experts had been involved in the approval process. Investigations after the Max crashes found that the FAA had an incomplete view of a new system that ultimately malfunctioned, forcing the planes into dives.
The FAA has been taking steps to stiffen its oversight of aircraft manufacturers in recent months and has come to rely more heavily on its own staff to conduct reviews, rather than drawing from experts at the companies. This month it also released a proposal to ensure that experts inside the companies are free to raise safety concerns with the FAA.
The job of overhauling the agency’s approach to safety fell to Administrator Steve Dickson, who took the job just months after the second Max crash. He has announced his resignation, effective at the end of March. | null | null | null | null | null |
The exodus continues to grow all along Ukraine’s 1,600-mile western border: More than 500,000 people have fled since the war began last week, wrote Filippo Grandi, head of the U.N. refugee agency, in a tweet. E.U. Commissioner for Home Affairs Ylva Johansson said Sunday that the European Union may grant temporary asylum to Ukrainians for up to three years. The plan could move ahead this week.
Immigration authorities in the five countries immediately to Ukraine’s west have been overwhelmed, and many trying to flee have waited for days. Those with cars sleep in them. Those on foot will themselves to stay awake, unable to rest in the freezing overnight temperatures and fearful of losing their place in the miles-long lines. It’s a journey so arduous that some simply give up and decide to risk staying in Ukraine.
With people now beginning to arrive at these borders from the capital, Kyiv, as well as Ukraine’s east — the area hit worst by Russia’s attacks — the number languishing is set to rise dramatically.
At Medyka, the most trafficked post on the Ukraine-Poland border, the line of cars was backed up for over 20 miles on Sunday over gray and frozen country roads, almost halfway to Lviv, the most populous city in western Ukraine. Drivers swapped shifts between naps to lurch forward sporadically.
Maksym Kozytskyy, the head of the Lviv state administration, said there were 30,000 people waiting outside or in their cars for as long as three days at the region’s train stations and six border crossings with Poland. The state’s emergency services set up tents, with snow falling on Sunday night.
The elderly woman was lying on the ground, her face pale, and her son was giving her chest compressions. It was another half-hour before the ambulance came, but the woman was already dead. Her son did not give up trying to resuscitate her, however.
With border points jammed, some decided against fleeing, finding shelter in cities such as Lviv, around 50 miles from the Polish border and one of the safer cities in the country. Others sought to take the still-operational cross-border trains into Poland, but their schedules have become sporadic, and the stations and train cars were crammed with people.
Olena Chefranova, 42, comforted one of her 7-year-old twin daughters who cried softly while waiting outside Lviv’s train station, wiping tears from her cheeks.
While the vast majority of those fleeing are Ukrainians, a significant number of those crossing Sunday were not. Conversations on both sides of the Medyka crossing on the Ukraine-Poland border took place in Pashto, Lingala, Malayalam, Japanese, Somali, Kurdish and Nigerian Pidgin, to name a few. Ukraine heavily subsidizes university programs for foreigners, and many were there studying.
Pavlenko, the Ukrainian border security spokesman, said that there was no special treatment for Ukrainians over foreigners, but border guards were giving priority to families with small children, the elderly and those in need of medical assistance. “There are no privileges for anyone else,” he said. | null | null | null | null | null |
People arriving from Ukraine are welcomed by residents in Przemysl, Poland, on Feb. 27. (Kasia Strek for The Washington Post)
Nations in Europe are opening the door to a historic wave of refugees fleeing the war in Ukraine, breaking with the continent’s past resistance to asylum seekers from the Muslim world and Africa, and embracing hundreds of thousands of new arrivals who some leaders are hailing as culturally and ethnically European.
The rapidly escalating Ukrainian wave — already more than 500,000 people, over the span of less than a week — appeared poised to dwarf the landmark European migrant crisis of 2015 and 2016, when 2 million people sought sanctuary, mostly Syrians fleeing civil war. Those arrivals sparked intense friction among European Union nations, fueled a resurgent movement of the far-right and led to backlash policies designed to stop or turn back asylum seekers.
The solidarity of current moment stands in stark contrast, particularly amid estimates that numbers could soar into the millions and potentially become the largest refugee wave on the continent of the post-World War II era.
Some leaders have been unabashed about the dramatic shift in attitudes.
“These are not the refugees we are used to … these people are Europeans,” Bulgarian Prime Minister Kiril Petkov told journalists about the Ukrainians, as reported by the Associated Press. “These people are intelligent, they are educated people. … This is not the refugee wave we have been used to, people we were not sure about their identity, people with unclear pasts, who could have been even terrorists.”
Governments in the eastern and central parts of the continent that were once staunchly opposed to refugees have suddenly become some of the biggest supporters of an open-door policy — even as their welcoming stance appeared to be limited to Ukrainians.
In the mid-2010s, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán built barbed-wire fences and established “border hunters” with 4x4s, night-vision goggles and migrant-sniffing dogs to halt arrivals of asylum seekers from an arc of instability from Africa to Afghanistan. On Sunday, he told journalists that “everyone fleeing Ukraine will find a friend in the Hungarian state.”
When Belarus began funneling Middle Eastern and Afghan asylum seekers toward Poland last year, Warsaw dispatched troops and pushed back migrants — some of whom froze to death in the woods. In recent days, however, Polish state railways have announced free travel for Ukrainians, and tons of aid have been donated by the public.
The misery of migrants caught in Belarus's battle with Europe
Some of that disparity may be explained by the different push-factors at play. E.U. leaders said Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, under heavy sanctions, was trying to manufacture a crisis and destabilize the bloc by using migrants as pawns. Now, the E.U. has a shocking war happening right next door.
“Eastern European countries see a chance to show unity with a neighbor and take a stand against Russian hostility,” said Hanne Beirens, the director of Migration Policy Institute Europe. Compared with 2015 and 2016, she said, “[Europe] is in a very different political situation, a very different political landscape.”
But in interviews with The Washington Post, several European officials were blunt that identity politics, too, are playing a role.
“Honestly, the sentiment is different since they are White and Christian,” said one European official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak candidly.
The E.U. is opening its doors even as it remains reticent about granting Ukraine membership into its 27-nation club. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky made a further appeal on Monday for “urgent accession.” So far, the E.U. has refused to assume the risk of helping defend Ukrainian territory from the long-present Russian threat or allow the free movement of 44 million people through the bloc.
But the brutality of the Russian invasion and the sheer number of displaced and fleeing Ukrainians, some argued, required a strong collective response — particularly as the struggle in Ukraine is rooted in the desire of its people to link with E.U. principles of democracy and human rights and shift away from Moscow’s authoritarian orbit.
And so the E.U., formed as a trade alliance, has taken the unprecedented step of financing the purchase and delivery of weapons to Ukraine. And E.U. leaders are expected to announce Thursday that they will allow Ukrainians to receive temporary protection for up to three years, potentially allowing them to work legally and access social services.
An emergency meeting of E.U. interior ministers achieved “solidarity among all E.U. states to jointly take in war refugees quickly and unbureaucratically,” German Interior Minister Nancy Faeser said Sunday.
“I don’t know how many will come,” E.U. Home Affairs Commissioner Ylva Johansson said when asked about the scale of refugees she expects. “I think we will have to prepare for millions.”
Beirens said E.U. nations had an additional interest in supporting the measure, because it would free up asylum systems that otherwise would be choked with new Ukrainian applications. Europe, however, did not take similar steps in 2015 and 2016. Asylum seekers from the Middle East and Africa have in many cases had to wait years in legal limbo, making it difficult to find jobs in the formal economy, while their claims were assessed.
So while refugee advocates have cheered the E.U.'s growing support for Ukrainian refugees, some have also bristled at how ethnicity, culture and religion appear to be driving the humanitarian response.
“For anyone who understands the liberal mind, please explain to me why the lives of Ukrainians are more precious than Haitians, Palestinians, Ethiopians, Afghans, Syrians, Iranians, Africans,” tweeted Ajamu Baraka, an American human rights activist. “Is it only the images of white suffering that moves them?”
Tarik Abou-Chadi, an associate professor in European politics at Oxford University, tried to explain it like this in an interview with The Post: “There’s the idea of a shared fate — ‘we could be next’ — and having a shared identity that stands against Russian imperialism. So this gives some people a different sense of community with others who are now fleeing. This might increase compassion for these Ukrainian refugees, compared to those from Syria.”
In interviews Thursday, several refugees and asylum seekers in Greece — a main arrival point for those fleeing the Middle East and African conflicts — said matter-of-factly that they weren’t surprised that Europe was approaching the current crisis differently.
A Nigerian in Athens, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fears to his safety, described following the news and empathizing with Ukrainians fleeing war.
“But, you know, a lot of people have been dying in Yemen,” he said. “And a lot of people have been dying in Ethiopia in horrible violence. Very little of that makes the news. Now it is Europe, and Europeans who are fleeing … I hear people say, ‘All lives matter’ but no, they don’t all matter the same. Black lives matter less.”
Even as Europe welcomes Ukrainians, it is funding the Libyan coast guard to thwart migrants from crossing the Mediterranean to Italy. Greek security forces have been accused of pushing migrants back toward Turkish waters, in violation of international law. Those who do have the fortune of reaching Greek soil often wind up in a highly surveilled camp where they can live for more than a year.
Pope Francis, visiting Greek razor wire-fenced migrant camp, challenges Europe to live up to its human rights ideals
Britain — which left the European Union in part because of a desire to “take back control” of its borders — signaled on Monday that it was willing to open the door to Ukrainians but only a crack. The offer is limited to the family members of British nationals. Home Secretary Priti Patel estimated that 100,000 Ukrainians would be able to “seek sanctuary,” provided they passed security checks.
Over the weekend, a Home Office minister tweeted — and then deleted — that there were “a number of routes” for Ukrainian refugees without family connections to come to Britain, including work visas that would allow them to pick seasonal fruit and vegetables.
The suggestion was met with widespread condemnation as inappropriate for the moment. “People are fleeing war in Europe, the like we haven’t seen in generations, in search of swift sanctuary,” wrote opposition Labour Party lawmaker Yvette Cooper.
Polls suggest Britain’s Conservative government is out of step with the public opinion, with the majority saying they’d support resettlement efforts for refugees. That was also the sense in south London on Sunday night, where Londoners turned up to a Polish community center to donate thousands of bags filled with clothes, medicines, diapers, sleeping bags — you name it — for fleeing Ukrainians.
“They are very vulnerable citizens. It would be ideal to see the U.K. open its doors,” said Dia Day, 19, a student who was lifting boxes of bedding into a van, destined for Ukrainian refugees in Poland.
On the continent, it remains unclear how long the warm welcome will last. In 2015, Germany’s then-chancellor, Angela Merkel, told her country “we can do it” and swung wide the doors of Europe’s largest economy to Syrians. Clusters of Germans turned out to welcome the new Muslim migrants with flowers and hugs at train stations.
But for many Germans, the welcome wore thin as refugee numbers continued to surge, migrant ranks were infiltrated by small numbers of trained terrorists, and the bills came due for financial aid. Merkel would later backtrack on her decision, one that would haunt her political career.
Emily Rauhala in Brussels, Chico Harlan in Rome, Elinda Labropoulou in Athens, Kate Brady in Berlin and Claire Parker in Washington contributed to this report. | null | null | null | null | null |
Voters in the crucial Indian state of Uttar Pradesh ask: Are we job seekers or Hindus first?
Pilgrims visit the Sarayu River in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, on Feb. 11. Elections in India's most populous state will conclude in early March. (Photos by Vivek Singh for The Washington Post)
Anant Gupta
VARANASI, India — Shivam Chaudhari dreams of working with computers, maybe one day in Dubai. Instead, he says, he’s condemned to cremating bodies here on the banks of the Ganges River.
He has applied, and failed, to get one of the office jobs that are so scarce today. He has tried, and struggled, to save any money, with inflation so rampant. When the novel coronavirus struck this city of pilgrims two years ago, corpses were piled so far up the riverfront steps that it was “overwhelming,” he recalled. Yet, when his community, a low-ranked caste traditionally tasked with burning bodies, asked for masks and vaccines to carry out its work, the government, led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), said no.
Still, when you ask the 22-year-old devout Hindu which party he supports, he doesn’t hesitate.
Shivam Chaudhari stands near a cremation at the Manikarnika Ghat in Varanasi on Feb. 9. He is a member of the Dom caste, traditionally the keepers of cremation grounds.
“The BJP,” Chaudhari said, as he showed off a video he took recently of Prime Minister Narendra Modi cruising in a boat on the Ganges, shortly after he inaugurated the $100 million renovation of a Hindu temple up the river. “The King of India,” Chaudhari captioned his Facebook post.
This month, roughly 150 million voters, including Chaudhari, are casting ballots in Uttar Pradesh, the most populous state in India and a political battleground where the elections are widely seen as a referendum on Modi and his BJP.
Scaffolding and temporary structures separate housing from the Kashi Vishwanath Temple Corridor, under construction in Varanasi.
The streets of Varanasi bustle on Feb. 9, as voting in critical state elections is underway.
Bharatiya Janata Party workers gather at a local party office in Varanasi.
At play are dueling personalities, perennial debates over economic development and law and order, and the rivalries between castes that make up the complex jigsaw of Uttar Pradesh politics. But beneath it all, the battle could be tipped by the same overriding force that has long polarized India: religion.
In interviews across Uttar Pradesh, next to fields of sugar cane, at vast political rallies and in the shadow of ancient temples, voters said they were weighing promises of jobs, stability and basic services made by Modi and his ally Yogi Adityanath, the firebrand Hindu cleric who has been chief minister of Uttar Pradesh since 2017. By those measures, some voters felt disappointed. Inflation in the state has topped 6 percent, according to India’s central bank, while the rate of employment in formal jobs, hurt by the pandemic, has fallen below 33 percent, from 38 percent in 2016, according to the Center for Monitoring Indian Economy, an independent think tank.
But even if jobs numbers have waned, many said, their sense of Hindu identity has not.
“I do blame the government for corona, but would someone other than Yogi have managed any better?” Chaudhari asked. What Adityanath has managed, he said, was making sure Muslims no longer dare to intimidate Hindus in Varanasi’s streets, or to wave the Pakistani flag in public. BJP officials and supporters often describe Hindus, who make up 80 percent of India, as facing threats — real or unfounded — from the country’s Muslim minority.
“The Muslims now stay in line,” he said with satisfaction. “Hindus finally feel secure.”
In 2014, Modi swept to power nationally by touting his economic know-how, his corruption-free image and, more subtly, his Hindu nationalist bona fides. But in 2017, the BJP overwhelmingly won the Uttar Pradesh state elections for the first time in decades with a more overtly religious platform: The party pledged the controversial construction of a temple to the Hindu god Ram in Ayodhya, on the site of a 16th-century mosque that had been demolished by a Hindu mob in 1992, and promised a grand renovation of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple in Varanasi. Modi inaugurated the temple renovation in December to Chaudhari’s delight.
Gaurav Gautam, a boatman who ferries pilgrims on the Sarayu River in Ayodhya.
Those banner projects, combined with a raft of new laws in Uttar Pradesh that appear to target Muslims, have fueled criticism from the BJP’s opponents, who say the ruling party is undermining modern India’s secular foundations.
[In Modi’s quest to transform India, a grand temple rises]
But those initiatives also have left an impression on voters such as Gaurav Gautam. Sitting beside the Sarayu River in Ayodhya, the 38-year-old boatman said he was frustrated with BJP officials who once promised plumbing to poor residents like him. For the past eight months, Gautam has made calls, sent letters, even hired a lawyer for $15 to send online petitions to Modi and Adityanath so he could get a toilet installed at home. “No response,” he fumed.
Pilgrims and boats line the ghats, or riverfront steps, along the Sarayu in the temple town of Ayodhya.
Ayodhya is home to the site of a 16th-century mosque that was demolished by a Hindu mob in 1992.
The BJP has pledged to build a temple to the Hindu god Ram on the site of the destroyed mosque.
Yet Ayodhya also has improved, Gautam acknowledged. Beyond its ghats and its timeless churn of bathing pilgrims, holy men and beggars stands a gleaming promenade, renovated by Adityanath in 2019. Outside town, there will soon be a new airport named after Lord Ram. A new train station will be the largest in Uttar Pradesh.
Thirty years ago, Gautam said, his family helped feed and shelter the Hindu “volunteers” who tore down the mosque. Today, off the main road, a new Ram temple is rising. And for Gautam, that was enough.
“Look, I’ll still vote for Yogi,” he said. “But, please, get me a toilet.”
A worsening divide
Master weaver Maqbool Hasan in his office.
As the tight race has gathered steam in recent weeks, Modi has mostly pitched the BJP as the party that’s delivered tangible results to Uttar Pradesh: new highways, new loans for entrepreneurs, new colleges for aspiring doctors. Adityanath has been more pointed. This month in Shahjahanpur, a sugar cane region, he said his opponents were the ones who pander to religion.
“I talk about sugar cane, they talk about [Mohammad Ali] Jinnah,” he said, referring to the founding father of Pakistan at the partition of India in 1947. “I talk about holistic development, they talk about Muslim burial grounds.”
A day later, Akhilesh Yadav — the Samajwadi Party, or Socialist Party, leader who is seen as the BJP’s main rival — swooped into Shahjahanpur by helicopter bearing a different message. Onstage, a band played music reminiscent of both Sufi qawwalis and Hindu songs of worship, with lyrics that drove the point home:
We are residents of this country,
All its people, we love; Akhilesh, we love
“Akhilesh is our only hope,” said Hafeez Ansari, a Muslim member of the party, standing in the crowd.
That sense of apprehension has been echoed by Muslims across the state ahead of March 10, when results of the vote will be announced. With Adityanath at the helm for the past five years, Uttar Pradesh has passed laws to prevent the slaughtering of cows and discourage interfaith marriages, two measures that critics say target Muslims. Headlines about mobs lynching Muslims or right-wing leaders delivering hate-filled speeches have continued to crop up.
“We’re afraid of what will happen if they’re reelected,” said Maqbool Hasan, a leader of Varanasi’s Muslim weaving community. For one thing, the economy is so bad that the number of looms operating is a quarter of what it was during the early 2000s, he said. Weavers have quit to drive rickshaws and sell vegetables. Beggars are everywhere.
Then there is the worsening religious division.
“There’s poison in the air,” said Hasan, who says he fears that Muslims one day could be asked to vacate the Hindu holy city.
The under-construction Kashi Vishwanath Temple Corridor is visible from the Ganges River in Varanasi.
The Kashi Vishwanath renovation will feature grand prayer halls and a dramatic waterfront staircase.
The disputed Gyanvapi Mosque (white structure in distance) is visible on the periphery of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple Corridor project in Varanasi.
A few weeks ago, a Hindu nationalist group put up posters telling non-Hindus they were forbidden to visit Varanasi’s ghats. (The posters were later taken down.) Hasan saw further worrying events this month. A protest had erupted in southern India over whether Muslim students could wear the hijab to class, sparking angry showdowns in several states between Muslim women in headscarves and Hindu men in saffron shawls.
Across town, Vishwambhar Mishra felt sympathy for the Muslims, even frustration.
As the high priest of the Sankat Mochan, one of the most influential Hindu temples in Varanasi, Mishra made for an unlikely critic of the BJP. But all around him, he said, he saw Hindu religious sentiment being “exploited.”
In December, Mishra said, Modi had swept into Varanasi, cameras in tow, to pray at a shrine to Shiva and give his blessings to the Kashi Vishwanath renovation, which will feature grand prayer halls and a dramatic waterfront staircase.
“If you say, ‘I can’t get a job, I can’t find a good hospital, the price of petrol is over 100 rupees,’ they say, ‘But look at the temple!’ ” he said, throwing his hands up. “What is this? Let me tell you: It’s not good for Hinduism, and it’s not good for the country.”
Enduring popularity
R.P. Singh at Pappu’s tea shop in Varanasi on Feb. 9.
For every Mishra, there are Hindu voters such as the regulars at Pappu’s teahouse in Varanasi, a hangout renowned for political chatter. Over chai and chickpeas, locals offer their takes on the day’s headlines — and a glimpse into the BJP’s upper-class support.
It’s not all about Hindu nationalism, argued R.P. Singh, a retired archaeology professor. For all their faults, Modi and Adityanath have never been trailed by allegations of corruption, a rare quality in Indian politics, he said. The last time the Samajwadi Party’s Yadav served as chief minister, from 2012 to 2017, organized crime gangs run by Yadavs — members of the political leader’s caste — and Muslims ran amok, Singh said, echoing an allegation frequently made by the BJP against its opponents.
“There were kidnappings, carjackings, politicians dropping by police stations bailing out criminals,” Singh said. On the campaign trail, Yadav has often retorted that the BJP, rather than his party, is filled with criminal elements and has pointed to examples of current and former BJP lawmakers who have faced accusations of murder and rape.
Too many people were expecting welfare handouts — and economic miracles — from the BJP, Singh said. “Instead of blaming the government, why don’t we blame ourselves?” he asked.
Milan Vaishnav, an expert on Indian politics at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said the BJP’s law-and-order image, combined with the appeal of Hindutva, or a form of religious nationalism, could outweigh voters’ concerns about the slumping economy or its pandemic management.
“The link between performance and accountability is not at all clear,” Vaishnav said. “Modi’s popularity is still sky-high. There’s an enormous reservoir of goodwill and confidence in his leadership.”
For decades, Uttar Pradesh, with its dizzying array of castes jostling for power and a 20 percent Muslim population, was seen as an electoral puzzle that, if solved, would pave the way to the prime minister’s office in New Delhi. Some parties wooed Dalits, formerly known as untouchables, while others pursued Muslims as they cobbled together coalitions of support. In the 1990s, the BJP, once known as the party of middle-to-upper-class traders, began a concerted effort to win over all Hindus, reaping significant rewards.
This year, one region where the BJP could lose support among Hindus is western Uttar Pradesh. A stretch of farmland dominated by an agrarian caste known as Jats, the region became polarized along religious lines after deadly riots broke out in 2013, killing more than 60 people, the majority of them Muslims. After that, the Jats mobilized behind the BJP, giving it a crucial boost in Uttar Pradesh.
Despite high inflation and a drop in formal employment, some BJP supporters in Uttar Pradesh say they will vote based on the party's religious promises.
Patrons gather at Pappu's tea shop, a popular spot known for its political chatter.
Images of deities and a photo of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on a wall in Pappu's tea shop.
In the last state elections, the BJP swept the region, collecting 53 of the 58 seats in the Jat belt.
Then came 2020. Modi introduced an overhaul to agricultural subsidies, which sparked huge, year-long protests by growers. After angry farmers occupied Delhi’s borders in protest and fought with police, BJP leaders hit back, accusing the demonstrators of being a front for Sikh separatists or leftists.
[A deadly clash at India’s farmer protests points to a growing challenge for Modi’s BJP]
Modi withdrew the laws in November, but at the side of a dusty road in Pinna village in Muzaffarnagar district, Rajveer Malik, a 59-year-old sugar cane farmer, wasn’t able to forgive the BJP. He was voting for the opposition.
“The farmers who feed the nation were called names,” he said. “In a democracy, everyone has the right to protest against the government. We haven’t seen such arrogance before.”
For many, the choice is harder. Sumit Malik, a 25-year-old farmer who is not related to Rajveer, said he has always voted for the BJP. “Modi made us feel pride in being Hindus,” he said.
But last year, he joined the farm law protests and, for the first time, began to question his allegiances. Soon after, other concerns surfaced. Unemployment was rising. Farming incomes were down, and electricity prices were shooting up. Last year, his family shelled out $225 on electricity bills, three times the amount they had paid previously, and to make ends meet, Malik felt compelled to open a shop selling pesticides.
What the BJP had done for the Hindus was good, said Malik, pointing — again — to the Ram temple in Ayodhya.
“But will that fill our stomach?” he asked. “For farmers, our fields are our temples.”
Gerry Shih is the India Bureau Chief for the Washington Post, covering India and neighboring countries. Twitter Twitter
Niha Masih is an India-based correspondent for The Washington Post based in New Delhi. Before joining The Post in 2019, she reported on politics, conflict and religious fundamentalism in India for Hindustan Times and New Delhi Television (NDTV). Twitter Twitter | null | null | null | null | null |
Abramovich has not been been hit with sanctions so far. The financial penalties on Deripaska date back to 2016, when he was accused by the Treasury Department of being linked to Russian interference in the U.S. election, an allegation he has denied. But Fridman, an Alfa Group founder who is ranked among the 10 richest Russians in the world, was sanctioned on Monday by the European Union. | null | null | null | null | null |
With a “strategic stability” dialogue underway with Moscow, there had been hope for a revival of nuclear arms negotiations, including a successor INF treaty; a broader agreement on tactical or short-range nuclear weapons that have never been covered by treaty; new technologies such as hypersonic glide vehicles and Russia’s development of a nuclear-powered cruise missile. But the strategic stability talks have now been halted because of the situation in Ukraine. Mr. Putin’s aggression means that arms control negotiations won’t be relaunched any time soon. Moreover, Alexander Lukashenko, the autocrat of Belarus and Mr. Putin’s ally, has just pushed through constitutional changes renouncing the 1990s commitment to be a non-nuclear state, thus giving Russia the possibility to bring nuclear weapons to Belarus, bordering NATO members Poland, Lithuania and Latvia.
Mr. Putin’s war also casts a cloud over arms control generally. In the end, such agreements are useful to limit dangerous weapons in a verifiable, legally-binding treaty. But treaties and negotiations depend on the political willpower and trust of the parties involved, which has now all but vanished in the case of Russia. Would the U.S. Senate ratify any treaty with Mr. Putin, given what has happened in Ukraine? No.
Both Russia and the United States maintain strategic nuclear weapons on launch-ready alert, a relic of the Cold War. But the risks of accident or miscalculation are not a relic, and have not gone away. Mr. Putin has committed an act of utter folly by injecting reckless nuclear weapons threats into the volatile mix he has created in Ukraine. | null | null | null | null | null |
What is NATO? Ukraine invasion raises profile of this political and military alliance.
The United States is part of a group of 30 nations that long ago agreed to defend one another in the event of an attack.
If you have been paying attention to the news lately, you probably know that Russia has invaded Ukraine, its western neighbor. Ukraine (pronounced you-CRANE) had been part of the Soviet Union since 1922 but became an independent country when the Soviet Union broke up in 1991.
Russian President Vladimir Putin (VLAD-uh-meer POO-tin) claims that Ukraine isn’t a real country and that its land and people are historically Russian. He says it should be part of Russia again. Ukraine’s pro-Western government defends its right to exist and is fighting the invasion, which is the latest in a series of assaults by Russia over the past decade. Although the invasion is in its first week, some people fear that it could become the worst conflict in Europe in more than 75 years.
A key player in the struggle is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). NATO is a political and military alliance of 30 mostly European nations. The United States and Canada belong to NATO. Ukraine and Russia do not.
The heart of the NATO alliance is Article 5, an agreement that an armed attack on one member will be viewed as an attack on all, and that they will defend one another.
Ukraine has made a bid to join NATO, which Putin opposes. He doesn’t want a sixth NATO country bordering Russia or its separate Kaliningrad territory and threatening his hold on power. He has demanded that NATO agree to never admit Ukraine, which the alliance has refused to do.
NATO’s top official called Russia’s invasion a “brutal act of war” and “senseless.” Although Ukraine is not a member, NATO has sent troops and weapons to its member nations closest to Ukraine. In addition, the United States, Germany and other member countries have imposed economic restraints, called sanctions, to punish Russia.
With Russian troops fighting in Ukraine and deployed in nearby Belarus, the risk for NATO has increased “enormously,” said Ian Lesser, a NATO expert with the German Marshall Fund of the United States. He said the situation could make it harder for the alliance to defend its eastern edge.
Here is a look at NATO in a changing world:
NATO was founded in 1949 by 12 countries concerned that the Soviet Union would expand its political and economic system, called communism, beyond Eastern Europe. This was during a time called the Cold War, which ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
NATO now has 30 members. Although its membership is almost entirely European, Article 5 (the all-for-one defense pledge) has been invoked just once — after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States. NATO also supported the United States in the war in Afghanistan.
NATO’s headquarters is in Belgium. Funding for its operations comes from members based on their national incomes. The United States, one of the world’s richest economies, pays more than other NATO countries.
NATO does not have its own armed forces. Instead it has a military command structure that works with the militaries of member countries in peacekeeping operations.
Countries wanting to join NATO must meet political, economic and military goals proving that they can contribute to NATO’s security as well as benefit from it. No country that has joined NATO has ever left it. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s bid for membership is not likely to advance while the country is at war, analysts say.
Some people confuse NATO with the United Nations. Both organizations focus on peacekeeping, but the United Nations, with 193 member countries, seeks cooperation in areas such as international law, human rights, the environment and social progress. | null | null | null | null | null |
MOSCOW — Ordinary Russians are facing the prospect of higher prices as Western sanctions over the invasion of Ukraine sent the ruble plummeting. That’s led uneasy people to line up at banks and ATMs in a country that has seen more than one currency disaster in the post-Soviet era. The Russian currency plunged about 30% against the U.S. dollar after Western nations announced moves to block some Russian banks from the SWIFT international payment system and to restrict Russia’s use of its massive foreign currency reserves. The exchange rate later recovered ground after swift action by Russia’s central bank.
LONDON — Shell says it’s pulling out of Russia as President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine continues to cost the country’s all-important energy industry foreign investment and expertise. The company on Monday announced its intention to exit joint ventures with Russia’s state-owned energy giant Gazprom and related entities. That includes stakes in a key liquefied natural gas project and two projects that are developing oil fields in Siberia. Shell also intends to end its involvement in the now-halted Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline. BP announced plans Sunday to shed an almost 20% stake in Russian-controlled Rosneft. Norway’s Equinor said Monday that it would halt new investment in Russia and begin selling holdings there.
NEW YORK — Markets quivered Monday amid worries about how high oil prices will go and how badly the global economy will get hit after the U.S. and allies upped the financial pressure on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. Stocks swung down, up and down again, while investors herded into bonds in search of safety and the value of the Russian ruble plunged to a record low. The S&P 500 was down as much as 1.6% but recouped much of its losses to end down 0.2%. Oil prices rose sharply amid concerns about what will happen to crude supplies.
DETROIT — Labor unions and worker advocates have applauded President Joe Biden’s nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson for the Supreme Court. Yet a look back at Jackson’s decisions in cases involving business and labor suggest that she won’t always rule as they want or expect her to. Though Jackson is widely seen as a liberal on social and economic issues and as a defender of workers’ rights, her decisions, as a federal district court judge and then as a federal appellate judge since last year, defy easy categorization.
BELGRADE, Serbia — Sberbank and the Russian bank’s subsidiaries in southeastern Europe are facing closures or takeovers following international sanctions imposed on Moscow for its invasion of Ukraine. The European Central Bank said Monday that Sberbank Europe AG and its branches in Slovenia and Croatia are failing or likely to fail after they “experienced significant deposit outflows” because of the impact to their reputation from the conflict. In both Slovenia and Croatia, Sberbank temporarily closed its branches or limited cash withdrawals following a rush by its clients last week. Sberbank Europe AG also has subsidiaries in Bosnia the Czech Republic, Hungary and Serbia.
WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden is launching a major overhaul of nursing home standards in his State of the Union speech. White House officials Monday outlined a series of measures long sought by advocates and opposed by the industry. Taken together, the measures would raise the bar on quality, increase government oversight, and continue efforts to keep COVID-19 out of nursing homes. The cornerstone of Biden’s plan is a new requirement for minimum staffing standards for nursing homes. Experts say staffing levels are a critical marker for nursing home quality, and many facilities lack sufficient numbers of nurses, nursing assistants and other workers.
NEW YORK — There’s a glaring carve-out in President Joe Biden’s sanctions against Russia, and that’s oil and natural gas, which will continue to flow freely to the rest of the world. That means that money will also keep flowing into Russia. Biden is defending the decision by saying he needs stable oil supplies so Americans feel less pain at the gasoline pump. Inflation is at a 40-year high and that’s been a political challenge for Biden. But some academics, lawmakers and analysts say the fossil fuels carve-out could defang the sanctions and embolden Russian President Vladimir Putin.
NEW YORK — Chris Licht, who has been late-night host Stephen Colbert’s top producer since 2016, was appointed the new chairman and CEO of CNN. Licht will replace Jeff Zucker, who was forced out as CNN chief earlier this month for not revealing his romantic relationship with a CNN marketing executive to his superiors. Licht has a news background, working as the top producer at “CBS This Morning” and “Morning Joe” prior to getting into late-night television. He was appointed by Discovery chief executive David Zaslav, pending the expected approval of Discovery’s takeover of CNN parent company WarnerMedia. Licht said in a statement that he’s looking forward to getting back to his journalism roots. | null | null | null | null | null |
HP revenue increases in first quarter; Zoom revenue gains 21 percent in fourth quarter
HP revenue increases in first quarter
HP increased its full-year earnings outlook on strong personal computer demand while saying it would take a hit to quarterly profit as a result of global sanctions on Russia.
The company said annual profit will be as much as $4.38 per share, an increase of 11 cents a share from the forecast issued in November. Earnings, excluding some items, will be as high as $1.08 per share in the current period ending in April, the company said Monday in a statement. The quarterly outlook includes an impact of three cents because of the global sanctions against Russia, HP’s chief executive, Enrique Lores, said in an interview.
Driving that rosy outlook is an increased demand for PCs, a market that HP now expects to be worth as much as $560 billion by 2024, as well as continued success in segments like gaming and 3D printing.
“The market is now significantly bigger than it was before the pandemic,” Lores said. “We don’t think we’ll continue to grow at the 40 percent annual growth rates that we have seen in the last two years, but the new market size is sustainable.”
Still, supply chain challenges will continue to affect HP’s printing business through the remainder of the year, he said. The company, based in Palo Alto, Calif., will work through a growing order backlog that is expected to remain elevated through 2022, Lores said.
Fiscal first-quarter revenue increased 8.8 percent to $17 billion, compared with analysts’ average estimate of $16.5 billion, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Personal systems sales, which includes PCs, jumped 15 percent to $12.2 billion. Printing revenue dipped 4 percent to $4.8 billion, in the period ended Jan. 31.
Zoom sees 21 percent revenue gain in Q4
Zoom Video Communications projected sales for the current quarter that fell short of Wall Street’s estimates, ramping up pressure on the software vendor to show it can continue to grow beyond the initial boom caused by the coronavirus pandemic. Shares declined 10 percent in extended trading.
Sales will be about $1.07 billion in the period ending in April, the company said Monday in a statement. Analysts, on average, estimated $1.1 billion, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. For the full year, Zoom anticipates revenue as high as $4.55 billion, which was also lower than Wall Street’s estimate of $4.75 billion.
Fiscal fourth-quarter revenue gained 21 percent to $1.07 billion compared with analysts’ expectations of $1.05 billion. Profit, excluding some items, was 87 cents a share.
The company, based in San Jose, has expanded its suite of products in a bid to broaden its business and ease investors’ fears. Last week, Zoom unveiled a new cloud contact center product. The company also sells an Internet-enabled replacement for landline phones and technology to help organizations improve meetings that involve remote and in-office workers. Despite the progress in expanding its product portfolio, Zoom continues to face stiff competition
Petroleos Mexicanos reports large net loss
Petroleos Mexicanos reported its largest net loss in seven quarters even as crude output increased, the latest sign the beleaguered Mexican state driller has a ways to go to stabilize its finances.
The company reported a fourth-quarter loss of 124.1 billion pesos ($6.1 billion) compared with a profit of 96.1 billion pesos a year earlier, which it said was because of global crude tax increases of 65 percent compared with late 2020. The dollar strengthening against the peso led to exchange-rage losses, Pemex added.
Fourth-quarter oil and condensate output rose to 1.751 million barrels a day in the quarter, a 4.5 percent annual rise, because of higher volumes of light crude and condensates. However, output of its heavy flagship crude Maya declined substantially.
Pemex’s financial debt fell 0.7 percent compared with a year ago to $109 billion by the end of December, thanks to federal government support, the company said in a statement Monday.
Workday on Monday reported a loss of $73.3 million in its fiscal fourth quarter. The company, based in Pleasanton, Calif., said it had a loss of 29 cents per share. Earnings, adjusted for stock option expense and nonrecurring costs, were 78 cents per share. The maker of human resources software posted revenue of $1.38 billion in the period.
Earnings: Target reports quarterly financial results before the opening of trading on Wall Street. | null | null | null | null | null |
International Atomic Energy Agency plans an emergency meeting Wednesday, as an expert notes, "We’ve never seen a full-scale war in a country that operates nuclear facilities”
An aerial view shows a New Safe Confinement structure over the old sarcophagus covering the damaged fourth reactor at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant during a tour of the Chernobyl exclusion zone in Ukraine on April 3. (Gleb Garanich/Reuters)
The International Atomic Energy Agency announced it would convene an emergency meeting Wednesday as fighting closed in on the largest of Ukraine’s functioning nuclear plants.
Six of the country’s 15 reactors have been disconnected from the electricity grid to reduce cooling needs, according to the State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine. The 15 Soviet-era reactors had provided half of the nation’s electricity in normal times.
Both sides vied for control of Ukraine’s biggest nuclear power complex Monday. Russia’s defense ministry was quoted in state-run media as saying that its forces had taken control of “the territory around” the nuclear power complex in Zaporizhiya. “The plant personnel are continuing to service the site and control the radioactive situation as usual. Background radiation levels are normal,” the defense ministry said.
However, Ukraine’s state-owned firm Energoatom said that the Russian claim was false. The International Atomic Energy Agency said that “additional information” from the operator of the reactors confirmed that Russian forces were “operational near the site but had not entered it.”
While a direct attack on Ukraine’s nuclear infrastructure seems unlikely, experts raised the alarm that an inadvertent strike by a missile or air attack could trigger a disaster.
“It is extremely important that the nuclear power plants are not put at risk in any way,” IAEA’s director general Rafael Mariano Grossi said. Without naming the catastrophic Chernobyl accident which took place four decades ago, Grossi said that “an accident involving the nuclear facilities in Ukraine could have severe consequences for public health and the environment.”
The Zaporizhia complex, 140 miles up the Dnieper River from the Black Sea, has six reactors, more than in any other location in Ukraine’s nationwide fleet. Three of those are among the reactors disconnected from the grid.
Nuclear experts also said they feared fighting might accidentally damage the pools used for cooling spent fuel, posing a greater danger than any potential threat to the well-constructed vessels designed to protect the reactors’ cores. The open pools, which resemble regular swimming pools, are inside of buildings that are not as robust as other structures.
“The largest radioactive inventories remain the spent fuel pools,” said Mycle Schneider, a Paris-based consultant and a member of the International Panel on Fissile Materials.
Operators often disconnect reactors to reduce the amount of heat they generate. Frank von Hippel, a senior research physicist and professor of international affairs emeritus at Princeton University’s program on science and global security, said that “when a reactor is operating, each ton of fuel is generating about 30 megawatts of heat.” Disconnecting it decreases the generated heat to about 300 kilowatts, lowering the required amount of cooling water by a factor of a hundred.
But disconnecting reactors from the electricity grid does not guarantee safe conditions, experts cautioned. It places reactors one step closer to needing auxiliary power, which usually comes from standby diesel generators.
“All reactors need power to stay safe. That does not stop with the disconnection from the grid,” Schneider said. “Residual heat remains enormous in the core … and needs to be evacuated.”
“We’ve never seen a full-scale war in a country that operates nuclear facilities,” he added. “You can’t just decide to shut them down.”
Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said, “it’s in no one’s interest to have any of those plants damaged, but sometimes things spiral out of control.”
Ukraine warns of 'ecological disaster' as Russia takes Chernobyl zone
Earlier, Russian forces had seized control of the decommissioned Chernobyl nuclear complex just six miles north of the capital Kyiv and 10 miles from the Belarus border.
A meltdown took place at Chernobyl’s unit four in 1986, spreading radiation across a swath of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine and ultimately leading to 28 deaths in four months and the eventual evacuation of hundreds of thousands of people from an 18-mile exclusion zone. The last of the four reactors there was shut down in 1999.
But the pools are still used to cool Chernobyl’s spent fuel rods, including 20,000 fuel assemblies that are being transferred from storage pools to more protective, double-walled dry storage canisters designed to last 100 years, according to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Lyman identified those pools as the area “that would need a relatively high degree of attention.”
Other parts of nuclear reactors can withstand substantial impacts.
The IAEA said Sunday that missiles hit the site of a radioactive waste disposal facility in Kyiv overnight, but there were no reports of damage to the building or any indications of a release of radioactive materials, Grossi said in a statement. Staff at the facility were forced to take shelter during the night.
The incident came a day after an electrical transformer at a similar facility near the northeastern city of Kharkiv had been damaged, but there were no reports of a radioactive release. “Such facilities typically hold disused radioactive sources and other low-level waste from hospitals and industry,” the IAEA said.
Nonetheless, Grossi said, “these two incidents highlight the very real risk that facilities with radioactive material will suffer damage during the conflict, with potentially severe consequences for human health and the environment.” He said “once again, I urgently and strongly appeal to all parties to refrain from any military or other action that could threaten the safety and security of these facilities.”
Before Russia’s attack, Ukraine had explored having Westinghouse build four more nuclear reactors. Westinghouse has already been providing some nuclear fuel, previously supplied by Russia.
“The lesson from this is that these facilities are different and more complex than other sources of electricity generation,” Lyman said, “and they do have additional risks.” | null | null | null | null | null |
Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered nuclear forces on alert Sunday, adding a complicated and concerning dimension to the widening conflict in Ukraine.
Experts said it was the first time the Kremlin, which has the world’s biggest nuclear stockpile, had made such an announcement since the Russian Federation was established in 1991.
U.S. officials have refused to say whether the Pentagon’s posture has changed in response to Putin’s announcement. White House press secretary Jen Psaki, speaking on MSNBC, said soon after that the United States has “the ability, of course, to defend ourselves, as does NATO” while describing Russia’s actions as an escalation to justify its actions in Ukraine.
While experts said they did not expect Putin to attempt any sort of nuclear strike on the West or a smaller-scale nuclear attack within Ukraine — where conventional Russian forces already have a major advantage — they said the fact the alert was occurring at a time when a major conflict is unfolding on NATO’s borders made it much more dangerous. Russia has nearly 6,000 warheads, slightly more than the United States’ approximately 5,400, according to the Federation of American Scientists.
“We’re in a dangerous moment. How dangerous, it’s hard to assess,” said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association.
What has changed since Putin’s order?
How does this alter the risk of violence?
Have similar orders been given in the past? | null | null | null | null | null |
This photo provided by Louisville Metro Department of Corrections shows Quintez Brown. A candidate for Louisville’s metro council, Brown stands charged with attempted murder, accused of opening fire on a mayoral candidate whose shirt was grazed by a bullet in his campaign headquarters, police said Tuesday, Feb. 15, 2022. Brown, 21, also faces four counts of wanton endangerment, Louisville police spokesman Aaron Ellis said. (Louisville Metro Department of Corrections via AP) (Uncredited/Louisville Metro Department of Corrections)
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — The man charged with shooting at a Louisville mayoral candidate will receive a mental health evaluation at a psychiatric hospital to determine if he should be admitted for treatment, according to a court order. | null | null | null | null | null |
Protester fatally shot as thousands march
Security forces killed a protester Monday as thousands of Sudanese again took to the streets of Khartoum to denounce an October military coup that plunged the country into turmoil, a medical group said.
The protester was shot in the head as security forces fired live ammunition and tear gas at people marching in Omdurman, which is the twin city of the capital, Khartoum, said the Sudan Doctors Committee.
Security forces also broke up protesters marching toward the presidential palace in Khartoum, injuring dozens, the group said.
Court says anti-gay law is unenforceable
Singapore’s highest court on Monday dismissed a challenge by three gay rights activists to a law criminalizing sex between men, ruling that because authorities do not enforce the law, it does not breach the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.
The Court of Appeal’s ruling follows emboldened efforts by activists to get rid of the colonial-era law after India scrapped similar legislation four years ago. Previous challenges in the socially conservative city-state in 2020 and 2014 also failed.
The activists who brought the latest challenge against the rarely used law, under which offenders can be jailed for up to two years, are a retired doctor, a DJ and a former director of a nonprofit group.
In a written judgment, Singapore Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon said that although the law had “long been a lightning rod for polarization,” the court did not find a breach of the constitution. The law is “unenforceable” because Singapore authorities do not plan to prosecute gay sex and thus would not deprive a person of the right to life or personal liberty under Singapore’s constitution, Menon said.
In a statement, the law firm that represented one of the activists said the ruling “may be seen as a small step in the right direction” after the court noted that the law is legally unenforceable.
Parties vow to scrap presidential system
In a ceremony in Ankara, the leaders signed a declaration confirming their resolve to introduce a “Strengthened Parliamentary System” should they unseat Erdogan in elections scheduled for June 2023.
Erdogan, who has been in office since 2003 — first as prime minister and then as president since 2014 — inaugurated a presidential system in 2018 that abolished the office of the prime minister and concentrated most powers in the hands of the president. The office of the president had been a largely ceremonial post until then.
The opposition has blamed Turkey’s woes, including an economic downturn and an erosion of rights and freedoms, on Erdogan’s system, which they say amounts to “one-man rule.”
The new system envisioned by the six opposition parties would revive the office of the prime minister and restore the president’s largely symbolic powers, party officials said. It foresees a greater separation of powers, including an increased legislative and oversight role for the parliament, and an independent judiciary.
8 dead in Australian floods: Parts of Australia's third-most-populous city, Brisbane, were underwater after heavy rain brought record flooding to some east coast areas and killed eight people. The flooding in Brisbane and its surroundings was the worst since 2011, when the city of 2.6 million people was inundated by what was called a once-in-a-century event. Emergency crews made more than 130 swift-water rescues in 24 hours, officials said.
Police clash with Palestinians in Jerusalem: Israeli police fired stun grenades, rubber bullets and wastewater canons to disperse Palestinian stone-throwers at a gate to Jerusalem's Old City. Palestinian medics said 33 Palestinians were injured, including an 11-year-old girl hit in the face by a stun grenade. Police detained 20 Palestinians and said four police officers were also hurt. The clash erupted as crowds streamed through the Damascus Gate. | null | null | null | null | null |
Two years ago, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) blocked unanimous passage of a similar measure
Rep. Bobby L. Rush (D-Ill.) speaks during a news conference about the Emmett Till Antilynching Act on Feb. 26, 2020. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)
The House is poised to approve legislation that would make lynching a federal hate crime on Monday, two years after a similar effort passed the chamber but was held up in the Senate by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).
H.R. 55, the Emmett Till Antilynching Act, was introduced by Rep. Bobby L. Rush (D-Ill.). It would amend the United States Code to designate lynching a hate crime punishable by up to 30 years in prison.
More than 4,000 people, mostly African Americans, were reported lynched in the United States from 1882 to 1968 in all but a handful of states. Ninety-nine percent of perpetrators escaped state or local punishment, according to Rush’s office.
The measure’s expected passage comes after lawmakers tried, and failed, to pass anti-lynching bills nearly 200 times. Supporters of the legislation called its passage long overdue.
“I was eight years old when my mother put the photograph of Emmett Till’s brutalized body that ran in Jet magazine on our living room coffee table, pointed to it, and said, ‘this is why I brought my boys out of Albany, Georgia,’ " Rush said in a statement last Friday. “That photograph shaped my consciousness as a Black man in America, changed the course of my life, and changed our very nation.”
Two men were charged with murdering Till but were acquitted by an all-White, all-male jury. The men later confessed to the crime. Till’s accuser, Carolyn Bryant Donham, acknowledged in 2017 that Till did not make sexual advances toward her, contradicting her earlier testimony.
In 2020, the House passed a previous version of Rush’s bill on a 410-to-4 vote. But Paul objected to the measure’s unanimous passage in the Senate, saying that he feared the bill might “conflate lesser crimes with lynching” and that it would allow enhanced penalties for altercations that resulted in only “minor bruising.”
“I have had children break down with me this week wondering if this would be a country that values their lives as much as White people’s lives,” Booker said at the time. “I had to explain to grown men this week that there is still hope in America; that we could make change in America; that we could grow and heal in America; that we could make this a more perfect union.”
In a change from the 2020 measure, the latest version of the measure includes the words “death or serious bodily injury.”
In a statement Monday, Paul said he joined with Booker and Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) to rework the legislation and supports the version that is expected to pass the House.
During Monday’s floor debate, Rep. Troy Carter (D-La.) said that lynching “isn’t just a horror of the past” and noted that the measure would “incredibly and tragically for the first time make lynching a federal hate crime in America.”
Several House Republicans voiced support for the legislation during Monday’s floor debate, with some pointing to the changes that were made after Paul’s objections.
“I am grateful that we’re going to be voting today on this version of this bill,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) said. “I think this is a much-improved version, as opposed to the one that came out of committee. And I’m grateful to all those who’ve worked hard on this to try to to make this a better bill.”
In 2005, the Senate approved a resolution apologizing for its failure to enact anti-lynching legislation. Then-Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) pointed to the horrific impact of the chamber’s decades of inaction, declaring that “there may be no other injustice in American history for which the Senate so uniquely bears responsibility.” | null | null | null | null | null |
WASHINGTON — The fencing around the U.S. Capitol is back up for the president’s State of the Union address on Tuesday. Police cars with flashing lights are stationed at major intersections and highways. The U.S. National Guard is on standby.
Since the fence first came up and went down, it’s been re-installed once, briefly, for a rally in September that was organized to support people who remained jailed in connection with the insurrection. Law enforcement officers and members of the media vastly outnumbered the protesters and only a few incidents were reported. But Manger and other law enforcement officials said they'd rather take heat for being over-prepared than relive the nightmare of being vastly outnumbered by a violent mob. | null | null | null | null | null |
Sports organizations are benching Russian teams over the invasion of Ukraine
Banners at Monday’s Italian Serie A match between Atalanta and Sampdoria call for a stop of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. (Paolo Magni/EPA-EFE)
As the invasion of Ukraine continues, sports leagues and organizations have begun to sideline Russia’s sports teams. On Monday, the International Olympic Committee recommended that international sports federations not allow Russian or Belarusian athletes and officials to participate in international competition “to protect the integrity of global sports competitions and for the safety of all the participants.”
Several leagues have adopted measures along those lines, benching Russian teams and also moving scheduled events out of the country while condemning Russia’s actions. Here’s a look at what has happened so far:
IOC, FIFA clamp down on Russian and Belarussian athletes and teams
The IOC’s executive board, in its recommendation to not allow Russian or Belarusian athletes and officials to participate, said in a statement that it was moving “to protect the integrity of global sports competitions and for the safety of all the participants.”
The IOC stopped short of an outright ban and has not suspended either country.
FIFA, soccer’s global governing body, announced Monday that it was suspending all Russian teams, both national and club squads, from international competition until further notice. In a joint statement by FIFA and UEFA, which oversees the game in Europe, the groups said they hoped “the situation in Ukraine will improve significantly and rapidly so that football can again be a vector for unity and peace amongst people.”
FIFA and UEFA suspend Russia from soccer competitions
The Russian Football Union said in a statement that it would challenge the decision “in accordance with international sports law.” The day before, FIFA had issued an initial set of penalties that banned Russia from using its flag, anthem and name at matches, a move that would have forced the team to compete as “Football Union of Russia.”
That statement also noted that no international games could be played in Russia and that Russia’s “home games” had to be played at neutral sites with no fans. Russia was scheduled to host Poland and possibly Sweden or the Czech Republic in World Cup qualifiers in March, but the other three teams said they would not play.
UEFA joined FIFA in Monday’s announcement by announcing that Russian teams were suspended from international competition, including at the Champions League and the second-tier Europa League. UEFA had followed the same protocol as FIFA with Sunday’s sanctions barring the flag, anthem and name.
Spartak Moscow, a men’s team that had advanced to the round of 16 of the Europa League, is no longer eligible. Its opponent, RB Leipzig, will advance to the quarterfinals.
Last week, UEFA moved the Champions League final, the world’s biggest club match, from St. Petersburg to suburban Paris on May 28.
The National Hockey League announced Monday that it was suspending relationships with business partners in Russia, pausing Russian language social and digital sites and not considering Russia as a location for future events.
The league expressed sympathy for the NHL’s Russian players but not for the country itself, saying, “We understand they and their families are being placed in an extremely difficult position.”
The International Ice Hockey Federation suspended all Russian and Belarusian national and club teams from IIHF competitions of all ages. They also withdrew the hosting rights of the 2023 world junior championships from Russia upon urging from the hockey federations of Switzerland, Latvia and Finland.
The decision affects participation by Russia and Belarus in six IIHF events in 2022, including the men’s and women’s world championships and the men’s and women’s under-18 championships.
The WCF’s board is beginning the process of removing Russian Curling Federation entries from the upcoming world championships.
The organization added a new rule that allows the board to “remove a team or Member Association from any WCF event if in the sole opinion of the Board their presence at the event would damage the event or put the safety of the participants or the good order of the event at risk.” Barring any objections in the coming days, the board will remove all Russian curling teams.
Cindy Boren contributed to this report. | null | null | null | null | null |
Sanctions experts and former U.S. officials said that while the signs of dissent remain tepid, they represent a more palpable fraying of relations between Putin and the ranks of elite loyalists than has been observed in years.
Roman Abramovich, a Russian billionaire considered by experts and officials to be among the most prominent sanctions targets, has yet to take a public position on the invasion but was reportedly in Belarus on Monday to take part in talks between Russian and Ukrainian representatives. Abramovich has made some moves in recent days interpreted by experts as signs of anxiety over sanctions.
Abramovich has not been hit with sanctions so far. The financial penalties on Deripaska date back to 2016, when he was accused by the Treasury Department of being linked to Russian interference in the U.S. election, an allegation he has denied. But Fridman, an Alfa Group founder who is ranked among the 10 richest Russians in the world, was sanctioned on Monday by the European Union. | null | null | null | null | null |
Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) speaks at a news conference after a Democratic policy luncheon on Capitol Hill in Washington on Feb. 8. (Andrew Harnik/AP)
The Senate on Monday blocked consideration of a bill to protect the right to abortion nationwide, an election-year measure pushed by Democrats as the Supreme Court decides the fate of the landmark decision guaranteeing access to abortion.
Republicans and Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) voted against moving ahead on the legislation. The Senate fell 14 votes short of the 60 necessary to begin debate on a vote of 46-to-48.
The Women’s Health Protection Act, which was introduced in 2013, would enshrine the right to abortion in federal law, while blocking many of the abortion restrictions that have passed in several states. The House passed the bill last September, largely along party lines.
The bill would eliminate a list of what proponents describe as “medically unnecessary” antiabortion restrictions, including mandatory waiting periods, antiabortion counseling, telemedicine bans and various regulations on the layout, structure and staffing policies at abortion clinics, which have forced many clinics to shutter.
Some Republican lawmakers who support abortion rights have called the bill “extreme,” arguing that the legislation goes “way beyond” the precedents established in Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Ahead of the vote Monday, Senators Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) proposed an amendment that would codify Roe and Casey into law, without additional conditions and language from the Women’s Health Protection Act that the two senators find problematic.
“I have long supported a woman’s right to choose, but my position is not without limits, and this partisan Women’s Health Protection Act simply goes too far,” Murkowski wrote in a statement. “It would broadly supersede state laws and infringe on Americans’ religious freedoms.”
The Women’s Health Protection Act has been reintroduced in Congress four times since 2013 — but it wasn’t until Texas implemented its restrictive abortion ban in September that the bill received a vote in either chamber. The Texas law essentially bans abortion after six weeks.
With strong support from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who decried what she called the Supreme Court’s “flagrantly unconstitutional” decision to let the Texas law stand, the bill passed in the House less than a month after the Texas ban took effect, with support from all but one Democrat.
“Across the country, it’s a dark, dark time for women’s reproductive rights,” Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Monday in remarks on the Senate floor, adding, “it looks like the Supreme Court is close to drastically restricting this right in the coming months.”
The measure, introduced by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), was co-sponsored by all but two Democratic senators, Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Robert P. Casey Jr. of Pennsylvania, who are both opposed to abortion.
“This vote will be a rallying cry in November,” said Blumenthal at a news conference before the vote. “This vote is going to awaken a lot of people, men and women, who grew up taking reproductive rights for granted.”
Casey voted to allow the start of debate on the bill, calling out Republicans for what he described as their “clear and unrelenting use of this issue as a political weapon.” He did not signal how he would vote on the measure itself if given the opportunity.
At a news conference before the vote, Republicans warned about the dangers of the measure.
“This is by far the most extreme pro-abortion bill that has ever been put in front of Congress. Ever,” said Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.).
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), a physician, claimed that he “wouldn’t be surprised” if half of medical and nursing students left the field if the bill passed.
Many of the Democratic senators considered vulnerable in November have been vocal in their support of the measure. Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire has tweeted about the bill multiple times, saying she is “proud” to co-sponsor such a “critical” piece of legislation.
Your constitutional rights shouldn’t change based on your zip code – the Women’s Health Protection Act will protect a woman’s reproductive rights regardless of where she lives. I'm proud to #ActForWomen by co-sponsoring this critical legislation.
— Sen. Maggie Hassan (@SenatorHassan) May 23, 2019
Across the country, approximately 60 percent of people think abortion should be legal in all or most cases, a number that has stayed roughly the same for three decades.
Ahead of the Supreme Court decision, expected this summer, lawmakers have been racing to pass antiabortion bills in Republican-led states across the country. At least 11 states have proposed abortion bans modeled after the Texas law that banned abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, while empowering private citizens to enforce the law through civil litigation. Others are mimicking the Mississippi law currently before the Supreme Court, which bans abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.
Democrats in Washington are energized to do all they can to protect abortion rights, said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), who has been an outspoken advocate of the Women’s Health Protection Act and shared her own abortion story in the New York Times in 2019. But if the bill fails to pass the Senate, she said, there’s not much more the federal government can do.
“I think it’s going to unfortunately rest with states and providers and communities,” said Jayapal. “I fear that without legislative action we are not going to be able to address the desperate needs of women to be able to make choices about their own bodies.”
Amy B Wang contributed to this report. | null | null | null | null | null |
Now we get to see why our parents fled from the Russians — in real time
Maryana Zhahlo, 52, reservist of the 130th battalion of the Ukrainian Territorial Defense Forces before a training exercise in Kyiv, Ukraine, on Jan. 22. (Oksana Parafeniuk for The Washington Post)
“Don’t you feel like joining the fight?” read the text from an old friend.
Like me, she’s the daughter of a Czech immigrant. I’ve heard from most of my first-generation friends this week. Because watching the Russian invasion of Ukraine feels like we’re watching our parents’ histories. And understanding them better.
“I feel this profoundly,” said the friend, a 50-year-old lawyer and vegetarian leftie who told me she imagined herself grabbing a gun and joining the Ukrainians. “It is in our roots.”
History is being repeated at a breakneck pace as Russia attempts to take Ukraine. And the Europeans like my parents who fled a Soviet invasion and the horror of that Communist regime are being deeply retraumatized.
'It was lethal': How the Prague Spring was crushed by a Soviet invasion
“I was running for my life,” said tennis legend and political dissident Martina Navratilova. “My emotional life, my spiritual life. It’s just so sad to see this again.”
Navratilova posted a tweet showing the masses of Czechs demonstrating in support of Ukrainians on Vaclavske Namesti — the place where dissident Czechs protested Soviet aggression in 1968 and Russian troops rolled in, shooting dozens of citizens.
She was 12 when this happened, a talented and determined young tennis player who watched her country close in on itself as she was headed to the world stage. She defected when she was just 18 and still chokes up when she talks about it.
“Who the hell really wants to leave their country?” she said.
It’s easy to forgot how terrifying and oppressive Communist rule was in the Eastern Bloc. Navratilova speaks often about this, but sometimes it’s hard to imagine that people like her or Czech supermodel Paulina Porizkova or Romanian gymnast Nadia Comaneci fled oppression. We imagine refugees emerging from the dust and rubble of war — hungry, bruised and bloodied.
My parents were welcomed as refugees. That was the America of 1968, not today.
“I only realized we were refugees when I saw the Syria crisis at 40 and took the moniker on,” said Tereza Nemessanyi, a tech company executive in New York and one of the first child of immigrants I related to when we met decades ago.
Her parents fled in 1967, just before the invasion. They saw trouble coming. Dad was an engineer who defected during a business trip to Greece. Mom defected while working the Czechoslovak pavilion at the World Expo in Montreal. Theirs was a bloodless escape, but traumatizing because they couldn’t return for decades. The Soviets were good at disinformation, and it wasn’t easy for the world to understand why they fled.
“It’s like all their anxieties and exaggerations have come true,” Nemessanyi said.
Because it’s easy to go back and visit these places now. Prague is beautiful and the beer is cheap! Poland has castles! Budapest has spas! In our lifetime, they’ve recovered from the Soviet chokehold and the Russians weren’t that bad, were they?
“How could you?” my mother asked, when I announced that I’d be taking Russian in college. It was a language she was forced to learn and couldn’t understand why I’d willingly study it.
I imagined I’d use it in my career. And reading Cyrillic did help when I had the chance to cover some of the war in the Balkans. But in my trips to Russia and the ironic gifts of Russian nesting dolls and military hats that I brought back to my parents, I wasn’t grasping how chilling these totems were.
“We have a tendency to try to remember the good,” Navratilova explained to me. She is active in Democratic politics and speaks passionately about the dangers of flirting with communism.
“People might say there was free health care and free education,” she said. “But the rest of it sucked.”
Karin Fuchs, a clinical psychologist in the United Kingdom has also been hearing her immigrant parents kvell at the history they see being revisited. Her father, an engineer, fled the communists, too.
“I was wrong to believe that Mother Russia has changed from the communist days,” Milan Fuchs said.
The aggression and suppression of freedom in this invasion feel the same. What’s different this time? The world’s seeing it.
In 1968, when those tanks rolled in and 137 people were killed, President Lyndon B. Johnson promised that America would look into this.
“Meanwhile, in the name of mankind’s hope for peace, I call on the Soviet Union and its associates to withdraw their troops from Czechoslovakia,” Johnson said. “I hope responsible spokesmen for governments and people throughout the world will support this appeal. It is never too late for reason to prevail.”
Vietnam had America’s attention. Few people could find Czechoslovakia on a map.
But this time, the world is watching. From demonstrations in support of Ukrainians in capitals across the globe to Virginia Senate President Louise Lucas (D) calling for a ban of Russian vodka in state liquor stores, Russian aggression isn’t being ignored.
But will it be stopped? | null | null | null | null | null |
Republicans’ criticism of Ketanji Brown Jackson is part of the reason Black women like me left the party
One of the reasons I am no longer a card-carrying Republican is because the party simply does not actively court, value or embrace smart Black women among their ranks. Yes, we can point to former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice; Kay Coles James, director of the office of personnel management under former president George W. Bush and current Virginia secretary of the commonwealth; Virginia Lt. Gov. Winsome Sears; and former Utah congresswoman Mia Love as Black female success stories in the Republican Party. And retired federal Judge Janice Rogers Brown, who was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by Bush, and who was considered a serious contender for the Supreme Court.
The problem is that after those five names, I am hard pressed to come up with any others. Trust me, I know. I spent over 20 years of my life as a Republican woman of color, and it was not a very positive experience. I have written many articles about it over the years, and I am sad to see little has changed since I first joined the GOP as a college sophomore in 1988.
The reality is that as we head into the confirmation phase of the historic Supreme Court nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, the Republican Party that will vet her in the Senate does not have one elected Black woman in the Congress. White women are represented in local, state and federal offices, but not as well as Democratic women, who make up the majority of the country’s female elected officials.
In the current Congress, women make up 38 percent of Democrats, a much bigger share than the 14 percent of women who are Republican members. Across both chambers, there are 106 Democratic women and 38 Republican women in the new Congress. Women account for 40 percent of House Democrats and 32 percent of Senate Democrats, compared with 14 percent of House Republicans and 16 percent of Senate Republicans.
Biden’s nomination of Jackson to the Supreme Court on Friday, along with his historic choice of Kamala D. Harris as his running mate in 2020, has likely solidified the Black female vote for Democrats for the next century. Maybe that’s why Republican senators, the Republican National Committee and many conservative White male pundits are carping about the unfairness of Biden’s commitment to appoint the first Black woman to the court.
But here’s something Republicans should consider: Every historic first nominated to the Supreme Court has received overwhelming bipartisan support, even when the nominee did not share the judicial philosophy or political party of the senators who voted for them. Starting in 1967 when Thurgood Marshall, who was confirmed 69 to 11 as the first Black associate justice of the court. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor was confirmed 99 to 0 when she became the first female member of the court in 1981. The Senate confirmed the first Latina, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in 2009 by a vote of 68 to 31.
These shrieks and rants of “affirmative action” about Jackson’s nomination are just raw meat for an aggrieved White base of Americans who see any racial progress as a threat to their own. Not only are Jackson’s credentials impeccable, they are in line with most other nominees: Most are Ivy League-educated, many are former law clerks and have experience on the federal bench; Jackson checks all of those boxes.
If Senate Republicans try to derail Jackson’s nomination they risk going down in history as breaking from precedent in overwhelmingly supporting historic nominees to the court and raising questions of whether their actions are racially motivated. Critics didn’t wait to find out which Black woman Biden would name; they attacked the idea that any Black woman was qualified for the job.
Take Louisiana Sen. John F. Kennedy, who suggested that Biden’s nominee would not know the difference between a J.CREW catalogue and a law book, or Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who when asked about diversity on his staff, responded, “I don’t know if any black women work for my office.” Let’s not forget Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.) who argued that Biden’s pledge to nominate a Black woman was offensive to a majority of Americans and perhaps, worst of all was Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker, who said of the potential black female nominee: “The irony is that the Supreme Court is at the very same time hearing cases about this sort of affirmative racial discrimination while adding someone who is the beneficiary of this sort of quota.” Wicker’s comments came during an interview with local radio network SuperTalk Mississippi, referring to the high court’s recent decision to reconsider challenges to race-based affirmative action in college admissions.
Sen. Susan Collins of Maine told the New York Times: “The idea that race and gender should be the No. 1 and No. 2 criteria is not as it should be.” Collins went further in this interview and said, “On the other hand, there are many qualified Black women for this post and given that Democrats, regrettably, have had some success in trying to paint Republicans as anti-Black, it may make it more difficult to reject a Black jurist.” I find her comments unfortunate, not only because she is a woman, but because just last year she voted to support Jackson’s nomination to the D.C. Circuit.
Let’s put this into context: Donald Trump was the first Republican president since Nixon not to put a Black jurist on the U.S. Court of Appeals. Trump and his Republican Senate allies placed over 200 judges on the bench in four years, including three on the Supreme Court. These judges were overwhelmingly White, male and conservative. Nine of them were rated as “unqualified” by the American Bar Association. But that did not matter to Trump and McConnell, who was Senate majority leader at that time. They forged ahead, with then-Judiciary Chairman Lindsay Graham (S.C.) leading the way.
In September 2020, I penned a piece here in The Washington Post titled, “Republicans grab a Supreme Court seat, denying Black women their turn.” It was in response to Republicans, who at the time controlled the Senate, announcing they would vote to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died less than two months before the 2020 presidential election. Trump even promised to appoint a woman and nominated U.S. Circuit Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett (not only did Republicans not complain about quotas, they highlighted her gender and touted the fact that she had seven children.) Four years earlier, McConnell had refused to consider President Barack Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, citing the Senate’s practice of not allowing a floor vote of federal judicial nominees during an election year. Had Senate Republicans honored that rule in 2020, Biden would have gotten the chance to fill the vacancy.
Biden is getting his chance now, and he is using it to make a historic choice. It’s no different than former president Ronald Reagan’s pledge that the time had come for a female jurist to take her place in history. I remember being a freshman in high school in 1981, when Reagan named O’Connor to the Court. It was exciting. Now, here I am in my 50s, and I am ecstatic that Jackson is someone who looks like me, has similar life experiences to mine and, most of all, brings a different lens by which to process the complex issues that she will be presented with on the court.
Sophia A. Nelson is a former House Republican Committee Counsel, and she is the author of the book “E Pluribus One: Reclaiming Our Founders Vision for A United America.” | null | null | null | null | null |
Opinion: Biden’s State of the Union address should build on his record
President Biden delivers remarks at the White House on Jan. 14. (Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post)
“My fellow Americans, the state of the union is … better. Much, much better.”
I doubt President Biden will use those exact words in his first State of the Union address on Tuesday night — not with inflation still in the headlines — but they encapsulate the truth. Biden has not solved all the problems of the nation or the world in his first year in the White House. But he has done a heck of a lot.
Recall where we were on the day Joe Biden took the oath of office.
The nation was gripped by the covid-19 pandemic, and there was no workable process or plan to get everyone vaccinated. The economy was in crisis; restaurants and hotels were shuttered, and airports were like ghost towns. Schools were closed. Two weeks earlier, a shocking and unprecedented violent assault on the U.S. Capitol was waged by insurrectionists bent on overturning the presidential election and keeping Biden’s predecessor in power. That defeated incumbent, bitter because the putsch had failed, lacked the respect for tradition and country to attend Biden’s inauguration.
Look where we are now.
Some 65 percent of the U.S. population is fully vaccinated, and nearly 44 percent has also had a booster shot. Covid-19 cases, hospitalizations and deaths are in free fall. During Biden’s first year, the economy added a record 6.6 million jobs and the unemployment rate fell to 4 percent. Schools are open and functioning normally. Mask mandates are being lifted. Our political discourse has returned to Democrats and Republicans shouting at each other across a yawning divide, but they are once again fighting with words, not cudgels and bear spray.
Working with a slim majority in the House and a 50-50 Senate, Biden and the congressional leadership — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) — managed to pass a $1.9 trillion covid-19 rescue package and a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill. Biden has had a record 46 federal judges confirmed. And this past week he nominated U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court — she could be the first Black female justice in our nation’s history.
By any standard, that’s pretty remarkable for a year’s work.
Perhaps just as important as the concrete achievements are the intangibles. We have moved beyond the exhausting craziness of Donald Trump’s time in office. For four long years, Americans woke every morning to a fresh barrage of insanity, inanity and insults from the president and his administration. Now, everything is so normal as to be almost boring.
White House statements are not riddled with misspellings. Media briefings are once again held daily and are informative, not argumentative. Policy positions are developed through an exhaustive process, not announced and abandoned according to whim. Nobody gets fired via angry tweet.
Yet Biden’s approval rating stands at just 40.8 percent, according to the RealClearPolitics average of polls, with disapproval at 54.6 percent. In part, that just demonstrates the absolutist nature of our partisan divide. In part, it reflects the fact that Biden and the Democrats overpromised by heavily touting the benefits of the Build Back Better spending package, which they lacked the votes to pass — and then spent more time talking about what they couldn’t do than what they’d already done.
Eugene Robinson: In year two, Biden needs to be The Boss
The biggest and most important factor, however, is likely that inflation has soared to levels not experienced in four decades. Biden has taken concrete steps to demonstrate that he sees the problem and is trying to address it — releasing oil from the strategic reserve, for example. But some of his actions are unlikely to lower prices very much and others will take time to have an impact, and the administration needs to visibly do much more.
Voters care about inflation because they see and feel it every day. They understand that it cannot be vanquished overnight. But they have little patience with politicians they perceive as indifferent to rising prices for gas, food, housing and almost everything else. In his State of the Union, Biden should offer a long list of actions he is taking to try to defeat inflation, and he should treat the subject with the urgency it deserves.
Biden took over from an administration that had bashed our NATO and European Union allies and gone out of its way to praise Russian President Vladimir Putin. Today, following Putin’s brutal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, the transatlantic alliance is stronger than it has been in decades. The United States leads a coordinated response designed to isolate Russia and devastate its corrupt Potemkin-village economy.
On foreign policy, Biden needs only to explain how Ukraine shows that “America is back” is more than a slogan. It’s the hope of the free world. | null | null | null | null | null |
Opinion: Carl Icahn picks a fight with McDonald’s over ... pigs?
Investor Carl Icahn. (Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg)
Legendary corporate raider Carl Icahn is waging yet another boardroom battle. But instead of making a multimillion-dollar investment in a company’s stock and then pushing it to increase shareholder profits, he bought a very small stake — a mere 200 shares — and is using it to pressure a fast-food giant to keep its promise to ensure that the pigs raised for its pork products are treated more humanely.
It’s hard, on one level, not to root for Icahn in this fight. McDonald’s vowed 10 years ago to require its suppliers to end the use of cramped “gestational stalls” but isn’t meeting its own deadline for action. Industrially farmed animals live terrible lives, and the matter of the pregnant pigs — who are typically housed in crates so small they cannot turn around — is particularly egregious. Words such as “cruel” and “inhumane” understate the awfulness of the practice.
More deeply, however, the imbroglio demonstrates why our treatment of business figures as founts of wisdom is so problematic. In short: The octogenarian billionaire’s indulging in a corporate food fight over … pigs? A worthy cause? Certainly. But it’s hardly the most urgent one the nation — or, for that matter, McDonald’s — faces.
Why a shareholder fight over animals and not people? If one wanted to pick a beef with McDonald’s, wouldn’t employee conditions be the most urgent target? The fast-food industry pays low wages. The hours are erratic. Positions rarely provide paid sick leave, no small matter during the covid-19 pandemic. McDonald’s tries to pass the buck by saying that individual franchise owners — not corporate offices — are responsible for working conditions, a matter that went before the National Labor Relations Board. And the NLRB is also reviewing the entire matter of joint corporate-franchisee employers.
As Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) tweeted last week: “Yes, it’s important that McDonald’s pigs be treated humanely. But maybe it’s more important that we take care of the humans who work there by paying them a living wage.”
Icahn told the Wall Street Journal that he feels “emotional” about animals in general and pigs in particular. But the plight of workers seems to be of less interest to him — in fact, the wealth-equality advocacy group Hedge Clippers once estimated that 10 of his most infamous deals, ones that earned him billions, resulted in the aggregate loss of more than 35,000 jobs.
Thus, that combination — Icahn’s hard-charging (some say bullying) reputation and his sudden outspokenness on the matter of pigs — has left Wall Street puzzled. This is a man, after all, who was one of the inspirations for “greed is good” financier Gordon Gekko in the film “Wall Street.” “It makes no sense to me,” David Maris, managing partner at Phalanx Investment Partners, told me. Maris wonders: Why doesn’t Icahn use a stake his hedge fund owns in Bausch Health, a maker of medical equipment and pharmaceuticals, to open a discussion on health-care costs?
Or how about climate change? Icahn’s hedge fund has substantial investments in oil and gas, but when he had then-President Donald Trump’s ear, he used it to attempt to roll back environmental regulations, the New Yorker reported. Icahn says he’s concerned about wealth inequality. But ProPublica has reported that he relied on legal tax-avoidance strategies to avoid paying the Internal Revenue Service a single cent on his several-hundred-million dollars in personal income for 2016 and 2017.
Moreover, McDonald’s didn’t exactly ignore its vow to improve the lives of the pigs. It maintains it is on track to obtain up to 90 percent of its pork from pigs housed in more humane conditions by 2023 and will be in full compliance by 2024.
But pigs it is, which gets to what’s so troubling about all this. This sort of crusade is exactly what we often see when powerful business executives champion a passion project. The causes chosen are often capricious — and almost never threaten their benefactor’s elevated position in our economic and societal firmament.
Consider the push for stakeholder capitalism, the idea that a publicly traded company should act in the interests of its workers, shareholders and the communities where it operates alike. It’s promoted by hedge fund manager Paul Tudor Jones, who founded a nonprofit called Just Capital to argue for it, and many CEOs have publicly committed to practicing it. But in their conception it’s all voluntary — which means, of course, they determine what the common good is and whether and how they will actually run their businesses with that in mind.
Icahn’s porcine crusade is really just a perhaps more idiosyncratic variation on the theme. A good cause? Absolutely. But also a billionaire attempting to control the public debate and set the agenda on his terms. At least in the case of Icahn’s quixotic fight, McDonald’s shareholders will get to vote yay or nay.
And maybe some pigs will benefit. He’s right about this: They deserve better. So do we all.
Carl Icahn picks a fight with McDonald’s over ... pigs? | null | null | null | null | null |
Opinion: After two pandemic years, ‘Folly chasing Death’ takes on a new Mardi Gras meaning
Folly chases Death on a Mardi Gras parade float in Mobile, Ala., in 2016. (Sharon Steinmann/AL.com)
By Audrey McDonald Atkins
Audrey McDonald Atkins is the author of “They Call Me Orange Juice: Stories and Essays.”
Eugene Walter, the bon vivant chronicler of life in Mobile, Ala., once wrote, “If, as a child, you saw, every Mardi Gras, the figure of Folly chasing Death around the broken column of life, beating him on the back with a Fool’s scepter ... wouldn’t you see the world in different terms, too?”
Folly chasing Death. I can’t think of a better way to describe much of what has happened over the past two pandemic years.
The Order of Myths, Mobile’s oldest Mardi Gras mystic society, founded in 1867, takes Folly chasing Death as its symbol. Folly is always depicted as a court jester who chases his skeletal foe, Death, around a broken column that symbolizes the fragility of life.
And after about 60 parades over several weeks of Mardi Gras celebrations, the OOM parade this week (if you want to sound like a local, pronounce it “double-oh-em”) will be, as usual, the last one, falling on Fat Tuesday. It’s the last gasp of fun before the penitential season of Lent begins.
For more than 150 years, the Carnival season has ended with Folly defeating Death by beating him with gilded pig bladders. Seriously, the Fool’s “scepter” is a broomstick from which dangle two inflated pig bladders that have been painted gold.
The scepter stayed on the shelf last year, when covid-19 canceled Mobile’s Mardi Gras season. But it was in full swing the year before — revelry in the streets even as death was creeping up on the world. Fat Tuesday that year fell on Feb. 25, when the coronavirus was still called “novel,” when the World Health Organization had not yet declared its spread a pandemic.
My husband and I traveled from our home in Birmingham to Mobile County, where I was born and grew up, to visit my parents and, of course, take in the Mardi Gras parades. The weather was gloriously sunny and nearly 70 degrees, even though it was still winter.
We had no idea that within a couple of weeks, the things we took for granted would become unthinkable: Kicking off the day in a crowded downtown restaurant with bloody marys topped with skewers of boiled shrimp, olives, and pickled okra and green beans. Strolling along with other Mardi Gras revelers among the live oaks in Bienville Square. Staking out a spot at my favorite vantage point, the corner of St. Francis and St. Joseph streets, as the crowd gathered.
Before too long, we heard the telltale sirens alerting the crowd that the parade was near. Marching bands and floats passed us, krewe members tossing MoonPies, beads, Mardi Gras doubloons and other treats to outstretched hands. My husband caught a 4-foot bright green, furry stuffed triceratops for me.
I named him Folly, and he still sits on the chair in our bedroom as a reminder of all the fun we had before the world shut down.
“Folly” is defined as a costly or foolish undertaking. I never in a million years dreamed that venturing out to the bookstore or grocery store would become an act of folly. Or that visiting with a friend from a 6-foot distance, our smiles hidden by flowery masks we coordinated with our outfits, would become a daredevil stunt. Or that searching for toilet paper and Lysol wipes would become an extreme sport. Forget about dancing around in a crowd of thousands trying to catch some plastic beads and a smushed marshmallow cookie.
For the past two years, I’ve felt like Folly, only Death was chasing me. And it wasn’t a man in a silly skeleton costume with a skull mask.
It was the woman who got too close to me in the line at the Piggly Wiggly. And the hikers who wouldn’t yield an inch on the trail. And the people who crowd together in restaurants and bars and then go out into the world recklessly spreading their mucus and droplets. And the ones who refuse to believe that there is still a pandemic and won’t get vaccinated or wear a mask, not even one with a skeleton grin.
In the past two years, we’ve had to give up so many things that we used to take for granted, such as standing on a crowded sidewalk in the sun and watching a parade. That’s why I hope the experience is all that more fun for the thousands of revelers who are enjoying the Mardi Gras parades in Mobile and New Orleans and elsewhere this year, even as the shadow of the pandemic still looms over us all.
Because this Fat Tuesday, this one day out of the whole year, is the day Death can never win. Laissez les bons temps rouler. | null | null | null | null | null |
Opinion: What Ketanji Brown Jackson’s guidance counselor missed
WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 25: Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, BidenÕs nominee to serve as Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, makes remarks to reporters at the White House in Washington, DC. (Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post)
By Michele L. Norris
When I learned that President Biden had asked Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to serve on the Supreme Court, my first instinct was to cheer this historic appointment. But what soon followed was an instinct to dream of the moment when the elevation of such a supremely talented person would be more routine than remarkable.
I hope to see a world where we can stop tossing confetti when 232-year-old institutions include women, people with brown skin, those who are differently abled, those who are LGBTQ or those who have been locked out for centuries.
I hope to see a world where braids and passion twists or kinky, curly, fuzzy, nappy, “grow as God gave me” hairstyles are as common as side-part, soft-fade, executive haircuts in CEO suites and anywhere people exert influence over life, learning, longevity and the engines of our economies.
I hope to see a world where names like Ketanji and Kamala and Kizzmekia roll off the tongue as easily as Ashok, Xiomara or Eun-Woo. A world where more National Football League coaches have names such as Kwame and Francisco. A world where college students do not feel like they must Anglicize their names so their résumés don’t go to straight to the piles labeled “not ready” or “not sure” or “not now.”
Consider this: Researchers at the University of Chicago, Harvard and MIT sent résumés to employers with similar levels of education and experience. The only difference was the name at the top. Candidates with African American or ethnic-sounding names were much less likely to get a call back. Opportunities flow more freely in some directions than in others. I want to see a world where that does not happen.
Studies have found that the most common names for CEOs in the United States over the past 20 years were Peter, Jack, Bob, Chris, Fred, Bill, Ron, Don, Bruce and Alexander. According to an analysis by LinkedIn, if you are a woman who aspires to become a CEO, your chances are improved if your name is Deborah, Pamela, Cynthia, Cheryl or Sally.
Is that a coincidence? Is it about natural selection or the subtle messages that are passed on over decades about what authority should look and sound like?
I want to live in a world where a Supreme Court nominee, or anyone else making history, will not be able to tell the story, as Jackson did, about the high school guidance counselor who urged her to lower her sights when she aspired to attend Harvard. My Post colleague Jonathan Capehart took to Twitter and asked, “Raise your hand if you had *that* guidance counselor?” The response was revealing and heartbreaking: Dozens upon dozens of lawyers, journalists, professors, CPAs, nurses and a chemical physicist all reported that they had *that* guidance counselor.
Ruth Marcus: I’ve covered the Supreme Court for years. Here’s what to know about Jackson’s nomination.
It reminded me of a book club meeting I attended before Michelle Obama published her memoir, “Becoming,” in which she recalled how her high school guidance counselor suggested that she rethink her plan to follow her older brother to college at Princeton.
This was no ordinary book club. A dozen women had a chance to read and discuss “Becoming” with the former first lady before its publication; they included TV producer Shonda Rhimes, historians Erica Armstrong Dunbar and Martha S. Jones, Andrew W. Mellon Foundation President Elizabeth Alexander, former U.S. poet laureate Natasha Trethewey, civil rights lawyer Sherrilyn Ifill, law school dean Verna Williams, and authors Tayari Jones, Jacqueline Woodson and Farah Jasmine Griffin.
When asked whether anyone in the group had a high school guidance counselor who tried to clip their wings, almost every woman present raised her hand; so did some of the younger women in attendance from Obama’s staff. We all stared at one another. We didn’t know whether to laugh or to cry.
Some of us have been in touch after hearing Jackson share her story last week from the White House lectern. A few of us had parents, including me, who took time off from work to set the counselor straight. One ran into her old guidance counselor at a train station after she had made a name for herself. That day, he told her, “I knew you’d do great things.”
Why couldn’t he have said that to her as a 17-year-old?
Thank goodness all these accomplished people soared beyond their guidance counselors’ limited visions. But I worry about all the kids who sadly succumb to low expectations or who don’t have champions to nurture their ambitions.
So, I have a slight twist on Jonathan’s query. I’d ask: “Are you now *that* guidance counselor, unable to see the potential that resides inside brown skin, or in some kid who doesn’t have the ‘right’ Zip code, name or gender?”
I want to live in a world where young people, regardless of color, or sexual orientation, or station in life, can follow their dreams without running into a counselor who will “guide” them toward a lower altitude based on nothing more than the unfortunate limits of *that* counselor’s imagination. | null | null | null | null | null |
With a “strategic stability” dialogue underway with Moscow, there had been hope for a revival of nuclear arms negotiations, including a successor INF treaty; a broader agreement on tactical or short-range nuclear weapons that have never been covered by treaty; new technologies such as hypersonic glide vehicles and Russia’s development of a nuclear-powered cruise missile. But the strategic stability talks have now been halted because of the situation in Ukraine. Mr. Putin’s aggression means that arms control negotiations won’t be relaunched anytime soon. Moreover, Alexander Lukashenko, the autocrat of Belarus and Mr. Putin’s ally, has just pushed through constitutional changes renouncing the 1990s commitment to be a non-nuclear state, thus giving Russia the possibility to bring nuclear weapons to Belarus, bordering NATO members Poland, Lithuania and Latvia.
Mr. Putin’s war also casts a cloud over arms control generally. In the end, such agreements are useful to limit dangerous weapons in a verifiable, legally binding treaty. But treaties and negotiations depend on the political willpower and trust of the parties involved, which have now all but vanished in the case of Russia. Would the U.S. Senate ratify any treaty with Mr. Putin, given what has happened in Ukraine? No.
Both Russia and the United States maintain strategic nuclear weapons on launch-ready alert, a relic of the Cold War. But the risks of accident or miscalculation are not a relic and have not gone away. Mr. Putin has committed an act of utter folly by injecting reckless nuclear weapons threats into the volatile mix he has created in Ukraine. | null | null | null | null | null |
Opinion: Americans think the state of our union is a disaster
The speaker's dais in the House of Representatives. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)
Normally in a State of the Union address, the president steps onto the rostrum of the House of Representatives, touts the administration’s achievements in the past year and lays out a plan to build on them.
That model won’t work for President Biden. Most Americans don’t think the state of our union is strong; they think Biden’s first year has been disaster. Since he took office, we have experienced the worst inflation in 40 years; the worst crime wave in many cities since the 1990s; the worst border crisis in U.S. history; the worst foreign policy debacle in recent memory, in Afghanistan. The worst global health crisis in a century is still upending our lives. And we are witnessing the worst act of unprovoked aggression in Europe since World War II.
Little wonder that a new Fox News poll shows (like many other polls have found) that Biden’s approval is underwater across the board on every major issue: covid-19 (51 percent disapprove), foreign policy (58 percent), crime (59 percent), the economy (61 percent) and immigration (62 percent). When it comes to Ukraine, 56 percent say Biden has not been tough enough on Russia, and 54 percent say they are not confident in his judgment in a crisis. A Politico-Morning Consult poll found that 50 percent say Biden is responsible for Russia’s invasion. In Economist-YouGov polling, 56 percent say Biden is a weak leader (38 percent say “very weak”). And 56 percent of respondents to NPR-PBS NewsHour-Marist say his first year has been a failure — with 36 percent calling it a “major failure.” No modern president has fallen from grace so far, so fast, so early in his tenure.
If Biden tries to convince these Americans they are wrong — and paints his first year as a series of major successes, pushing for the same partisan agenda — he will fail. And at such a time of international crisis, we cannot afford to have the president fail.
So, what should Biden do? Simple. Do what he promised, but failed, to do from Day One: Unite the country.
The war in Ukraine is an opportunity to do just that. Americans have been inspired by the courage and tenacity of the Ukrainian people, who have held off the Russian invaders. They look at the bravery of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — who turned down Biden’s offer to help him flee his country — and think: So that’s what a strong leader looks like. Biden should channel his inner Zelensky (if he has one) and use his State of the Union address to rally Americans to help Ukraine defeat Russia’s assault on its democracy.
He should use his speech to tell the stories of brave Ukrainians who have taken up arms to defend their country and seat their American family members in the first lady’s box. He should spell out a concrete plan to help them. He should make clear that, whether Kyiv stands or falls in the coming days, our country will continue to provide arms and intelligence to the forces of a Free Ukraine. He should call out Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war crimes and unroll even stronger sanctions — including on oil and natural gas. Most important, he needs to say something he has not said yet: “This aggression will not stand.” He needs to make clear that the United States will support the Ukrainian people until Russian forces are gone from their country.
He should then say that with freedom under siege abroad, we must unite at home as never before — and spell out a bipartisan agenda to achieve that. In his inaugural address, Biden promised to put his “whole soul” into uniting the country. But a majority of Americans say he is doing more to divide than unite us.
Jennifer Rubin: Quick! Rewrite the State of the Union
The fact is, Biden is going to have to pivot to bipartisanship in a few months whether he wants to or not. Come November, it is likely that Republicans will take control of at least one house of Congress, if not both. When that happens, there will be no more radical, multitrillion-dollar Democrat-only reconciliation bills. He will need Republican support to pass anything. So why not make a virtue out of necessity? If he pivots to a bipartisan agenda now, at least he can make it seem like a choice.
The worst thing that has happened to Biden’s presidency was the narrow Senate majority that came from Democrats winning Georgia’s two Senate seats. It deluded him into thinking that he could be a transformational president like Franklin D. Roosevelt. But if Americans had voted for a transformational president, they would have given him FDR-like majorities. Instead, they elected a 50-50 Senate and a razor-thin House majority. That wasn’t a mandate for socialism; it was a compromise.
In his first year, Biden failed to meet that mandate. The State of the Union is a chance — perhaps his last chance — to fix that error, which has hobbled his presidency. | null | null | null | null | null |
Biden sending delegation to Taiwan to reaffirm commitment amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
Protesters outside the office of the Moscow-Taipei Coordination Commission in Taipei, Taiwan, on Feb. 25. (Chiang Ying-Ying/AP)
President Biden is sending an unofficial delegation of former U.S. defense and national security officials to Taiwan on Monday, an effort to show that the United States’ commitment to Taiwan “remains rock solid,” according to a senior Biden administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the trip.
The visit, first reported by Reuters, comes amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which prompted Taiwan to take steps to bolster its military readiness against a possible attack from China. China claims the democratically ruled island as its own and has asserted it could one day use force to take control of Taiwan. The United States has for decades not taken a position on the status of Taiwan’s sovereignty.
The Biden administration official did not cite Ukraine specifically as the reason for the U.S. visit but noted that it followed “a long-standing bipartisan tradition” of presidential administrations sending “high-level, unofficial delegations” to Taiwan.
Traveling to Taiwan will be Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama; Meghan O’Sullivan, deputy national security adviser for Iraq and Afghanistan under Bush; Michèle Flournoy, undersecretary of defense for policy under Obama; and Mike Green and Evan Medeiros, who were both senior directors for Asia on the National Security Council.
“The selection of these five individuals sends an important signal about the bipartisan U.S. commitment to Taiwan and its democracy and demonstrates that the Biden administration’s and the United States’ commitment to Taiwan remains rock solid,” the Biden administration official said.
The U.S. delegation will meet senior Taiwanese officials at the highest levels, including Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen and Defense Minister Chiu Kuo-cheng, Reuters reported. A representative for Taiwan’s presidential office could not immediately be reached Monday afternoon.
The delegation was departing on Feb. 28, one of the most significant and sensitive dates in Taiwanese history. It is the 75th anniversary of the “2-28 incident,” which in 1947 led to the massacre of tens of thousands of people, sparked 38 years of martial law in Taiwan and paved the way for Taiwan to become a democracy decades later.
In her commemoration Monday of that dark period in Taiwan’s history, Tsai emphasized that the day was “an important reminder of the Taiwanese people’s journey to democracy, strengthening our resolve to protect our country & way of life.” Citing the anniversary, Tsai’s spokeswoman also vowed Monday that Taiwan would “never go back” to the days before it was a democracy, along with a message of solidarity to Ukraine.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has stoked fears among world leaders and some in Taiwan that something similar could happen if China chooses to attack Taiwan. About 200 people in Taipei protested Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in front of Moscow’s de facto diplomatic office in the Taiwanese capital last week. In the wake of Russia’s invasion, China’s Foreign Ministry has said that Taiwan is “not Ukraine” — but only to again claim that it was a part of China.
Tsai condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last week, and Taiwan has joined international economic sanctions against Russia. At the same time, Tsai emphasized that Taiwan’s situation was “fundamentally different” from that of Ukraine, noting geographical and other differences. Nevertheless, she said, Taiwan’s security agencies and military were “on guard around the clock” and “prepared to respond to any contingency.”
“Our military is committed to defending our homeland and continues to improve its ability to do so, and our global partners are contributing to the security of our region, giving us strong confidence in Taiwan’s security,” Tsai said in a statement.
“At the same time, we are working to strengthen our civil defense as well as our ability to counter cognitive warfare, so that we can prevent external forces and their collaborators from using the situation in Ukraine to manufacture and spread disinformation in an attempt to undermine morale among the Taiwanese people,” she added.
Annie Linskey contributed to this report. | null | null | null | null | null |
A sign showing support for Ukraine at the desk of Switzerland's delegation during an emergency session of the U.N. General Assembly in New York on Feb. 28. (Justin Lane/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)
In a sharp break with its long-standing neutrality, Switzerland on Monday announced that it would join the European Union in imposing sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine, filling a key gap in Western efforts to curb the Kremlin following widespread criticism of the Swiss government.
The Swiss had for days held off on following the E.U. and the United States, citing the nation’s long-standing role as a neutral and diplomacy-focused country.
Swiss political isolationism dates back around two centuries. The 1815 Congress of Vienna signed a declaration formally recognizing Switzerland’s neutrality, saying it was “in the true interest of the whole of Europe.” Buffered by larger, mightier powers — France to the West, Germany to the North and Italy to the South — the small Alpine nation has been entrusted with special international functions, including acting as a mediator in conflicts.
Switzerland’s government now says it will immediately implement the measures already agreed on by the E.U. last Wednesday and Friday.
“We are in an extraordinary situation where extraordinary measures could be decided,” President Ignazio Cassis told reporters Monday. He said only history would tell if Switzerland would ever do the same again. Swiss neutrality remained intact, he insisted, but “of course we stand on the side of Western values.”
Switzerland will also close its airspace to flights from Russia and planes with Russian markings, and bar five oligarchs close to Russian President Vladimir Putin from entering the country. Authorities did not provide their names.
The nation will also impose sanctions on Putin and other officials in the Russian government.
“The attack of Russia against an independent European country — Ukraine — is an attack on sovereignty, freedom, democracy, the civil population and the institutions of a free country,” Cassis said.
E.U. and domestic pressure on the Swiss government had mounted for days. On Friday, an E.U. spokesman said the bloc expects Switzerland “to follow suit in standing up for defending the principles on which our communities and countries are based.”
Switzerland is not a member of the E.U., a bloc of 27 nations. Upon the 1945 founding of the United Nations, Switzerland ruled out membership, only joining the international body with a slim margin nationwide vote over five decades later in 2002. Switzerland didn’t join NATO, founded in 1949 — and instead has become part of NATO’s Partnership for Peace program, which allows it to build an “individual relationship” with NATO. The nation managed to keep its neutrality through both world wars, propped up by a system of armed neutrality.
Switzerland has mandatory military conscription for men. The armed forces focus on “assuring domestic law and order and defending the territory of the Swiss Confederation,” according to its website.
Even Monday’s sanctions constitute “a striking movement away from their neutrality,” Neal G. Jesse, a political scientist at Bowling Green State University, who studies small, neutral nations, told The Washington Post. “Normally if there was conflict, they wouldn’t even consider it. Nobody would even ask Switzerland, ‘Do you want to take a side on this?’ — because it’s security related.”
The country’s status in the geographical center of Europe but on its political sidelines has long allowed its banks to uphold ties to entities and individuals whose businesses would probably run into obstacles elsewhere.
The sanctions aimed at punishing Russia are “clearly security related,” Jesse said.
“This is highly unusual,” he said. “This is a development that shows that Europe is headed now for a new era. If Switzerland believes that defense of Europe is something they want to be a part of, we are really seeing a new era of international relations in Europe that we haven’t seen since 1815.”
The largely neutral Sweden has also agreed to send military aid to Ukraine, including antitank weapons and body armor, Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson said Sunday. | null | null | null | null | null |
A destroyed armored vehicle sits in front of a school in Kharkiv, Ukraine, on Feb. 28. Residents said the school caught fire amid shelling as Russia's bombardment of Ukraine's second-largest city intensified. (Vitaliy Gnidyi/Reuters)
Amid what appeared to be sporadic missile strikes in Kyiv, satellite photographs showed a Russian column of troops and armored vehicles stretching for 17 miles heading southeast in the direction of the Ukraine capital. The United Nations refugee agency said that more than half a million Ukrainians, primarily women and children, had fled to neighboring countries seeking safety.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in a video posted late Monday, called the shelling of Kharkiv a “war crime” and the “deliberate destruction of people” in an areas where there are no military facilities. Calling for an international tribunal to judge Russia’s actions, he said, “No one in the world will forgive you for killing peaceful Ukrainian people.”
He said that the border talks had been “synchronized” with the “brutal” attack on Kharkiv. After the two sides departed, Kremlin aide Vladimir Medinsky, the head of the Russian delegation, said that they found “certain points where we forecast common ground” and that they expected to meet again in the coming days after consulting with their respective presidents.
Officials said the expulsions were not directly related to events in Ukraine and had been in the works for several months, but they underscored the heightened U.S.-Russia tensions. Russia’s U.N. ambassador, Vassily Nebenzia, called the expulsions a “hostile” act and a violation of Washington’s commitments as a host of the United Nations headquarters. He said Russia would respond.
Meanwhile, President Biden, asked by reporters Monday as he left a White House event whether Americans should be worried about the possibility of nuclear war, responded briskly, “No.” U.S. officials said there had been no change in the U.S. nuclear posture after a Kremlin announcement Sunday that Russian nuclear forces had been placed on alert. Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said that officials were “reviewing and analyzing” the situation but that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin “is comfortable with the strategic deterrence posture of the United States.”
At the Pentagon, Kirby said the United States has no insight about the exact intentions of the miles-long Russian military column on the move in Ukraine. “The main conclusion we can draw is that they continue to want to move on Kyiv, to take Kyiv, capture Kyiv. How they’re going to do that, whether it’s encirclement or bombardment or street-to-street” fighting, he told reporters, is still unknown. | null | null | null | null | null |
One might be tempted to forgive Greene for not realizing how embarrassed she should be to “share a room with” these speakers and pro-Putin attendees. After all, it’s usually Greene who’s the most embarrassing person to share a room with. When Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) was asked Sunday what he thought of Greene’s (and Gosar’s) participation at a white-nationalist event, he replied: “I don’t know them, but I’m reminded of that old line from the ‘Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid’ movie, where one character says: ‘Morons. I have got morons on my team.’” | null | null | null | null | null |
Opinion: Americans think the state of our union is a disaster
The speaker's dais in the House of Representatives. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)
Normally in a State of the Union address, the president steps onto the rostrum of the House of Representatives, touts the administration’s achievements in the past year and lays out a plan to build on them.
That model won’t work for President Biden. Most Americans don’t think the state of our union is strong; they think Biden’s first year has been disaster. Since he took office, we have experienced the worst inflation in 40 years; the worst crime wave in many cities since the 1990s; the worst border crisis in U.S. history; the worst foreign policy debacle in recent memory, in Afghanistan. The worst global health crisis in a century is still upending our lives. And we are witnessing the worst act of unprovoked aggression in Europe since World War II.
Little wonder that a new Fox News poll shows (like many other polls have found) that Biden’s approval is underwater across the board on every major issue: covid-19 (51 percent disapprove), foreign policy (58 percent), crime (59 percent), the economy (61 percent) and immigration (62 percent). When it comes to Ukraine, 56 percent say Biden has not been tough enough on Russia, and 54 percent say they are not confident in his judgment in a crisis. A Politico-Morning Consult poll found that 50 percent say Biden is responsible for Russia’s invasion. In Economist-YouGov polling, 56 percent say Biden is a weak leader (38 percent say “very weak”). And 56 percent of respondents to NPR-PBS NewsHour-Marist say his first year has been a failure — with 36 percent calling it a “major failure.” No modern president has fallen from grace so far, so fast, so early in his tenure.
If Biden tries to convince these Americans they are wrong — and paints his first year as a series of major successes, pushing for the same partisan agenda — he will fail. And at such a time of international crisis, we cannot afford to have the president fail.
So, what should Biden do? Simple. Do what he promised, but failed, to do from Day One: Unite the country.
Follow along with Post columnists as they watch Biden’s State of the Union address
The war in Ukraine is an opportunity to do just that. Americans have been inspired by the courage and tenacity of the Ukrainian people, who have held off the Russian invaders. They look at the bravery of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — who turned down Biden’s offer to help him flee his country — and think: So that’s what a strong leader looks like. Biden should channel his inner Zelensky (if he has one) and use his State of the Union address to rally Americans to help Ukraine defeat Russia’s assault on its democracy.
He should use his speech to tell the stories of brave Ukrainians who have taken up arms to defend their country and seat their American family members in the first lady’s box. He should spell out a concrete plan to help them. He should make clear that, whether Kyiv stands or falls in the coming days, our country will continue to provide arms and intelligence to the forces of a Free Ukraine. He should call out Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war crimes and unroll even stronger sanctions — including on oil and natural gas. Most important, he needs to say something he has not said yet: “This aggression will not stand.” He needs to make clear that the United States will support the Ukrainian people until Russian forces are gone from their country.
He should then say that with freedom under siege abroad, we must unite at home as never before — and spell out a bipartisan agenda to achieve that. In his inaugural address, Biden promised to put his “whole soul” into uniting the country. But a majority of Americans say he is doing more to divide than unite us.
Jennifer Rubin: Quick! Rewrite the State of the Union
The fact is, Biden is going to have to pivot to bipartisanship in a few months whether he wants to or not. Come November, it is likely that Republicans will take control of at least one house of Congress, if not both. When that happens, there will be no more radical, multitrillion-dollar Democrat-only reconciliation bills. He will need Republican support to pass anything. So why not make a virtue out of necessity? If he pivots to a bipartisan agenda now, at least he can make it seem like a choice.
The worst thing that has happened to Biden’s presidency was the narrow Senate majority that came from Democrats winning Georgia’s two Senate seats. It deluded him into thinking that he could be a transformational president like Franklin D. Roosevelt. But if Americans had voted for a transformational president, they would have given him FDR-like majorities. Instead, they elected a 50-50 Senate and a razor-thin House majority. That wasn’t a mandate for socialism; it was a compromise.
In his first year, Biden failed to meet that mandate. The State of the Union is a chance — perhaps his last chance — to fix that error, which has hobbled his presidency. | null | null | null | null | null |
Joshua Kiprono of Wilson High competes during the DCSAA wrestling championships Feb. 19. The Tigers have competed as a club team in recent years, but now they will be part of an official league with other D.C. public schools. (Craig Hudson for The Washington Post)
In early January, one of Kavon Hill’s teachers at Bell Multicultural High told him to start recruiting potential wrestlers.
“It’s coming back?” the freshman asked.
“Yeah, it’s coming back,” his teacher replied. Hill — the MVP of his middle school wrestling league in seventh grade — got excited and immediately started talking to people about joining the team, specifically some of his football teammates.
Thanks largely to efforts from Wrestling to Beat the Streets D.C., the sport is returning to public schools in the District after being dormant since 1990. Eight D.C. public schools — Anacostia, Ballou, Bell, Cardozo, Dunbar, H.D. Woodson, Roosevelt and Wilson — will launch an introductory season lasting from March 7 to June 7 before competing in a traditional season next winter.
“It’s going to help the sport grow,” said Helen Maroulis, an Olympic gold medalist who attended Magruder and serves as a board member of Wrestling to Beat the Streets, a program that teaches life lessons through the sport. “I wish people could see all that goes on behind the scenes. ... They really care about helping develop the child, not just in the wrestling world.”
The organization has provided wrestling mats, shoes, headgear and other equipment to the schools and is focused on developing the teens outside of the season. The organization aims to set up students with postgraduate endeavors — be it college or jobs at local businesses.
“Anything you’re doing after school could keep you out of trouble, but wrestling specifically is different,” said Jay LaValley, the program director. “It’s transformational. ... Not just stuff we do on the mat.”
Wrestling to Beat the Streets plans to spend $200,000 to get the program off the ground — roughly $25,000 for each school. It has raised nearly $120,000 through its board members, donors and grass-roots efforts and is now going more public with its campaign at wrestlingbts-dc.org.
The 86th annual National Prep School Wrestling Championships were held last weekend at Show Place Arena in Upper Marlboro. All the mats used there were purchased by Wrestling to Beat the Streets and were set to be delivered to each of the eight D.C. public schools.
After budget cuts forced wrestling out of D.C. public schools three decades ago, five middle schools adopted the sport in the 2017-18 school year. While more kids were exposed to wrestling, they had nowhere to continue competing unless they attended a private or charter school.
Wilson, in Northwest Washington, has a club wrestling team that competes in the D.C. State Athletic Association championships. Students at public high schools all over the District are eligible for its team, and Coach Archie Hogan said he has had state champions from all over the city. The wrestling program has been self-funded, though.
The Tigers don’t take a bus to meets; Hogan has to rely on the wrestlers’ parents to chaperone them. They have a potpourri of uniforms from over the years, many of which don’t match.
“For me, it’s been like ‘The Bad News Bears’ or ‘The Mighty Ducks,’ but put that in D.C.,” Hogan said.
Edwin Reilly is a senior who has been a big part of Wilson’s club team. He went from being an underclassman who didn’t work out to someone who attends every practice and is at the forefront of the program’s move to the varsity level.
“It has had a positive impact over my life,” Reilly said.
Reilly’s high school wrestling journey isn’t uncommon among the Tigers. Sophomore Maya Werbow started wrestling this year after being inspired by female wrestlers she saw on Instagram. At first she wasn’t truly committed to the sport, but she has grown to enjoy it — and is particularly excited about wrestling’s future in D.C. public schools.
“I feel like the effort that I’m putting into the sport is being considered an actual sport, and it’s not just being thrown to the side,” Werbow said. “It’ll be a big step for all of us.”
Zion Budley, an eighth-grader, has dominated at Johnson Middle School, which offers inconsistent competition levels. Budley also plays football and said he got a lot of out of the school’s wrestling conditioning program. He is looking forward to continuing both sports at Eastern High. “I really want to see more competition, more techniques,” he said.
As for Hill, the freshman at Bell, his journey in wrestling began in sixth grade. He quickly took to it and realized it was the sport for him.
When the pandemic wiped out his eighth grade season, he stepped onto the Columbia Heights Educational Campus with fears he might not wrestle again.
“I was going to try to get it back by trying to speak out to people,” Hill said. “I was kind of upset.”
Hill is ecstatic that he will get to compete again — even more so when he thinks about where he will be competing. “That’s what it’s like,” Hill said. “Putting on for your city.” | null | null | null | null | null |
Transcript: World Stage: Ukraine with Philippe Étienne, French Ambassador to the United States
MR. IGNATIUS: Welcome to Washington Post Live. I’m David Ignatius, a columnist for The Post. This afternoon, in the third of our three discussions today on the war in Ukraine, I’m joined by France’s ambassador to Washington, Ambassador Philippe Étienne. Ambassador Étienne, welcome back to Washington Post. We’re glad to have you today.
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Thank you, David. Thank you for having me again.
MR. IGNATIUS: So, Mr. Ambassador, today we have some significant diplomatic news centered around President Macron, the president of France, who spoke today with President Zelensky of Ukraine, and then with his encouragement, had a 90-minute phone conversation with President Vladimir Putin in Russia. Tell us about those conversations and about where things stand after the talks that your president had today.
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Thank you, David. I think it is important also to say that there was another coordination between the European and American and G7 leaders, because we keep this very close coordination between all of us. The purpose--and as President Zelensky is concerned, he speaks with many leaders in the world, and in particular, he has been having many conversations with our president.
The call with the Russian president was made to--again to demand a ceasefire, and but also, more precisely, also to ask for the immediate stop of attacks against civilian residential areas and against civilian infrastructure and to provide for humanitarian access. France is right now putting forward to the Security Council of the United Nations--or we'll do this very soon--a new resolution on humanitarian access. This is, unfortunately, now really one of the top priorities both inside Ukraine and of course for the refugees outside Ukraine.
MR. IGNATIUS: So, Mr. Ambassador, reading the initial accounts of the conversations between President Macron and President Putin, President Macron called for a halt on all airstrikes and attacks on civilians, as you said, preservation of civilian infrastructure, road axes south of Kyiv, and interestingly, according to the account that I have, President Putin confirmed his willingness to commit on all three requests that President Macron made to him. Is that accurate?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Yes, but we will see. Like other commitments he made, of course, we will--we will see, in the reality what happens. Indeed, you added something also very important, which is to keep up and--one of the roads, at least, of course, to Kyiv. And it's really important right now to do this. And again, he--the Russian leader will have the choice of doing it or not. But the fact that he committed himself to it in this--in the conversation, doesn't mean anywhere that he changes his general attitude. But at least this humanitarian question and the protection of civilians, we'll see what happens. We will judge on the reality, as I say, on the ground.
MR. IGNATIUS: As you say, this is a situation in which actions matter more than words. But I'm interested in whether President Putin made any commitment to President Macron to cease attacks on the civilian population in Kyiv, Kharkiv, and other cities where people have been pounded by bombardment today. Did he make any commitment to do that?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Well, it is a--it is the meaning of what the--what was discussed. And I'm not following the exactly what's happening on the ground. But I heard after a certain period where there was all these discussions happening between the two delegations that, again, there are shootings in Kharkiv, for instance, and very--and heavy weapons being used. So, we will see. But anyway, it's really important to make clear as directly as possible to him and to tell him what we know is happening, and to tell him what we want him to do.
MR. IGNATIUS: So, Mr. Ambassador, just so our viewers will understand where this diplomacy goes next, France will be introducing, if I understood you earlier, a resolution shortly at the Security Council. And can you be specific as to what the points of that resolution will be?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Yes, there are two tracks here. There was a first resolution vetoed by Russia condemning its--the invasion. And yesterday, the Security Council of the United Nations decided to send the matter to the General Assembly of the United Nations, and it will be discussed this week.
And then there is another issue, which is humanitarian access, which is a priority in such conflicts where the civilians pay such a high tribute, and there are already hundreds of civilians who have lost their lives. And we have to secure the conformity with international humanitarian law. And this is the role also of the Security Council, and this is a reason why we will introduce a second draft resolution to be hopefully voted as soon as possible.
MR. IGNATIUS: And I'm wondering, Mr. Ambassador, what comes next. Your president has had a channel of communication with President Putin, not just in this crisis, but going back several years. Was there any discussion between them of a follow-up conversation, of further discussions about some way to resolve this conflict?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Our president has shown that he is--he will not hesitate to engage, to pass the right messages, and to contribute to a solution or an improvement of the situation. But at the same time--and we have made clear that while we have these discussions, first, we do it in coordination with the president of Ukraine and also with our allies and our partners; and second, we make more and more decisions which hit and isolate Russia as long as we don’t see these requests being followed. And as you have seen, we have taken--and France being one--the presidents of the Council of the EU has had a very important role, of course, there. In one week, we have adopted three series of massive sanctions, and we are implementing them. And we are already seeing the results. So we are--we will continue to--this action. But of course, there--if there is a possibility to improve or to solve a situation, we will do it, but we will do it always in coordination with the authorities of Ukraine, and especially with the president of Ukraine, who has really an attitude which everybody admires.
MR. IGNATIUS: And before we leave the subject of today’s diplomatic conversations, I want to just to make sure in the initial conversation that President Macron had with other Western leaders, including President Biden, did he have the full support of those leaders in Europe and the United States for making this initiative?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: There is--I was not on the call--on the last call per multilateral, and it was about a lot of other issues, I am sure. But this is clearly in--done in a way where we are--because it’s a condition for our success. We are absolutely closely coordinating everything we are doing, the wants of the others. And it is the reason why it works, by the way, because on the issue of sanctions, for instance, the fact that we have been preparing them even while we were trying to preventing this war, we were preparing our sanctions. And it works, as we have seen. So, yes, there is a real--a really close coordination among the Europeans and between the Europeans and the Americans, and with the other partners and allies.
MR. IGNATIUS: So one thing that some analysts have noted is that over this first week of war, the balance has shifted more towards European action. The United States obviously is playing a leading role. But we had Germany coming out and announcing that it was halting progress on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. The European Union has been strongly committed to economic sanctions. France and other European countries worked closely on this morning's remarkable announcement on sanctions against the Russian Central Bank. But we're seeing a very strong Europe. And I wonder if it's right to say that the balance has shifted a little bit so that it's maybe a more equal distribution between Europe and America. How would you--how would you read Europe's role over the last week?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: The role of Europe and especially of the European Union is important, and the EU is stronger and has taken strong attitudes compared with previous crises in previous times. The U.S. has always been strong and a leader, but the U.S. can only benefit from having a stronger ally on the European side of the Atlantic. And this is happening now. And at least this is something we can--we can see as positive in these terrible times, because it has played a role, a decisive role in getting to a strong reaction, and which has--which binds, which has effects in Russia.
I think it is also due to the U.S. and the U.S. administration, because all of this has been closely coordinated, and we have time to prepare ourselves together. And there was on the U.S. side a real wish to have this coordination in the most effective way. So, I think it is a positive dynamic that--for the U.S. and for the European Union. And indeed, I would go that far to say that you have--you have seen a kind--a sort of transformation of the European Union with the kind of decision which had been taken, including in the--in the field of defense. So, yes, it is definitely something which is impressive. And within the EU, as you've said, Germany, but all the also other countries have moved quite decisively. And the EU as such is in this crisis a very, very important actor, which decides quickly on strong measures in close coordination with the United States.
MR. IGNATIUS: So I want to ask you in particular, Mr. Ambassador about Germany. The French-German relationship is obviously crucial for the European Union. France has had a strong military and a willingness to use that military for decades. But Germany has been much more reticent, as you know, wary of defense spending, was sharply criticized not just by former President Trump, but by other Americans for not carrying its fair share. The announcements of the last several days from Germany about the German willingness to ship lethal weapons to Ukraine and the significant increase in the German defense budget are quite extraordinary. And I’d just be interested in your assessment as France's ambassador to Washington about these changes in Germany, in terms of its military stance.
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Well, exactly because I am the French ambassador in Washington, I am not the best place to speak for another country. But actually, it happens I was ambassador in Germany also between 2014 and 2017. And I remember in November 2015--you remember, too, David--the terrorist motor--motorist terrorist attacks in the center of Paris by terrorist groups against our country. And I remember, I was there [unclear] in Berlin, and the German parliament, the German government and German parliament decided in a very short time to answer positively to our requests for help, also for military help. So, I think that we have no doubt about--and as you said, France and Germany, with their different traditions, histories are--their cooperation is--has been from the very beginning a fundamental element in the European integration. But I personally have no doubt about the fact that Germany, when we come to such a crisis, will do what's necessary.
But indeed, the decisions taken by Germany in recent days are quite impressive and are very important in this general movement. I described a European Union which is more and more able to be--to be strong, to be quick, to be a capable ally of the United States when it comes--and complementary to NATO, of course. So, you have seen also this NATO Summit, which was really important, and we took also very important decisions. The EU becomes an actor which is really up to the task.
And I would say, if you consider the whole history of the European Union, not only that France and Germany have always played a very important role together with the other countries, the other member states, but also that the EU has grown, has become stronger through crisis. And so it is also something which is not completely new because of this huge, huge crisis, this even turning point in the history of Europe, we see the EU adapting its role and stepping up.
MR. IGNATIUS: I’m interested in the reaction of public opinion in France and other European countries. France, with all of us has watched the bravery of the Ukrainian people at resisting the Russian invasion, the bravery in particular of President Zelensky. And I wonder if that is going to have any effect on French public opinion on the question of enlargement of the European Union to include the possibility of membership by Ukraine. What do you think?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: I think that there has been, across Europe, but in the world, more broadly, of course, including the United States, a very strong movement of sympathy. There is--there is a strong emotion which is felt, and it is completely understandable and positive. And I think it has also been an element for what has already been decided by the EU. For instance, the acceleration of the decision concerning SWIFT or the decision to make available defensive weapons and equipment for the Ukrainians so bravely defend their country. So yes, it gives this feeling of sympathy. I don't know how it will play out in the future on the--on the question of the enlargement of the European Union. But I'm sure there is this strong movement of sympathy and emotion in our country like in all the European countries.
MR. IGNATIUS: Ambassador, let's shift our discussion a bit to talk about Russia. It's widely said by analysts here in the United States that President Putin appears to have miscalculated--miscalculated the extent to which Ukrainians would resist the Russian invasion, miscalculated NATO's and Europe's unity with the United States in resisting aggression through sanctions and other means. Does France--do your colleagues in the Foreign Ministry share that assessment that Putin appears to have miscalculated here?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Well, it’s difficult to know exactly. But apparently, indeed, if you look at how the military operations have started with the use of only a part of this massive accumulation of military equipments accumulated on the border of Ukraine, it seems pretty clear that there was at least a hope on the Russian side that things would go differently. And you're right to say that both the resistance of the Ukrainians--which is, of course, the most important on the ground--but also the rapidity and the strength of our collective reactions to the invasion might have been something which has not completely factored in by the--by the Russian move. And it must also reinforce our determination to continue to be very, very, very firm to address this invasion.
MR. IGNATIUS: Your country has traditionally had close cultural relations with Russia, certainly in the pre-communist period. We remember seeing art exhibitions in Paris about Paris-Moscow. I'm wondering what you think the effect of this invasion and the strong opposition to it, what effect that will have on the Russian public and whether it's likely that we'll see continuing, maybe even increasing protests in Russia against this policy if Putin continues with his war?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Well, David, I thought of this myself. I lived in Russia 30 years ago, three years in Moscow, with my family. I speak Russian. We loved the Russian culture, language, literature. And I cannot imagine that the Russians themselves accept this, even if the access to the information is made more difficult for them. I'm sure that this action, these invasions, this use of such a force against the country which is also so close to Russia cannot--must raise a lot of negative reactions in Russia itself, in spite of the propaganda and everything, as I said, the control of the information and also the repression. So, it's just a guess. We have some signals, of course. We see that in Russia.
But you're right to say also that there is a sympathy in Germany, in France, in many European countries for these traditional--you know, this Russian culture--by the way, not only traditional the creation--cultural creation today, there is this norm. And it didn't prevent us to act. But we do not want to act against the Russian people. We want to act against this policy and this invasion, military invasion of another European country.
MR. IGNATIUS: Let's talk for a moment about one of the dangers that could lie ahead, and that is the threat of Russian cyberattacks, which have been experienced by the United States, by France, by many countries in Europe in the past. And there's concern that as Putin faces such opposition in Ukraine, he may turn to cyber weapons. Tell us about France’s preparation for the possibility of such cyberattacks. And do you believe that France, the United States, NATO countries in general, should regard such attacks as acts of war--they're certainly going to be damaging--under NATO's Article 5 commitment to mutual defense?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Well, probably it would depend on the--on the--on the scope and the nature of these attacks. But you're right. We are very much indeed aware of this danger. And cybersecurity in general--not only in our relations with Russia--but in general is--has been a growing concern, and a topic more and more important for our security cooperation between France and the U.S. and between Europe and the U.S. So, I guess we are better prepared. People in the business community, in the society are more aware. We try to better protect our critical infrastructures. And again, we do it in close cooperation. But we are aware of these dangers. And I think the people in charge of this are very, very vigilant.
MR. IGNATIUS: Again, to ask about one of the darker scenarios ahead, assuming that this war continues, that today's diplomacy is not successful in checking it, and we have a Russian conquest of major Ukrainian cities, occupation, there is the question of whether the United States, France, other Western countries should support this Ukrainian opposition to Russian occupation, if that's what it becomes. What is France's feeling about whether to help the Ukrainians resist, through supplies of weapons and other assistance, as they--as they fight against an occupation army?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Well, we are doing that already with the fact that, indeed, the Ukrainians hold their cities, especially the two big cities to the north, Kyiv and Kharkiv, in spite of the massive use of military force by the Russian army. They fight everywhere. And we support them, of course.
And there is another place where we support the Ukrainians, which is the refugees which--and we commend the work made by the member states of the EU who are on the front line, especially Poland, but also--as we see on the TV, but also Slovakia, Hungary and Romania, also Moldova, not an EU member state, which was on the front line. This is also where to--everybody has seen these heartbreaking pictures of mothers and children's saying goodbye to their husbands and fathers. And we welcome them, the Ukrainian refugees. and it is also a way to contribute to the Ukrainian people.
And this is something which we do at the level of the European Union. The EU has also a very strong policy here. And the French presidency organized a meeting of all the first ministers last Sunday. We are active in--on all fronts of this--of this crisis to help the Ukrainians in different way.
MR. IGNATIUS: So, we have just a minute left. Mr. Ambassador, I'm going to ask you a quick question. I can remember talking to you in recent months, in the last year when U.S.-French relations were really in a terrible situation because of French anger over the AUKUS submarine deal. What would be your quick summary of the state of U.S.-French relations today?
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Well, first, they have great--they have recovered after AUKUS because we had--the United States reached out very, very quickly, and including, and first of all, the president of the United States. And we had a very, very, very substantial dialogue, which led to the declaration adopted by President Biden and President Macron in Rome at the end of October.
And now even before the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, we had developed--we had implementing this declaration, we have advanced very much in Africa, in the Indo-Pacific, and on this--on the subject of European defense. And now we see how it is useful, especially when France is holding the presidency of the Council of the European Union, that this work has been doing--has been done. And we are--indeed, there were many conversations between the two presidents. And we are indeed seeing a very close coordination. I mentioned the preparation of the sanctions between the whole of the EU, but on all the aspects of this, of this very, very serious crisis, the dialogue, the cooperation, the exchange are permanent between our two countries.
MR. IGNATIUS: So, Ambassador Philippe Étienne, the French ambassador to Washington, thank you so much for joining us and talking about things that are happening almost as we speak. We look forward to having you back with us at Washington Post Live.
AMB. ÉTIENNE: Thank you. Thank you, David. Thank you very much.
MR. IGNATIUS: So thank you to our viewers for joining us today. We’ve had our three discussions of Ukraine. We’ll be continuing those through this week. If you want to look at the programming we’ve got ahead, go to WashingtonPostLive.com, register for the programs that interest you. Thanks for joining us today. | null | null | null | null | null |
The United States is part of a group of 30 nations that agree to defend one another in the event of an attack.
If you have been paying attention to the news lately, you probably know that Russia has invaded Ukraine, its western neighbor. Ukraine (pronounced you-CRANE) had been part of the Soviet Union since 1922 but became an independent country when the Soviet Union broke up in 1991.
Russian President Vladimir Putin (VLAD-uh-meer POO-tin) claims that Ukraine isn’t a real country and that its land and people are historically Russian. He says it should be part of Russia again. Ukraine’s pro-Western government defends its right to exist and is fighting the invasion, which is the latest in a series of assaults by Russia over the past decade. Although the invasion is in its first week, some people fear that it could become the worst conflict in Europe in more than 75 years.
NATO’s top official called Russia’s invasion a “brutal act of war” and “senseless.” Although Ukraine is not a member, NATO has sent troops and weapons to its member nations closest to Ukraine. In addition, the United States, Germany and other member countries have imposed economic restraints, called sanctions, to punish Russia.
NATO was founded in 1949 by 12 countries concerned that the Soviet Union would expand its political and economic system, called communism, beyond Eastern Europe. This was during a time called the Cold War, which ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
NATO now has 30 members. Although its membership is almost entirely European, Article 5 (the all-for-one defense pledge) has been invoked just once — after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States. NATO also supported the United States in the war in Afghanistan.
NATO’s headquarters is in Belgium. Funding for its operations comes from members based on their national incomes. The United States, one of the world’s richest economies, pays more than other NATO countries.
NATO does not have its own armed forces. Instead it has a military command structure that works with the militaries of member countries in peacekeeping operations.
Countries wanting to join NATO must meet political, economic and military goals proving that they can contribute to NATO’s security as well as benefit from it. No country that has joined NATO has ever left it. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s bid for membership is not likely to advance while the country is at war, analysts say.
Some people confuse NATO with the United Nations. Both organizations focus on peacekeeping, but the United Nations, with 193 member countries, seeks cooperation in areas such as international law, human rights, the environment and social progress. | null | null | null | null | null |
This Pizza Hut in Landover wasn’t always a Pizza Hut. Reston blogger Addison Del Mastro was determined to discover the building’s history. (Addison Del Mastro)
Our suburbs can seem indistinguishable from one another — and indistinguishable within themselves: just endless, sidewalk-less accretions of tract homes, gas stations and strip shopping centers.
But grow up in the suburbs and you come to know the architecture as a cowboy knows the landmarks along his cattle drive: the Golden Arches of McDonald’s, the fauxdobe of Taco Bell, the rising sun of Roy Rogers. When the topography looks a little off, your brain notices.
And so it was when Addison Del Mastro was caught short as he drove through Landover not long ago. There was something weird about a Pizza Hut that caught his eye.
“The building was a square and not a rectangle,” Addison said. “The roof was a little different.”
The windows were a little off, too. Most Pizza Huts have trapezoidal windows, but this one didn’t. It was clear to Addison that before it was a Pizza Hut, this little building at 6747 Annapolis Rd. was something else. But what exactly?
Addison lives in Reston, where he writes about urbanism, land use and the built environment on his Substack newsletter, the Deleted Scenes.
“But I also have this adjacent interest in architecture, commercial landscapes and retail history,” he said.
The mystery of the Landover Pizza Hut brought all of Addison’s interests together. He told the story in a Feb. 2 post titled “Didn’t Used to Be a Pizza Hut,” a nod to a blog that catalogues buildings that began life as part of the pizza chain.
“It’s kind of like a magnum opus,” he said of his essay.
It’s also an exploration of what we think we know — and in the very limits of knowing.
Addison began by going online and searching aerial images. Pictures from 1977 and 1980 showed the building. One photo was in color, revealing that the roof was then orange. It was also a different roof, a more steeply angled structure than the shingled pilgrim hat mansard of Pizza Hut.
Addison looked for information on Facebook pages devoted to local history. Many people surmised the building was once a Howard Johnson’s: orange, angled roof. Or maybe a Krispy Kreme: green, angled roof.
But those didn’t seem quite right. In 1981, according to a story in the Evening Star, there was a fire in the building, which by then had become the Studio 450 Restaurant. Before that, the story noted, it was home to Fat Albert’s Rib Shack.
Addison searched property records, but he was no closer to unearthing that initial seed.
It turned out that it was more of an egg than a seed. A Facebook acquaintance sent Addison a newspaper ad from 1971 that included that building among the locations of a new restaurant. What became a Pizza Hut — a global company with more than 18,000 locations — started life as an outlet of a restaurant chain hatched in Salisbury, Md.: English’s Chick’n Steak House.
The chain promised “authentic Eastern Shore home-style cooking,” including “Delmarvalous” fried chicken.
“It was a concept piloted by this small regional chain,” Addison said. “It basically fizzled out in the 1980s, I believe.”
English’s never garnered the fan base of other defunct chains, such as Little Tavern or Miles’-long Sandwich Shop.
“There’s nothing on the Internet that attests to the fact that it ever existed,” Addison said. “It took tracking down old newspaper clips, property records and phone books to find any evidence of it at all.”
It’s a reminder that just because some place or event isn’t online, that doesn’t mean it didn’t exist or didn’t happen. Addison said it can be unsettling to people when they realize something from their childhood left no digital trace. Not that English’s Chick’n Steak House was ever part of his childhood. He’s 28.
“I have no nostalgia for it,” Addison said. “Maybe it sounds silly, but it brings me joy to uncover stuff that means something to other people and to feel that maybe someone will look that question up one day and my essay will pop up and that will be the answer.”
Addison’s quest to uncover the story of the building has become the most-read post on his newsletter. And while it may not be in the same category as stumbling across an unknown Shakespeare play or finding a Viking runestone in a New England field, it is its own tale of discovery.
“The fact that ultimately this isn’t a momentous story makes it more meaningful to me in a way,” he said. “It’s such ordinary stuff, it feels like it should all be there, and it’s not. It’s ubiquitous and mass-produced and already skipped into the past.”
You can quote me: ‘Doesn’t anybody know how to use punctuation any more?’
In 1902, a remarkable and charitable house opened in a part of Southwest D.C. known as Bloodfield | null | null | null | null | null |
Here’s what to know about the health benefits of mushrooms.
The most familiar varieties are white button mushrooms, which have a mild flavor; crimini (a.k.a. baby bellas), with a slightly deeper, earthier flavor; and large portobellos, known for their meaty texture.
Specialty mushrooms include maitake (also called hen-of-the-woods), shiitake, enoki, morel, porcini and oyster. These can be pricier because they take longer to grow and require more maintenance.
Chaga, cordyceps, reishi and turkey tail are some of the types primarily used in powders and other supplements, although they can be found dried or fresh.
Different types of mushrooms have different amounts of nutrients, but overall, “mushrooms are wonderful sources of the minerals potassium and selenium,” says Joan Salge Blake, a nutrition professor at Boston University. “Potassium can help lower high blood pressure, while selenium is an antioxidant that protects your cells from free radicals. If free radicals accumulate faster than your body can neutralize them, their damaging effects can contribute to chronic diseases such as heart disease and age-related macular degeneration.”
Mushrooms are also the leading dietary source of ergothioneine, an antioxidant known for its role in supporting the immune system.
Certain mushrooms, particularly white, baby bellas and portobellos, can supply vitamin D. Some producers expose the fungi to ultraviolet light, which prompts them to make the vitamin, similar to the way that sunlight on skin triggers vitamin D production in the body. Look for those listing 10 mcg or more per serving — about half your daily need — on the label.
As a meat substitute
Mushrooms have a deep savory flavor called umami and a meaty texture, making them good substitutes for beef burgers. There are two ways to do this. You can grill a large portobello and put it in a bun with burger fixings, sans meat. Or you can blend chopped mushrooms with ground meat (1 cup per pound of meat). “This lets you increase the number of burgers you can make and lowers the calories and saturated fat per burger,” Blake says.
Blending mushrooms with meat is great for the planet, too, because it helps reduce the amount of animal products consumed. Overall, mushrooms are a very sustainable food. They grow with minimal water and produce a high yield on a small plot of land.
Mushrooms have been part of Eastern medicine for thousands of years. Today, people who want to use them to address health concerns typically turn to supplements.
Preliminary research suggests that some varieties may complement the treatment of certain types of cancers. But claims that mushrooms boost immunity (turkey tail), help with anxiety and mood (reishi) or improve concentration (Lion’s mane) have only lab or animal studies to support them.
If you want to try mushroom supplements, check with your doctor first, particularly if you have a medical condition. Some of them can lower blood pressure, blood sugar or interfere with medications. And as with all supplements, mushroom supplements aren’t tightly regulated, which means you can’t be sure that the product you’re buying contains what the label says it does. | null | null | null | null | null |
The history of molotov cocktails, from the Spanish Civil War to Ukraine
The fiery weapon, named after a Russian, has been the tool of rebels, agitators and underdogs for 80 years.
A protester throws a molotov cocktail during clashes with police in central Kyiv, Ukraine on Jan. 22, 2014. (Efrem Lukatsky/AP)
The young men waited in the shadows until the Russian tank had passed them on the narrow city street. Then one jumped from a doorway, climbed on the vehicle and jammed a crowbar into its tread, bringing it to a halt.
When a member of the tank crew cracked open a hatch to take a look, another man threw a flaming molotov cocktail, while the first man jerked open the hatch and dropped in a hand grenade. Other men then clambered over the tank, yanked out the Russians and shot them.
“As long as there are old bottles and gasoline supplies and rags to serve for fuses, no Russian tank will be safe in the streets,” a member of the besieged country’s defiant government declared in the New York Times. (His name was withheld for security reasons.)
Ukrainian brewery is making molotov cocktails: ‘We’ll bottle beer later’
The Russian army has “met its match in the molotov cocktail,” he proclaimed.
The city was Budapest. The year was 1956. And the Hungarian dissidents, according to accounts in the Times and The Washington Post, were fighting an invasion by Soviet Russia.
More than a half-century later, the homemade weapon they hailed is the same one being mass-produced by Ukrainian citizens today to battle the Russian invasion of their country.
The molotov cocktail — or petrol bomb, or gasoline bomb — is a simple device consisting of a glass bottle of incendiary fluid like gasoline with a cloth wick stuck in its mouth.
The wick is set afire. The bottle is thrown at a target, shattering on impact into a small lake of flaming gasoline.
In Ukraine, thousands of these makeshift hand grenades have been made, using soda, wine and beer bottles. Grated Styrofoam has been sometimes added, reportedly to make the flaming liquid sticky.
The molotov cocktail — so named by Finland during its war with Russia in 1939 and 1940 — has long been seen as the weapon of rebels, agitators and citizen soldiers.
It has been used for decades during street disturbances around in world, including in the United States, where protesters reportedly threw molotov cocktails at police during recent unrest over the killings of Black men by White police officers.
But the weapon was also featured in an official 1943 U.S. Army training film explaining how to destroy Nazi tanks, titled “Crack That Tank.”
‘It was lethal’: How the Prague Spring was crushed by a Soviet-led invasion
As a soldier in a foxhole demonstrates, a narrator (dressed as an army sergeant) explains: “Light the rag, heave the bottle so it busts on top of the tank and this is what you get.” The film shows a “cocktail” exploding on a simulated tank.
“The burning gas pours through cracks and crevices in the tank,” the narrator says. “Nine times out of 10, it’ll find oil or grease or more gas inside.”
The device was heavily used by the Finnish army during its attempt to repel the Russian invasion in 1939 and 1940, according to the late American historian William R. Trotter, who chronicled the war in his 2000 book, “Frozen Hell.”
Russia had attacked Finland because the Finns refused demands for Finnish territory that would help protect Russia from a potential attack by Adolf Hitler’s Germany, Trotter wrote. The Finns fought bravely but were eventually overwhelmed, despite the molotov cocktail.
“The Finnish version was … powerful, consisting of a blend of gasoline, kerosene, tar, and chloride of potassium, ignited not by a dishrag but by an ampul of sulfuric acid taped to the bottle’s neck,” Trotter wrote.
“If a sufficient amount of flaming gasoline got sucked into the turret, there was a good chance it would ignite one or more rounds of ready ammo, which was usually stored in a rack near the main gun’s breech,” Trotter wrote in a separate essay posted on the Internet Archive.
“When that happened, the result was gruesome,” he wrote. “It was not the Molotov cocktail itself that caused the destruction of so many tanks, but rather the secondary effects caused when its flames surged into the turret.”
The Finns supposedly named the molotov cocktail after Vyacheslav Molotov, the Russian foreign minister at the time.
Molotov had claimed that Russian planes bombing Finland were actually dropping humanitarian supplies as the Russian army was “liberating” the country, Trotter wrote in his essay.
The Finns thus called the bombs “Molotov’s Picnic Baskets,” which supposedly led them to call their gasoline bombs molotov cocktails, Trotter wrote.
The best bottles, he wrote, were found to be the one-liter vodka bottles made at the State Liquor Factory, in Rajamäki, Finland, just north of Helsinki, the capital. There, thousands of the cocktails were made.
“Working brutally long hours, 87 women and five men hand-crafted 542,194 Molotov cocktails,” Trotter wrote. “And their product is credited with destroying approximately 350 Soviet tanks and other vehicles.”
But it was the Hungarian dissidents, rebelling against the oppression of their Russian-backed government a decade and a half later, whom Trotter says used the molotov cocktail most effectively.
“It was the Molotov cocktail that enabled them to briefly seize control of central Budapest,” he wrote in his essay.
A Budapest newspaper sent the Associated Press office in Vienna teletyped messages at the height of the fighting. “Young people are making molotov cocktails and hand grenades to fight the tanks,” one said. “We are quiet, not afraid.”
Putin’s attack on Ukraine echoes Hitler’s takeover of Czechoslovakia
By the time the two-week Hungarian uprising was crushed on Nov. 11, 1956, the street fighters of Budapest had destroyed 400 Soviet tanks, Trotter wrote. Three-quarters of them had been taken out with molotov cocktails or similar devices.
The first reported use of the device by an organized armed force was in 1936 by the fascist forces of Francisco Franco during the Spanish Civil War, Trotter wrote.
Franco won the war, and remained the repressive dictator of Spain for the next 35 years. | null | null | null | null | null |
The clumsy effort to criticize Biden on Ukraine using Keystone
An oil drilling rig operated by Ukrnafta in Boryslav, in western Ukraine, in 2019. (Vincent Mundy/Bloomberg News)
In the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, there have been a number of lines of argument aimed at criticizing President Biden for purportedly making the attack possible or inevitable. There have also been arguments that Biden’s decisions made the United States’ position worse, perhaps the foremost of which centers on one of his first moves as president.
On Jan. 21, 2021, Biden canceled the Keystone XL pipeline project, an expansion of an existing conduit for tar-sands oil from Canada to the central United States. The pipeline had been a focus of activism for years, with Barack Obama first rejecting and Donald Trump later approving its construction. For a variety of reasons, which we’ll get into in a second, Biden placed the final nail, meaning that the proposal aimed at increasing the amount of product brought into the country by pipeline would not become reality.
The argument, then, goes like this: Had Biden not canceled the Keystone XL pipeline, we could have offset the oil that is imported from Russia, giving us more flexibility in imposing sanctions on that country.
This is not a strong argument.
Before I explain why, it’s important to understand how the American energy industry has changed in the past decade and where American crude oil comes from. Using data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), we can visualize the change in imported and domestically produced oil over time. Most of the crude oil we import these days already comes from Canada; very little comes from Russia.
But notice the big surge in domestic production. That’s largely a function of improvement in hydraulic fracturing — fracking — that allowed oil to be better extracted from shale formations. It led to a surge in new production in places such as Texas, Oklahoma, Montana and North Dakota. And it reduced the need for imported crude oil.
The United States was exporting almost no crude oil about two decades ago. Now, thanks in part to that increase in production, we export one barrel for every two we import.
While we tend to think of oil in terms of big barrels of black sludge, the actual trade of oil and petroleum products is much more diverse than that. The EIA tracks crude production and trade as only part of the broader industry that includes refined products (such as gasoline) and other types of hydrocarbon liquids. If we include all of those products, Russia makes up a bit more of the mix — but still not much. It has increased since 2019.
That background is important for a few reasons.
First, the Keystone XL pipeline was first proposed in 2008, before the big surge in domestic production. It was meant to expand the flow from Alberta to Steele City, Neb., but the full route from Alberta to the Gulf Coast has been completed. The issue was not whether oil from Alberta should come into the United States at all but how much. Even without XL, some of what isn’t transported by the existing pipeline is shipped by rail — undercutting the argument from Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Tex.) about what’s being excluded from the marketplace.
Second, imports of crude oil from Canada have doubled since the beginning of 2008 — even without the expanded pipeline. Imports of crude oil and other products have increased by 80 percent.
Third, not all of the oil flowing into the United States was going to be refined and sold here. Much of the oil from Alberta was intended to go to the Gulf Coast, where there’s a lot of refining capacity. But part of the plan was also to then ship refined oil out of the country through the Gulf of Mexico. (About two-thirds of refined products on the Gulf Coast are exported.) In 2017, the Trump State Department stated that approving Keystone XL would have only a “minimal” effect on the price of refined petroleum products — meaning primarily gasoline — since gas prices are largely driven by “global market factors.”
Fourth, what is extracted in Alberta is tar-sands oil, a particularly heavy oil product. That is not what’s being imported from Russia, so it’s not a one-to-one replacement.
Fifth, there are significant environmental concerns about that particular type of oil. Environmentalists opposed the expansion because tar-sands oil is more carbon-intensive to refine and because it meant building new infrastructure that would facilitate the eventual combustion of the oil. Obama’s initial rejection of the pipeline centered on environmental concerns. When Trump approved it, his plan was quickly halted by the courts, which criticized the administration for ignoring the effects on climate change. It’s not simply a question of “build and get more oil”; it’s also a question of “build and get more oil and exacerbate global warming.”
That’s the false choice presented by Crenshaw and others. Instead of replacing the energy-generating capacity that is provided by Russian oil (not all of which goes to energy production, of course), why not replace the equivalent amount with non-fossil-fuel-based sources, instead of just Canadian oil? At his State of the Union address on Tuesday, Biden is expected to advocate once again for reducing U.S. emissions, a plan that could reduce the use of oil for electricity generation or for vehicles. Eliminating reliance on Russian oil would be good, but doing so by relying on oil from some other country is not the best path forward.
An interesting side note to all of this is that Ukraine’s allies, including the United States, decided against imposing sanctions on Russia’s oil industry anyway, worried about the sorts of global market factors that could cause gas prices to spike. There have not been many calls from Biden’s opponents to trigger gas-price increases as a way of inflicting more pain on Russia, largely because the point of the Keystone XL comparison isn’t to hurt Russia in the first place.
The point is to hurt Biden. | null | null | null | null | null |
Rep. Fred Keller (R-Pa.) arrives for a hearing on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2021. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
Rep. Fred Keller (R-Pa.) said Monday he won’t seek reelection to a second full term in the House, citing a newly drawn congressional map that would have pitted him against a fellow Republican lawmaker.
Pennsylvania is losing one congressional district in the once-a-decade redistricting process. In a statement last week after the new district maps were finalized, Keller had said he planned to run against Rep. Dan Meuser (R-Pa.) in the 9th District in the east-central part of the state, vowing to "ensure that the voters, not partisan judges, pick their representative in Washington.”
On Monday, however, Keller said “this election is bigger than any one person" and announced a change in plans. | null | null | null | null | null |
One of Russia’s greatest strategic weaknesses has recently turned into an advantage. Climate change may tilt the balance further in Moscow’s favor.
Farm production — traditionally an area in which Russia has underperformed due to the low quality of its frigid, drought-prone agricultural land — has boomed over the past decade. That’s important, because food exports have long been a crucial contributor to security and diplomacy, and one in which the amply fed U.S. and European Union have an inbuilt advantage. Even if President Vladimir Putin is found to have overplayed a weak hand in his invasion of Ukraine, food is one area where Russia’s sway is set to increase rather than deteriorate in the coming decades.
The Soviet Union rose and fell because of grain. The collapse in farm production during World War One, as conscription turned more than 10 million peasants from food producers into consumers, led to years of food riots culminating in the revolutions of 1917.
Collectivization and the brutal famine that killed around 4 million Ukrainians in the the 1930s saw agricultural output stagnate, to the point where, by the 1970s, the U.S.S.R. was importing an unprecedented amount of grain. Moscow’s inability to pay for its cereal purchases when the mid-1980s oil price collapse reduced the value of its petroleum exports was a major factor in the fall of Soviet communism, amid rationing and renewed fears of starvation.
That situation has dramatically reversed in recent years. Since the 2014 invasion of Crimea, Russia has turned itself from one of the world’s major food importers to an exporter on a grand scale. Shipments of wheat overtook those from the European Union, U.S. and Canada in 2017 to return the country to its Tsarist-era status as the world’s biggest exporter of that grain(1). Chicago wheat futures on Friday hit their highest levels since 2008.
Meat imports, which overtook those of grain in the post-Soviet era as the biggest food drain on the current account, have withered away almost to nothing. Sales of seafood from the warming seas of the north Pacific to the increasingly affluent markets of South Korea and China have surged. Even dairy products — one area in which Russia is still in a deficit — are less of an issue than they may appear, since the imbalance is overwhelmingly with Moscow’s close ally in Belarus. The country is fully self-sufficient in basic foodstuffs, Putin declared triumphantly in 2020, before announcing caps on the price of products such as sugar and oil as costs surged later in the year.
The main cause of the higher output has been increasing fertilizer use and professionalization, especially in the southern agricultural belt sandwiched between Ukraine and Kazakhstan. That’s been driven by a conscious effort throughout the Putin era to reduce import dependency, with targets set and then tightened in updates to the country’s Food Security Doctrine in 2010 and 2020. A counter-embargo in 2014, in which the country swore off imports from Western countries in response to sanctions taken out following the annexation of Crimea, accentuated the trend.
This process is only going to accelerate as the planet warms. The latest report published Monday from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change portrays a world in which plant and animal species are already fleeing increasingly torrid and turbulent tropical latitudes and shifting further north.
Even if warming is kept below 1.6 degrees Celsius by 2100, 8% of today’s farmland will be unsuitable for agriculture by the end of the century, according to the report. Ocean life is migrating toward the poles at a speed of 59 kilometers (36 miles) every decade, putting more of the rich fisheries of the Pacific into Russian waters. With climate change already slowing the growth in farm yields that have kept the world fed for the past century, much of the global population will be at increased risk of starvation, according to the IPCC. Russia will be well-placed to reap the strategic benefits of that more chaotic future, as the same factors open up new areas in the north with longer growing seasons and warmer conditions.
That’s a perverse reward for a country that has contributed amply to the warming climate through its role as the world’s biggest fossil fuel exporter — but it’s one that rival powers will have to reckon with.
In the 20th century, fossil fuels replaced food as one of the key ways for nations to throw their weight around in world affairs. The crisis in Ukraine may see that long tide start to ebb. If Europe was looking for additional reasons to switch to renewable power that can’t be cut off at the border, Russia’s behavior over its gas exports in recent months provides the perfect excuse. That won’t be the end of this story, however. Humanity’s oldest energy dilemma — how to source the grains, vegetables and meat that fuel our living bodies — will be with us for many years yet.
(1) The Tsarist-era figures also included substantial exports from Ukraine, which has been a major grain exporter since the era of classical Greece. | null | null | null | null | null |
Cuomo airs TV ad claiming ‘political attacks won’
Cuomo launches TV ad in bid to clear name
An unrepentant Andrew M. Cuomo (D) launched a television advertisement aimed at clearing his name on Monday, more than six months after a torrent of sexual harassment allegations drove the New York governor out of office.
Cuomo, a three-term governor, has mostly kept a low profile since resigning, but he has begun to poke his head out recently. He told Bloomberg News in an interview in February that he had been “vindicated” by the decisions of the prosecutors.
In August, state Attorney General Letitia James (D) released a bombshell report that found Cuomo had sexually harassed at least 11 women. The probe was met with swift outrage, and Cuomo quit after its release rather than face possible impeachment.
A November state Assembly report bolstered the findings of James’s office, saying that the evidence of Cuomo’s sexual misconduct was “overwhelming.”
But Cuomo has stridently denied the claims against him. His surrogates have painted James’s report as a partisan hatchet job.
Feinstein's husband dies after cancer fight
Richard Blum, husband of Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), died Sunday after a long battle with cancer. He was 86.
She said her husband, a wealthy San Francisco investor, “left things better than he found them” and was devoted to his family. She described his work for the people of the Himalayas and noted he was a longtime friend of the Dalai Lama’s.
In a White House statement, President Biden called Blum “a successful businessman and proud son of California who dedicated much of his public life to fighting poverty around the globe.”
Feinstein, 88, has missed votes in recent weeks as her husband’s health declined; Democrats hold a fragile 50-50 majority. Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) is also absent after suffering a stroke in January. He is expected to return in the coming weeks, ahead of an expected vote in April on Biden’s Supreme Court nominee, Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Several of Feinstein’s colleagues paid tribute to Blum on the Senate floor Monday afternoon. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said it was always a pleasure when the two families would “break bread” together.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat who represents San Francisco, said Blum was a “dear friend, a devoted philanthropist and a proud San Franciscan” who was a donor to arts and anti-hunger programs in the city.
Blum was the chairman of Blum Capital Partners, an equity investment management firm. He was also the former chairman of the University of California Board of Regents and a former chairman of the advisory board for the Haas School of Business at the University of California at Berkeley.
He served on then-President Barack Obama’s Global Development Council.
Senate passes bill to end gun licensing
Democrats said the measure would fuel gun deaths and proposed an amendment that would expand background checks, but the GOP-controlled Senate defeated it. Senate Bill 319 passed 34 to 22 along party lines and now goes to the state House.
Facing a primary challenge from Republicans including former U.S. senator David Perdue, Gov. Brian Kemp has backed the revocation. He says Georgia residents should have their constitutional rights protected and be able to protect themselves and their families amid a spike in violent crime.
To obtain a weapons license, state residents must submit an application and fee and undergo fingerprinting in addition to a background check.
People convicted of felonies and people who have been hospitalized for mental health problems or received treatment for drugs or alcohol in the years preceding the application are not eligible.
Also Monday, a House Public Safety and Homeland Security subcommittee passed House Bill 1358, its version of the Senate bill, with little debate.
The subcommittee also passed House Bill 1378, which would remove Georgia’s legal prohibition against carrying guns in churches.
Man saved after clinging to ice chunk in Alaska's Cook Inlet: An Alaska man walking on a shoreline wound up clinging to a chunk of ice for more than 30 minutes in frigid water when the shoreline ice broke loose and carried him out into Cook Inlet. Jamie Snedden, 45, of Homer was rescued Saturday near the community of Anchor Point on the Kenai Peninsula. He was taken to a hospital, where he was treated for hypothermia. He was expected to fully recover, Alaska wildlife troopers said. Snedden was swept about 300 yards out into the inlet, near the mouth of the Anchor River. He was not wearing any type of personal flotation device. | null | null | null | null | null |
FILE - In this photo provided by the U.S. Army Women’s Museum, members of the 6888th battalion stand in formation in Birmingham, England, in 1945. On Monday, Feb. 28, 2022, the House voted to award the only all-female, Black unit to serve in Europe during World War II with the Congressional Gold Medal. (U.S. Army Women’s Museum via AP, File) (U.S. Army Photo courtesy of the U.S. Army Women’s Museum via AP/U.S. Army Women’s Museum) | null | null | null | null | null |
WCAC championship: Cadets 68, Mustangs 50
Olivia Baptiste of St. John's celebrates a three-pointer during Monday's win. (Craig Hudson for The Washington Post)
Around 8 p.m. Monday, the St. John’s girls’ basketball team found itself in a position both familiar and not. The Cadets were crowded around midcourt at Robinson High in Fairfax County, the Washington Catholic Athletic Conference tournament trophy in the center of their joyous huddle.
They had just upset top-seeded Bishop McNamara, 68-50, to reach a height that has been the calling card of this program but was the dream of its current roster. Despite the school’s storied past, not a single player on this team had played in the WCAC championship game before Monday. At the end, they hoisted their hardware high as the surprise stars of the evening.
“We knew it would take every single day of this season to become prepared enough to win this game,” a soaked Jonathan Scribner, the Cadets’ coach, said outside the celebratory locker room. “We couldn’t have done this without everything we’ve been through.”
Monday brought the 10th conference title game appearance in the past 12 years for St. John’s, but the road to this one was bumpier than usual for the proud Northwest Washington program. After losing two-time All-Met Player of the Year Azzi Fudd to graduation (and the University of Connecticut), a young Cadets team was saddled with the same sky-high expectations that Fudd’s golden years had produced. Two early nonconference losses, which arrived just before a weeks-long pandemic-related pause, seemed to lower that bar and shift the team out of the spotlight.
But the Cadets (19-4) took care of business in the new year. Amid health issues, injuries and personal absences, the program didn’t have its full roster until late January. The Cadets entered the conference tournament with plenty of talent and a new addition that may not have been present for previous championship runs: a chip on their shoulder.
“We knew what we were walking into. We knew we weren’t the top team, and we wanted what McNamara had,” sophomore guard Kyndal Walker said. “But it’s always fun to be the underdog.”
From the start of Monday’s game, the Cadets showed no fear of the defending champion Mustangs. No. 3 McNamara (20-5) had given them every reason to, going undefeated during the conference’s arduous regular season calendar. But the No. 4 Cadets opened the game shooting at the basket directly in front of McNamara’s wall of eager, black-clad supporters, and they seemed excited by the chance to silence the crowd. They stayed tight on defense and played loose on the other end, building a 10-point lead by halftime.
High school basketball notebook: Hebrew Academy, Sandy Spring win PVAC titles
Walker was one of several young Cadets to play well beyond their years: She finished with 21 points, nine rebounds, seven assists and two steals. As the Cadets stifled the Mustangs on one end, they were content to let Walker go to work on the other.
“A game for the ages,” Scribner said. “Pretty much for a whole half, we just handed her the ball and said you’re going to have to help us win this game.”
Junior forward Delaney Thomas added 13 points, senior Olivia Baptiste had 12, and sophomore Carolae Barton finished with 11. McNamara led for just 12 seconds.
“We’ve been preparing for this game for most of the season,” Thomas said. “Some people may not think we have, but we’ve been waiting, been building. Getting ready.” | null | null | null | null | null |
Cartoonist Robb Armstrong, who shares his surname with “Peanuts” character Franklin Armstrong, is eager to see the art that will emerge from the Armstrong Project, which will provide $200,000 in endowments to two HBCUs. (Tito Gibbs)
Robb Armstrong remembers the thrill of first seeing a character who looked like him within the mostly-White world of “Peanuts.”
Armstrong was 6 years old when Charles M. “Sparky” Schulz introduced a Black playmate named Franklin in the summer of 1968. That change, rolled out despite concerns from the syndication service, represented something profound to a West Philadelphia child who had a precocious gift with a pen. Says Armstrong, who would grow up to create the popular syndicated strip “JumpStart”: “It was a prominent beam of possibility.”
Armstrong didn’t know then that a schoolteacher’s recent letters to Schulz advocating for more diversity had led to the creation of Franklin. And he couldn’t have guessed that about a quarter-century later, Schulz would ask for his permission to give the character the full name of Franklin Armstrong — as an artistic salute to his colleague who was a creator for the same syndicate.
“I’m hopeful that the awareness and action we are creating through the Armstrong Project will grow into extraordinary expressions of creativity and accomplishment, as these students launch lifelong careers in the arts,” says Jean Schulz, widow of the cartoonist and president of the board of directors at the Charles M. Schulz Museum. “I’m personally so excited to see what they will achieve.”
The endowments also come at a time when Black creators are underrepresented in comics syndication. In 2020, Steenz (“Heart of the City”) and Bianca Xunise (“Six Chix”) became two of the few African American women ever to appear on mainstream comics pages.
Newspaper comics hardly ever feature black women as artists. But two new voices have arrived.
Armstrong, though, doesn’t focus on such “dismal statistics.” Instead, he places his hope in students’ aspirations. “I don’t want things to change — I want kids to change in favor of the things they want to do,” says Armstrong, noting: “Things are best when young people don’t feel deterred.”
Yet when Armstrong was 17, the connections in that setting led to a three-week internship with local artist Signe Wilkinson, who would later become the first woman to win the Pulitzer Prize for editorial cartooning. From that experience, he learned firsthand how to be a “working pragmatic” cartoonist, hitting the bricks to make your art sales and refusing to take rejections to heart. Soon after, the teen cartoonist was drawing editorial artwork for the Philadelphia Tribune.
Armstrong’s art garnered further support in the ’80s while he attended Syracuse University, as his campus newspaper comic grew in popularity. Several years later, he signed with United Feature Syndicate — which also distributed “Peanuts” — and launched “JumpStart,” which centers on a Black family with four children. At the time, few Black families appeared on the comics page.
Armstrong was in his mid-20s when he met Schulz, whose advice and acceptance had a major impact on the younger cartoonist. Now, a veteran cartoonist himself — he turns 60 this week — he wants his connection to the Franklin Armstrong character, as well as his position on the Schulz Museum board, to make a difference. “Once you know the story about Schulz and I, it’s more than interesting — it’s deeply meaningful,” he says. “But I have to do something with it.”
“I want kids to feel that they have a road map provided to them,” notes Armstrong, who says he’s eager to visit both campuses and say in person to the students: “I’m looking for an intern — I need to see your work. I want to see what you’ve got!”
The Armstrong Project brings the educational origin of the Franklin character full circle. Harriet Glickman was a retired schoolteacher in Burbank in 1968 when, in response to the assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., she wrote to cartoonists to propose introducing Black characters. She had seen firsthand the power of comics among young readers, and she viewed the comics page as a positive forum amid the era’s sociopolitical turbulence. After some correspondence, Schulz decided to introduce Franklin.
Before he did, though, his syndicate said: “ ‘Are you sure you want to do this?’ ” Glickman, who died two years ago, told The Post in 2017. “If you know Sparky, you know what his response was. He said: ‘Either you run it the way I drew it, or I quit.’ ”
Glickman also recounted: “Schulz received some messages from the South from [editors], saying: ‘Please don’t send us any more strips with Black children in the classroom with White children. We’re going through forced integration in our schools and don’t want to see any more of these strips.’ ”
Franklin continued to appear in the classroom in the ’60s, paving the way for Franklin Armstrong to help endow classrooms in 2022 and beyond. | null | null | null | null | null |
This photo provided by the North Korean government shows North Korean leader Kim Jong Un speaks in a meeting of ruling Workers’ Party of Korea in Pyongyang, North Korea on Feb. 26, 2022. North Korea launched a ballistic missile into the sea on Sunday, Feb. 27, its neighbors said, in a resumption of weapons tests that came as the United States and its allies are focused on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Independent journalists were not given access to cover the event depicted in this image distributed by the North Korean government. The content of this image is as provided and cannot be independently verified. Korean language watermark on image as provided by source reads: “KCNA” which is the abbreviation for Korean Central News Agency. (Korean Central News Agency/Korea News Service via AP) (Uncredited/KCNA via KNS) | null | null | null | null | null |
Nash, who held his news conference before he was ruled out, said he doesn't think Simmons will practice this week after being bothered by back pain. He hasn’t been cleared for any high-intensity work, making it unlikely the former 76ers star will be ready when the Nets visit Philadelphia on March 10. | null | null | null | null | null |
CLEVELAND — Karl-Anthony Towns wasn’t shooting for a trophy or title. This time, his clutch 3-pointer saved the Timberwolves.
Cavaliers: Committed 22 turnovers. ... Didn’t get a rebound for the first 9:50 of the second quarter. ... Allen has a career-high 31 double-doubles, tying him for the third most in the East with Philadelphia’s James Harden. ... Love holds the Timberwolves record with 190 3-pointers in a season, set eight years ago. He spent his first six seasons with Minnesota. | null | null | null | null | null |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.