On Monday night, President Donald Trump unveiled his new strategy for American involvement in Afghanistan – a country that has been the stage for a seemingly unwinnable war for 16 years. There was not much in terms of specifics, though Trump did reveal that more US troops would be deployed and the military would have more freedom to fight America’s opponents as it sees fit. He also singled out Pakistan as part of the problem – implying that unless the Pakistanis stopped providing safety for terrorists, they might lose financial aid from the United States. Perhaps the most significant revelation was Trump’s desire to find a political solution to end the war – one that includes bringing the Taliban to the negotiating table. Can Trump’s plan actually work?Tillerson: ‘Peace talks’ part of strategyNew troops to land in ‘days’Five key pillars of Trump’s planTrump calls out Pakistan, IndiaAmerica’s longest war READ Trump’s full speech Can Trump’s plan actually work?Tillerson: ‘Peace talks’ part of strategyNew troops to land in ‘days’Five key pillars of Trump’s planTrump calls out Pakistan, IndiaAmerica’s longest war READ Trump’s full speech The new plan for American engagement in Afghanistan that Trump announced is – until he puts more meat on the bones – the same old plan, only with less accountability to Washington. Yes, Trump more publicly called out Pakistan as being part of the problem. But he failed to lay out any serious detail, making it hard to see exactly now this plan differs from existing US policy and how it will succeed where the old one failed. On the other hand, the lack of clarity may keep the enemy guessing: no drawdown dates, no troop numbers, only the threat that the enemy cannot win on the battlefield. Trump said: “Someday after an effective military effort, perhaps it will be possible to have a political settlement that includes elements of the Taliban in Afghanistan.” A political solution to the fight with the Taliban is the only realistic way for US forces to leave Afghanistan and not give a free hand to al Qaeda and ISIS. In acknowledging this, it is clear that Trump is now listening to the advice of his generals. Related article Afghanistan: 16 years, thousands dead and no clear end in sight If you listened carefully, you’ll have noticed that Trump differentiated between his enemies. This is key to leaving the door open for a political deal with the Taliban. He said that his objectives are to “obliterate ISIS,” “crush al Qaeda” and “prevent the Taliban from taking over Afghanistan.” The Taliban have responded by seemingly leaving the door open for talks. They couched their threat to keep fighting the United States by saying, “If the US keeps following a war strategy, we will keep fighting them.” That careful use of the word “if” may come to be incredibly important. Pakistan fears that India would like Afghanistan to become a client state on the Pakistani border. Pakistan has long supported the Afghan Taliban to prevent this from happening and as a result has a controlling influence in the Afghan government. Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, the Taliban have complained that Pakistan has prevented their efforts at negotiating peace on their own terms. Trump’s demand that Pakistan stop offering a haven to criminals, terrorists and other groups is not new. Related video Trump: US in Afghanistan to kill terrorists But when the United States has previously blamed Pakistan for supporting the Taliban – and in particular the Haqqani network – it has not worked out so well: Vital US troop resupply routes that run through Pakistan have been shut down, local tribes have protested and the government has closed the border. In such situations, the United States has turned to Russia for help. Russia has allowed resupply trains to run across its territory to Afghanistan. But the Russia route is not ideal because it takes much longer – supplies can take more than a month to arrive, as opposed to days from Pakistani ports. And the political situation today means that Russia is far less likely to allow United States the luxury of a backup path for supplies, should Pakistan close its borders again. Success for the United States in Afghanistan would be a negotiated political solution that sees the Taliban as a political entity in the Afghan government. It is something the Taliban have demanded in the past. The group is seeking ministerial places as well as senior positions in the army. The Taliban are a national force that has a nationalist agenda, unlike al Qaeda and ISIS, which both have international ambitions. Recognizing that – as Trump appears to have – is key. Certainly, it wouldn’t  guarantee success, but it would help create conditions where success may be possible. Related video Haley: Trump listened to his generals It would certainly require more diplomatic heavy lifting than the United States has managed in the past. The Taliban have a vested interest in seeing ISIS defeated and al Qaeda diminished – both are threats. Both groups share a broadly common conservative Islamic philosophy and, to a significant degree, their fighters in Afghanistan and Pakistan are drawn from the same Pashtun ethnic group, with similarly strong cultural beliefs. This makes it even more important for the Taliban to gain recognition as a political force to represent their community and shut down sympathy for ISIS and al Qaeda. And that’s the Taliban’s value to the Afghan government and to Trump: to co-opt them into denying territory to terrorists. Trust between all parties is central to this plan working. Pakistan will have to feel that it can trust the United States to act in Pakistan’s interest as well as its own – something that will be complicated because of Trump’s huge appeal in India. First, the United States cannot afford to make any mistakes – by this we mean civilian casualties that further damage its reputation. Second, it needs to practice quiet diplomacy and try to build a working relationship with the Taliban – which has suffered the most from American intervention. Related article In Afghanistan course correction, Trump learns winning is not so easy India has to hold its venom on Pakistan, which it came close to doing in its statement Tuesday responding to Trump’s address. And the Afghan government needs to win the confidence of its own people through curbing corruption and cronyism. This is the only way it can build an army that thinks it has a country worth fighting for. The fate of Afghanistan has always been in the hands of the generals who are invading it. Trump’s announcement Monday night has done nothing to change this.

Trump's new strategy for American involvement in Afghanistan


Here’s what you might have missed on CNN today: House Republicans released their new tax plan, but some rank-and-file members have their reservations about it. The bill would leave your 401(k) alone but could limit how much mortgage interest homeowners can deduct. Here’s what else it means for you. You can read the full bill here. Trump’s senior adviser has turned over documents to special counsel Robert Mueller, as investigators have begun asking in witness interviews about Jared Kushner’s role in the firing of FBI Director James Comey, CNN reported. The President nominated Jerome Powell to lead the Federal Reserve, rather than letting Janet Yellen keep the job for four more years. Powell would be the first former investment banker to head the US central bank and the first person to fill that role in more than 40 years who’s not an economist. – The suspect in the New York terror attack told investigators he “felt good about what he had done” and had been planning the attack for a year, inspired by ISIS videos, according to a criminal complaint. He was charged with federal terrorism. – President Trump called on Congress to “immediately” end the visa lottery program that helped bring the New York attack suspect to the US, and also tweeted that the suspect should receive the death penalty. NYC terrorist was happy as he asked to hang ISIS flag in his hospital room. He killed 8 people, badly injured 12. SHOULD GET DEATH PENALTY! – South Korean intelligence reported that North Korea is preparing to carry out additional nuclear tests. – Ahead of President Donald Trump’s 12-day trip to Asia, his top national security adviser is making one thing clear: The President won’t be moderating his language in the region. – A North Korean defector tells CNN he felt like he was “a modern slave.” He also said that outside information, not US military threats, could be Kim Jong Un’s “Achilles heel.” – Former FBI director James Comey has a book coming out next year, called “A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies and Leadership.” – The prosecution and defense asked for different punishments in Bowe Bergdahl’s sentencing hearing – fourteen years in prison or a dishonorable discharge, respectively – for the US soldier who deserted his army outpost in 2009. – Time Warner stock fell more than 3% Thursday on the news that the US government may sue to block AT&T’s acquisition of the media company. – A week after they voted to unionize, journalists at DNAinfo and Gothamist learned that billionaire owner Joe Ricketts was shutting the websites down. – Anthony Bourdain – whose girlfriend, Asia Argento, is among Weinstein’s accusers – expressed regret for participating in a restaurant industry culture that is “pervasively hostile to women.” – Spooky! A Robert Mueller jack-o-lantern showed up outside Paul Manafort’s NYC townhouse on Wednesday.


Mickey Mouse reigns again. The world’s most famous mouse house has topped the list of the world’s 25 most popular theme and amusement parks. The Magic Kingdom at Walt Disney World in Florida welcomed more than 20.4 million visitors in 2015, a 6% increase of over 2014, according to a report released Wednesday. Amusement park attendance is increasing around the world. There were 235.6 million visits to the top 25 theme and amusement parks worldwide in 2015, up 5.4% from 2014, according to the Themed Entertainment Association/AECOM 10th annual global attractions attendance report. The index ranks the 25 most-visited amusement and theme parks around the world, based on attendance figures compiled by AECOM, a global consulting firm. “The growth we’ve seen this year is tremendous for a relatively mature industry,” said John Robinett, senior vice president, economics, AECOM, in a statement. “Over our 10 years of tracking the industry, we have seen steady improvements in business volume (despite a global recession) the introduction of exciting new technologies and continued internationalization of the attractions world.” Top 10 U.S. beaches for 2016 Disney dominated the list. Disney parks in the United States, Europe and Asia held seven of the top 10 parks and 10 of the top 25 spots. Universal Studios two parks in the top 10 list and three in the top 25 list, while SeaWorld had just one. Visits to parks are increasing all around the world. The top 20 North American theme/amusement parks reported 146 million visits last year, up 5.9% from 2014. The top 20 Asian theme/amusement parks reported 131 million visits last year, up 6.9% from 2014. There were 61 million visits to parks in Europe, the Middle East and Africa last year, up 2.8% from 2014. Here are the top 25 most popular amusement and theme parks around the world in 2015: 1. Magic Kingdom at Walt Disney World, Lake Buena Vista, Florida, U.S. 2. Disneyland, Anaheim, California, U.S. 3. Tokyo Disneyland, Tokyo, Japan 4. Universal Studios Japan, Osaka, Japan 5. Tokyo Disney Sea, Tokyo, Japan 6. Epcot at Walt Disney World, Lake Buena Vista, Florida, U.S. 7. Disney’s Animal Kingdom at Walt Disney World, Lake Buena Vista, Florida 8. Disney’s Hollywood Studios at Walt Disney World, Lake Buena Vista, FL, U.S. 9. Disneyland Park at Disneyland Paris, Marne-la-Vallee, France 10. Universal Studios at Universal Orlando, FL, U.S. 11. Disney’s California Adventure, Anaheim, CA, U.S. 12. Islands of Adventure at Universal Orlando, FL, U.S. 13. Chimelong Ocean Kingdom, Hengqin, China 14. Everland, Gyeonggi-Do, South Korea 15. Ocean Park, Hong Kong 16. Lotte World, Seoul, South Korea 17. Hangzhou Songcheng Park, Hangzhou, China 18. Universal Studios Hollywood, Universal City, CA, U.S. 19. Hong Kong Disneyland, Hong Kong 20. Nagashima Spa Land, Kuwana, Japan 21. Europa-Park, Rust, Germany 22. SeaWorld Florida, Orlando, FL, U.S. 23. Tivoli Gardens, Copenhagen, Denmark 24. De Efteling, Kaatsheuvel, The Netherlands 25. Songcheng LiJiang Romance Park, Lijiang, China


Trump has displayed a continued willingness to pressure and contradict President Barack Obama Trump's statements on Thursday were astonishing, even by his standards President-elect Donald Trump long ago earned a reputation for being unpredictable in his statements, but he outdid himself on Thursday. In the span of just a few hours, Trump shook international relations by undercutting the Obama administration over a UN resolution on Israeli settlements, indicated he would ramp up nuclear competition with Russia and then jolted a major defense contractor – and its shareholders – by suggesting he would ask Boeing to replace a fighter jet being made by Lockheed Martin. Here’s a look at his day: THE TIME: 11:37 a.m. ET WHAT HAPPENED: Trump pressures the Obama administration to veto a UN Security Council resolution condemning settlement activity, an unprecedented move by a President-elect who has not yet moved into the White House. “The resolution being considered at the United Nations Security Council regarding Israel should be vetoed,” Trump tweets, linking to a statement. The resolution being considered at the United Nations Security Council regarding Israel should be vetoed....cont: https://t.co/s8rXKKZNF1 Egypt delayed the potential vote at the Security Council, putting off a potential standoff between the US and Israel. An Israeli official later tells CNN his country reached out to Trump for help in pressuring the Obama administration. WHAT FOLLOWED: On sensitive issues of diplomacy and national security, Trump has displayed a continued willingness to pressure and contradict President Barack Obama, eschewing a “one president at a time” policy that Obama insists must govern the peaceful transition of power. THE TIME: 11:50 a.m. ET WHAT HAPPENED: Trump threatens a nuclear arms race. “The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes,” Trump tweets. The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes Hours earlier in Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a defense speech in Moscow that Russia needs to “enhance the combat capability of strategic nuclear forces, primarily by strengthening missile complexes that will be guaranteed to penetrate existing and future missile defense systems.” WHAT FOLLOWED: The exchange appeared to raise the prospect of a new arms race between the US and Russia, which between them boast more than 14,000 nuclear warheads, the still deadly legacy of their four-decades long Cold War standoff. THE TIME: 5:26 p.m. ET WHAT HAPPENED: Trump cost millions in market value to Lockheed Martin and caused thousands of people to now worry they may lose their jobs after tweeting that the Pentagon’s costly new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter could be replaced with a modified version of a less expensive plane, the F/A-18 Super Hornet. The F-35 is made by Lockheed Martin, while the Super Hornet is made by aerospace rival Boeing. “Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!,” Trump tweets. Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet! WHAT FOLLOWED: Lockheed Martin’s stock dipped about 2% in aftermarket trading. For Lockheed, the F-35 is its industrial future. Trump’s tweet has threatened to upend Lockheed’s plans just as his tweets aimed at China has rattled Boeing, which is counting on selling jets to Chinese airlines. Biden: Clinton never figured out why she was running For more: Go to CNN Politics


There is nothing routine about the murder trial opening Thursday at the City Court of Copenhagen. Nearly seven months after the mutilated torso of Kim Wall washed ashore, Danish inventor Peter Madsen is expected to take the stand, charged with killing the 30-year old Swedish journalist. As the prosecutor presents his case in one of the most gruesome murder trials in Danish history, special accommodations are in place for nearly 80 local and foreign reporters in a race for details. It will not be easy listening. According to the prosecution, the promising young reporter died under the cruelest of circumstances. The indictment states that Madsen, 47, planned and prepared Wall’s murder, bringing a saw, a knife, sharpened screwdrivers and other items to his submarine where he had supposedly invited her to do a story. Instead, according to the indictment, Madsen cut and stabbed Wall multiple times before killing her, cutting off her head, arms and legs, then weighing her body parts down with plastic cable-ties and pipes before throwing them into the sea. The charges include premeditated murder, indecent handling of a corpse and “sexual relations other than intercourse of a particularly dangerous nature,” citing stab wounds inside and outside her genital area. The alleged murder has rocked the peaceful Danish archipelago and its Swedish neighbor to the core – albeit in different ways. While Sweden seemed immediately besieged by grief at the loss of one of its own, Denmark seemed caught in shock and disbelief. To them, Peter Madsen, or “Rocket-Madsen,” was a well-documented character, portrayed in books, articles, documentary films, even on Danish children’s programs, as an eccentric but visionary inventor with a strong passion for ocean and space travel. “I don’t know what to say. I was shocked, I still am,” said Tomas Trolle, who helped Madsen with some of his rocket projects. “I didn’t believe it because I knew him a little bit. He was a nice guy who really liked to show off his projects.” Madsen’s dream was to become the first Dane to fly into space in a privately built rocket. And, at the time of its maiden voyage in 2008, UC3 Nautilus, the submarine that Kim Wall stepped aboard on August 10, was said to be the world’s largest privately built submarine. “Everybody had heard about him, knew about his projects, knew about the submarine, and all the rockets,” said Trolle. As the investigation continued, Trolle and others who knew him waited for information that would help Madsen’s case, but police kept presenting more damaging evidence. For his part, Madsen changed his explanation several times as more body parts and evidence emerged. Amongst other things, police found films showing torture and real-life executions of women on his computer. Madsen has consistently denied the allegations of murder and sexual assault and any knowledge of the films. He maintains that Wall died by accident, saying he dismembered her body and tossed it in the sea in a state of panic. His attorney, Betina Hald Engmark, has said it cannot be excluded that it was an accident and that Madsen did act in a state of panic. If Madsen has a dark side, it is likely to be one of the points explored by prosecutor Jakob Buch-Jepsen during the trial, at which some 37 witnesses are expected to take the stand. “It seems unusual to call that many witnesses in this case since they obviously were not present at the scene of the crime,” says Lasse Lund Madsen, professor of criminal law at Aarhus University, and former special prosecutor and acting judge. “That means some of them are likely there to shed light on surrounding factors, I would assume to try to prove the murder was planned.” In another twist, at Madsen’s request, the trial will take place before a judge and just two jurors instead of the typical six- or nine-person jury. “The defense must believe this will be an advantage,” says Lund Madsen. “I can’t speak to the exact strategy, but this is normally something you might do when the case is one of great emotion, in the hope that less jurors could provide a more objective decision.” If found guilty, Madsen will spend the rest of his life in prison if the prosecution has its way. But in a country where a murder sentence typically carries 12 years, it will still take a significant burden of proof to show enough aggravating circumstances to warrant a life sentence. The verdict is scheduled for April 25.


Don’t just look at the results from Britain’s polls that had Theresa May’s Conservatives coming in at number one ahead of Jeremy Corbyn and Labour – the real winners and losers are far more interesting. Theresa May: No mandate for her. The Prime Minister took a gamble by calling an election three years ahead of schedule. She had been hoping to get more popular support for her government as it navigates the country through Brexit. Even though her party won the most seats – 318 out of 650, with one constituency yet to declare – it lost ground and will not be able to govern alone. Related article UK Prime Minister Theresa May: Will she stay or go? So May has reached out to Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party for support and will continue to lead the government. “Disaster” and “catastrophe” are two of the words wafting through the London air. And there are questions about how long May can last. Even if she stays, it’ll be tougher for her to get things done. The Conservatives: Bad judgment, again. Thursday’s vote was the second of two moves by the Conservatives that spurred unexpected periods of uncertainty and instability. The first occurred last year, when May’s predecessor, David Cameron, held the Brexit referendum. Britons were asked whether they wanted to stay or leave in the European Union. To the surprise of almost everyone, nearly 52% of the voters favored leaving the EU. The pound crashed, the Prime Minister quit and the world gasped. Related article Brexit talks face delay after Conservatives' UK election shock Brexit talks: Now that the Tories failed to secure a mandate and a majority in Parliament, the negotiations, scheduled to start on June 19, could be put on hold. The EU and UK have to forge a deal by March 2019. “We don’t know when Brexit talks start,” tweeted European Council President Donald Tusk on Friday as the election results became clear. “We know when they must end. Do your best to avoid a ‘no deal’ as a result of ‘no negotiations,’” he said. We don't know when Brexit talks start. We know when they must end. Do your best to avoid a "no deal" as result of "no negotiations". #GE2017 UKIP: A big goose egg for the UK Independence Party – the nationalist movement that favored an exit from the European Union. It won nary a seat and its party leader, Paul Nuttall, stepped down, saying UKIP needs a new focus. But he also warned that the Brexit movement remains strong and that it will flex its muscles again if the Prime Minister backtracks from her promises on Brexit. The Scottish National Party: Nicola Sturgeon’s party won 56 of 59 Scottish seats in the 2015 election but lost ground on Thursday. It ended up with 35 seats and the chances for its wished-for second referendum on Scottish independence took a big hit. Nick Clegg: A surprising defeat for the former leader of the centrist Liberal Democrats. Clegg, who once served as a deputy prime minister, was defeated in Sheffield Hallam by fewer than 1,500 votes. Jeremy Corbyn and Labour: The lesson is simple. Don’t write off Labour. The opposition party had been down in the dumps, with dismal polling and a general disdain for whether leader Jeremy Corbyn was “prime ministerial.” Related article Jeremy Corbyn's left-wing populism shook Britain's political mainstream But a good chunk of the populace – including the young and the working class – showed an appetite for the left-wing policies and world view embodied by Corbyn and his progressive political agenda. His talk of ending Tory austerity plans and getting better and fairer funding for health and education resonated. Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party: This is the Democratic Unionist Party’s time in the spotlight. It gained two seats to hit double figures but it has outsize influence now. May called the DUP her “friends and allies,” and aims to have an informal partnership with them to govern. The impact the DUP will have is not yet clear. The party is dedicated to an open border with the Republic of Ireland and may demand that be included in Brexit negotiations. It is also opposed to same-sex marriage and any extension of abortion tights. Female lawmakers: From left to right, Prime Minister to new lawmaker, 207 women were elected to the House of Commons, the most ever. In Birmingham Edgbaston, Preet Kaur Gill became the first Sikh woman to be elected to Parliament. Rosie Duffield won the seat in Canterbury, Kent for Labour for the first time in nearly 100 years. A number of prominent female power players kept their seats – Amber Rudd, Diane Abbott and Emily Thornberry, for example. The youth vote. Looks like passion overcame apathy for young voters. Those in the 18-24 age group came out to back Corbyn: including in university areas like Sheffield Hallam, where Clegg lost his seat to Labour. The interest – no matter what the party – could have an impact on civic involvement in a nation trying to find its way at home, in Europe and the world for years to come.


A steam locomotive winding through a mountainous landscape is an unforgettable sight. For British photographer David Kitching, it’s a spectacle that doesn’t grow old – even if mainline steam trains are long gone in the UK. Passionate about steam locomotives, Kitching has spent the past 20 years traveling to China, where – until very recently –  steam trains remained common. Kitching’s work charts how China became the last bastion of the steam railway. These stunning photographs are now the subject of a book: “Chinese Steam: The Last Years,” published by Amberley Books. Back in the early 1990s, train enthusiast Kitching first heard stories of China’s stunning terrains and incredible steam trains. “I resolved to join a tour as soon as possible,” he tells CNN Travel. Now  62, Kitching has been enamored by steam rail since he was a boy and has fond childhood memories of the railway. “I would join my friends watching the steam trains from a convenient footbridge over the local line,” he recalls. Nothing like it in the world: China's time-tripping steam railway “By the age of 9 years, I would head off after school to the local locomotive shed where we would spend many happy hours climbing on the locomotives and dodging the shed foreman.” So when Kitching heard about opportunities to photograph Chinese steam locomotives – he was thrilled. “I really missed the experience of mainline steam trains after they finished in Britain in 1968.” He seized the chance to witness the might of a steam engine once more – and to experience a different culture. On his first trip, Kitching headed to northeast China and captured coal mines, narrow-gauge lines and unforgettable landscapes. He returned to the country several times over the subsequent years, always with his camera in hand – taking fantastic photographs and forging lasting connections. 11 of the world's most luxurious train journeys Kitching’s early visits to China were as part of organized tours. Later, he coordinated freelance visits, often traveling with friends or his son. “There are so many fantastic memories,” Kitching recalls. “The train crews made us welcome.” Kitching remembers being invited onto the footplate of a QJ class 2-10-2 locomotive for an overnight journey through the mountains between Jiamusi and Mudanjiang in Heilongjiang. He says the journey was a “magical, never to be repeated experience.” 7 scenic train journeys -- riding the Dragon's Back Interacting with the train workers was always a highlight for Kitching – he also shared lunch with a train crew on a coal train at Yuanbaoshan, in the Mongolian Autonomous Region. “Chinese food never tasted so good as when it was prepared in the dedicated steam-box on the running plate of the JS class 2-8-2,” says Kitching. Kitching photographed railways across China, often from elevated vantage points to capture panoramic shots of the locomotives and the landscape. “The Jitong Railway in the Mongolian Autonomous Region has to be a favorite,” says Kitching. “It was the last steam-operated mainline in the world and the sight of double-headed QJs thrashing through the spectacular mountain scenery was as good is it gets.” Stunning photos of trains in the American West Kitching normally traveled in winter – because the exhaust from the steam trains is at its most impressive in cold conditions. Battling these extreme temperatures was part of the experience. “Once the temperature gets down around -40 C [-40 F] you have to take it very seriously or you will get frostbite,” says Kitching. “The cameras start to fail below -35 Celsius [-31 F] and battery life is very poor as well. You kept your camera under your coats and only brought it out at the last minute to take the shot.” Kitching recalls the tip of his nose becoming frozen to his camera on several occasions. But such hardships were worthwhile to get to his incredible snowy shots. Spectacular, rarely seen images of China's railways Chinese steam trains are becoming a thing of the past – only a handful of the photographs in Kitching’s book were taken in recent years. There are fewer and fewer steam locomotives operating in China – those that still exist are usually on tourist lines. But Kitching remains passionate about photographing China’s changing railway scene. “Although steam has all but finished, there are plenty of opportunities for interesting railway photographs, showing the modern scene against the magnificent Chinese scenery and the changing face of the country,” says Kitching. Record breaker: China's incredible north-south high-speed train line plan China’s railway scene has modernized – but Kitching remains intrigued. “The new high-speed lines are an amazing development in China – with much of the routes being elevated on concrete viaducts,” he says. “I watched several under construction during my visit in 2017. I am already planning another trip to photograph trains in both China and also on the vast plains of the Mongolian Republic.”


Judge ruled that "a feeble 'no'" could still signal willingness Experts contend ruling erodes the definition of consent An acquittal in a high-profile rape case in India has reignited debate over the meaning of consent after a judge set aside the conviction of a Bollywood filmmaker, saying “a feeble ‘no’” could still signal willingness on the part of an alleged victim. Mahmood Farooqui, the co-director of the hit Bollywood film “Peepli Live,” was sentenced to seven years in prison in 2016 after he was found guilty of raping a Columbia University graduate student at his home. Farooqui’s lawyers challenged the 2016 ruling in Delhi’s High Court. In their appeal, they called attention to the lack of evidence that Farooqui was alone with the victim in his house on the night of the alleged incident. They also made an alternative argument, claiming that “if at all, such an occurrence had taken place” it was with the alleged victim’s consent. In throwing out the conviction on Monday, High Court Judge Ashutosh Kumar said Farooqui deserved the “benefit of the doubt” on all points. Kumar said it was not clear whether the incident, as outlined by the alleged victim, took place. Moreover, he added, Farooqui had “no idea at all” that the alleged victim had not given her consent. Related article Indian guru Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh sentenced to 20 years for rape “It is not unknown that during sexual acts, one of the partners may be a little less willing or, it can be said unwilling but where there is an assumed consent, it matters not if one of the partners to the act is a bit hesitant,” Kumar observed in his ruling. “Such feeble hesitation can never be understood as a positive negation of any advances by the other partner.” Elsewhere in his ruling, Kumar ruled that “instances of woman behavior are not unknown (sic) that a feeble ‘no’ may mean a ‘yes’,” particularly in cases where the parties involved “are known to each other, are persons of letters and are intellectually/academically proficient, and if, in the past, there have been physical contacts.” The ruling has revived a debate in India over the meaning of consent in rape cases. “In this judgment, the court has unfortunately elided over the legal definition of consent that, that many of us worked to bring into law in 2013,” said Karuna Nundy, a Supreme Court lawyer who played a role in reforming India’s sexual assault laws in the wake of the brutal gang rape of a physiotherapy student on a moving bus in Delhi in 2012. Jyoti Singh Pandey later died, and anger about her case led to nationwide protests and triggered reforms to India’s sexual assault and harassment laws. Related article Indian Supreme Court upholds death sentences in Delhi gang rape Indian law stipulates that consent must be “unequivocal,” or in other words, absolutely clear. In the case involving Farooqui, the victim’s lawyer maintains that she did not give consent. “She protested, she pushed him off, he was trying to take off her undergarments, she kept yanking them back up, but he was stronger than her, he pinned her down. Under those circumstances, it is therefore startling to hear this series of events recorded as a ‘feeble no,’” Nundy told CNN. The ruling was met with frustration in legal circles. “(It) completely erodes the definition of consent,” said Jhuma Sen, a professor at Jindal Global Law School. “The court seems to be creating this additional defense that the accused must have been made aware (by the victim).” According to court documents, the woman had met Farooqui in 2014, after she arrived in India to research her PhD. She alleged that the assault at the center of the case occurred during a visit to Farooqui’s home in March 2015. The researcher’s lawyers now plan to appeal the decision in the Supreme Court. “The high court acquittal order is wrong on facts and in law,” said Vrinda Grover, the lawyer appearing for the victim told CNN.

Delhi High Court ruling on Mahmood Farooqui rape case


A grenade and knife were discovered by airport security Police say it was a live grenade An American accused of trying to take a live grenade and knife through airport security in the Philippines has been arrested, an airport official said. Cipriano de Guzman was being held at Manila’s Ninoy Aquino International Airport after the weapons were discovered in his backpack during X-ray screening, airport manager Dante Basanta said Thursday. “It is a case of illegal possession of an explosive device and illegal possession of a sharp object,” said Col. Ricardo Layug with the Aviation Security Group of the Philippine National Police.  “He definitely cannot leave the country.  He has to face the charges.” Kurt Hoyer, an official at the U.S. Embassy in Manila, said he was aware of the report, but had no information about the person who was detained.


Salk Institute researchers grow a rat pancreas, rat heart and rat eyes within a developing mouse Using stem cells, they generate human cells and human tissues in the embryos of pigs and cattle To grow human organs within animal bodies has long been the dream of scientists wanting to provide transplantable hearts, lungs, kidneys and other organs for patients in need. A glimpse of possible success in this elusive goal was seen Thursday. Using stem cell technologies, researchers generated human cells and human tissues in the embryos of pigs and cattle. Their research appeared in the journal Cell. Despite this milestone, integrating cells from human and animal species is proving difficult, and developing human organs remains at a considerable distance, said Dr. Jun Wu, a staff scientist in the gene expression laboratory at the Salk Institute and first author of the research. “Species evolve independently, and many factors dictating the developmental programs might have diverged, which makes it difficult to blend cells from one species to a developing embryo from another,” Wu said. “The larger the evolutionary distance, the more difficult for them to mix.” Or as senior author Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte, a professor in Salk’s gene expression laboratory, sees it, “To try to imitate nature is not that easy.” The project began with the research team attempting to prove that it could grow one animal’s organ cells within a different species of animal. This is known as a chimera – specifically an interspecies chimera, an organism containing cells from two or more species. They began with two closely related species: rats and mice. To create a rat-mouse chimera, the scientists began by creating a mouse embryo without a pancreas. Similar work had been done before by other scientists, notably Hiromitsu Nakauchi, now at Stanford, who bred mutant mice that lacked a pancreas and then grew a rat pancreas inside a mouse. Related article Human organs grown in pigs may help transplant patients, scientists say In the current study, Belmonte, Wu and their colleagues used gene-editing techniques known as CRISPR/Cas9 to generate mice embryos lacking a pancreas. Then they inserted rat stem cells that contained a gene for the pancreas into these mutant embryos. Once implanted, the stem cells developed into a rat pancreas within a mouse embryo that ultimately (and importantly) grew into a healthy mouse with a normal lifespan. Taking their idea a few steps further, the researchers used the same method to develop rat eyes and rat hearts within mice embryos. “We demonstrated the robustness of this system,” Wu said. By “genetically disabling” the mouse host, they proved it was possible to generate rat organs within a host species. Unexpectedly to the researchers, the mice delivered bonus organs after the injection of rat stem cells: gallbladders, which are present in mice but not in rats. “This suggests that rats lack a gallbladder not because of an inherent genetic deficiency of rat cells,” Wu said.  Instead, “embryonic niches” may be orchestrating the tissues and organs that develop and grow within each animal species. After the rat-mice experiments, the team turned its focus to human stem cells. They began by generating different types of human induced pluripotent stem cells – when adult cells are turned back into stem cells – and inserting them into pig embryos. Pigs were used because both the size and the development time for their organs are more similar to our own than, say, rats. Next, the team members implanted these embryos into sows. To test the safety and effectiveness of their work, they stopped the experiment at four weeks. Related article Chinese scientists use gene-editing techniques in humans for first time Human cells within some of the embryos had begun to specialize and turn into tissue precursors, they discovered. However, the success rate and level of human stem cell contributions in pigs was much lower than with the rat-mouse chimeras. Wu cautioned that the research is in its very early stages, and with many challenges ahead, the development of human organs within animals may not be possible for some time. Though the experiment with human stem cells was interrupted at 28 days, it remains the first reported case in which human stem cells have begun to grow within another species. So it is a small but significant step toward the ultimate goal of growing human organs in animals, said Insoo Hyun, an associate professor of bioethics and philosophy at Case Western Reserve University. “They just wanted to see if the cells would survive during gestation, and they did, and they kind of migrated here and there to various sites, except the brain, which is interesting,” said Hyun, who was not involved in the research. Hyun, who worked on developing international guidelines for the International Society for Stem Cell Research, said the Salk Institute researchers appear to be staying within international ethical boundaries. “The next step would be then to see if they can get better at localizing where the human cells develop and, ideally, getting to organ genesis,” he noted. “The interesting thing is, it was not funded by American taxpayer money,” Hyun said, at least not directly. The primary funding came from private Spanish sources. One reason for this is the US National Institutes of Health examined chimera science in a 2015 workshop and “accompanied that with a pause” on funding of a “very narrow subset of animal human chimera research,” said Carrie D. Wolinetz, the institutes’ associate director for science policy. Related article Feds open talks on growing human organs in animals This subset consists of scientists introducing human cells into animal embryos at a very early stage. “There has been the use of human-animal chimeras in biomedical research for a very long time. We’ve introduced human cells into animal models to create models of human diseases and used them as research tools for decades now,” Wolinetz said. “But over time, what we’ve seen – as stem cell technology has advanced and as gene editing technology has advanced – we’ve seen the ability to create more sophisticated animal-human chimeras at a much earlier stage of embryonic development,” she said. The reason, then, the National Institutes of Health suspended funding was over ethical concerns. The chimeras used in biomedical research have been created, typically, by putting the human cells in at a later stage of development: at the fetal stage or even after birth. At these stages, scientists have a lot more control in that the cells stay where they are put, and they don’t “drift all over” the animal’s body, explained Wolinetz. In these new experiments, human cells are being introduced at a much earlier stage of development, when the cells are still sorting themselves out within the embryo. “In particular, people were concerned about human cells populating the brain of the animal or the germline of the animal,” Wolinetz said. In the first case, the animal might be humanized; in the second case, the animal might pass human genes on to its offspring. As Hyun frames it, the ethical question is this: “If you up the biological contribution of the human stem cells, are you also somehow turning them morally into a human-like thing with human rights?”  He noted, though, “It’s so difficult to know how you would actually address that.” It’s not measurable. See the latest news and share your comments with CNN Health on Facebook and Twitter. “I would argue, as long as you are avoiding the brain, or there’s not a significant change to the brain, of structure and possible functioning, then I don’t think you even need to go down that philosophical path,” he said. Though as a philosopher, it might be “fun” for him, it’s not a wise or practical thing to do for policy. Instead, Hyun said, you want to stick with measurable criteria such as seeing a drop in animal function from the beginning of an experiment to the end. “The emphasis should still remain on animal welfare,” he said, as it is currently for any kind of animal research. Meanwhile, Wolinetz said the National Institutes of Health is hoping to finalize its policy on chimera research very soon in order to get back into the business of funding appropriate projects. “We would like to make sure exciting research can go forward,” she said, “but also make sure that we’ve got an appropriate oversight system so we can make sure it’s proceeding responsibly.”


Editor’s Note: Forest Whitaker is an artist and social activist. He is the CEO/Founder of the Whitaker Peace & Development Initiative and UNESCO Special Envoy for Peace and Reconciliation. Whitaker won an Oscar for his portrayal of Idi Amin in “The Last King of Scotland.” He will be keynote speaker at UNLEASH, a nonprofit innovation lab, in Singapore on June 6. The views expressed in this commentary are his own. We often hear the future belongs to the youth. This may be true, but the adults who are presently in charge can only ensure a safe and prosperous future if they make room for youth participation now. Though the United Nations estimates that around 600 million young people live in fragile or conflict-affected contexts, it is rare that young people emerge from behind the headlines to showcase their change-making abilities. I think of those places where armed violence and conflict have become pervasive and chronic. Take South Sudan, where children and teenage openly carry weapons as fighters in the country’s civil war. Or Mexico, where young people from cartel-subjugated neighborhoods are foot soldiers in drug wars. And yes, even the US, where students now feel as if their schools are under constant threat of gun violence. It is also telling that in countries affected by fragility and conflict, close to half of the young people are jobless. This picture of disenfranchisement and missed opportunities is certainly not good news for these young women and men – nor is it good news for the future of their communities. Indeed, on any continent, fragile communities are trapped in disruptive cycles of violence. Youth are disproportionately affected by such cycles because they are more likely to fall prey to conflict – by death, injury, displacement and, in most cases, trauma – and even if they survive or overcome that trauma, they face immense difficulties reconnecting with a normal life. I have witnessed such trauma in young people – be it among survivors of gang wars in Los Angeles where I grew up, in my cousin after he returned from Vietnam, or among child soldiers I met in Uganda on the set of “The Last King of Scotland.” These are places where young women and men bear the highest costs of armed violence, and do so because of decisions made by so-called grown-ups. And it’s manifest in scores of other places globally, from the civil war in Myanmar to the refugee crisis on all sides of the Mediterranean to urban zoning that ends up generating racially-based segregation and exclusion in the US Although they are particularly vulnerable in these situations, young people rarely if ever have a voice in building peace. I believe that this is a mistake. Young people have ideas on peace, and they should be heard. We have witnessed this in the US with movements like Black Lives Matter and March for Our Lives. And, on the global scale, there is UNLEASH, the nonprofit innovation lab that convenes millennial thought leaders from more than 100 countries to try and help achieve the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. This includes SDG16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, which aims to, among other things, “end abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children.” Many things about these movements are different – but they share a deeper message: Young people want peace and will take action to engineer it. To me, the only issue with Black Lives Matter and March for Our Lives is that we don’t have more of these initiatives. Nearly 60 years ago, John F. Kennedy came up with the idea of the Peace Corps – after an improvised speech at a university prompted thousands of young people to write him about their desire to commit to peace and development in vulnerable countries. We need that kind of responsiveness from the adults – but we need more than a volunteer program that will mobilize young people around projects designed and managed by adults. We need policies and programs that truly embrace change and social innovation. We need institutions that assume young people are going to come with ideas that don’t necessarily fit what adults believe to be an established truth. Of course, young people need guidance and mentorship. But I think that they want to establish a genuine dialogue with the older generations. They want to be taken seriously. Sign up for CNN Opinion’s new newsletter.Join us on Twitter and Facebook Young people should be invited to do their part, starting with local initiatives which promote tolerance and non-violence. These would be seen as services that governments and businesses would support as investments in the bottom line of the future. We could also think of “youth banks,” or earmarked funds that governments and businesses would establish to finance projects designed and implemented by young people to serve their respective communities. We must realize that whatever challenge we are faced with, young people can and should be part of the solution – both for today and tomorrow.

youth participation in peacebuilding and social innovation


Trump is expected to meet South Korean President Moon Jae-in and members of the US military North Korea will likely dominate the agenda For the first time as US President, Donald Trump will be in Kim Jong Un’s immediate neighborhood. The US President landed in South Korea on Tuesday, his second stop in Asia on a nearly two week-long trip, where the standoff with North Korea is likely to loom large. The threat posed by North Korea’s development of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles has been a top foreign policy priority for the Trump administration. The worry is that should Pyongyang successfully pair the two technologies, the reclusive country would have the potential to launch a devastating strike against a US city. In the South Korean capital Seoul, Trump will find people who have lived with that reality for decades. “It’s crucial for Trump to show that he’s willing to defend and protect South Korea because there’s a lot of questions and concerns on the part of South Koreans about his commitment to that alliance, and that has fed fears here in South Korea that they may be abandoned,” said Jean Lee, a global fellow at the Wilson Center and former Pyongyang bureau chief for The Associated Press. Seoul has sat in range of North Korean artillery since the Korean War ended in an armistice in 1953. Experts believe that if war were to resume on the Korean Peninsula, the city would see tens of thousands of people killed in the first hours. Many in South Korea, especially those who carry more liberal views, worry Trump’s heated rhetoric, mocking and name-calling of North Korea’s leader is exacerbating that danger. A spokesman for the South Korean President’s office urged citizens to warmly welcome Trump, though a handful of protests have been organized ahead of the visit. “If he comes in here rattling his saber and using that sort of militant rhetoric, it’s going to go down very poorly because this is the place that suffers the consequences,” said John Delury, a professor of international relations at Yonsei University’s Graduate School of International Studies in Seoul. Trump won’t visit the heavily-fortified demilitarized zone that separates North and South Korea – foregoing what has been a symbolic opportunity for US commanders in chief to stare into the Hermit Kingdom – declaring it a “little bit of a cliche.” By contrast, the South Korean government, led by President Moon Jae-in, will be looking to Trump for reassurance that the two countries are in this together, according to Van Jackson, a strategy fellow at the Centre for Strategic Studies at Victoria University of Wellington. “Trump’s visit is a huge variable. It’s a great opportunity to show a unity of purpose against North Korea and reinforce the larger US commitment to Asia, but there’s also a risk of provoking North Korea,” Jackson told CNN in an email. “We should brace for more heated rhetoric and some attempt to reassure South Korea. For most presidents, those tasks would not be mutually exclusive. The problem is Trump’s the wild card, not the reassurance guy.” Related article Trump says 'era of strategic patience is over' for North Korea When he arrived at Camp Humphreys outside Seoul, Trump met with his South Korean counterpart and spoke to service members from both countries. He is later expected to address the National Assembly in Seoul, according to the White House. Trump’s first Asia stop was in Tokyo, where he met Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Those two have developed a good rapport and both share a hawkish stance toward Pyongyang. Despite the fact that both the United States and South Korea continually stress the importance of their enduring alliance, Trump and Moon don’t appear to share as close a relationship as Trump and his Japanese counterpart do. Moon favors more engagement with Pyongyang and Trump’s hard-line public stance on North Korea has added to the perception that a rift has opened up between the two men. Trump’s recent tweets saying that his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, is “wasting his time” on negotiations and another intimating Seoul was appeasing their northern neighbors likely didn’t help. “Hopefully Trump visiting Korea will give him greater appreciation of what’s at stake in Korea in a human and war fighting sense if things go awry,” said Jackson of Victoria University. Trump will also come face-to-face with a South Korean public concerned they’re being bypassed in the decision-making process when it comes to North Korea policy, according to Lee. Those security fears have helped fuel a once-niche belief that is now gaining popularity: that South Korea needs its own nuclear weapons if it can’t rely on the United States, though Moon has publicly ruled out that possibility. A Gallup survey in September found 60% of South Koreans supported some form of nuclear capability for the country. At present, South Korea is defended by the US nuclear umbrella, a guarantee by Washington to defend the country in the wake of an attack. “This is reflective of the sense of insecurity on the part of the South Koreans that they don’t have that protection from the United States and the United States may be more willing under President Trump to really throw them under the bus,” Lee said. Trump is also seeking to renegotiate the US-Korea Free Trade Agreement, which experts believe could further strain the alliance at a time when they should be showing unity and resolve. Although Pyongyang has revived a threat to test a hydrogen bomb above the Pacific, the country has been relatively quiet when it comes to actions the United States considers particularly provocative: testing missiles and nuclear weapons. Though Trump’s visit would be an opportune time for Pyongyang to remind the world of its weapons program, experts were loath to make predictions about Kim Jong Un’s intentions. “They’ve been bathing in Trump’s attention all year and I think they know that they are kind of the center of his trip. I think they will be tempted to act somehow to kind of remind everyone that they are an independent actor here and you can’t just go to everyone around the neighborhood,” Delury said. “Whether that means a missile test I don’t know.” The US has been flexing its naval muscles in the region ahead of Trump’s visit with three aircraft carriers conducting exercises in the Pacific for the first time since 2007. Delury said, with Pyongyang quiet, US military maneuvers risk putting Washington in the role of provocateur. “This is why Trump needs to show that they’re serious about diplomacy and they’re not just practicing gunboat diplomacy or aircraft carrier diplomacy,” Delury said. CNN’S James Griffiths and Brad Lendon contributed to this report


Editor’s Note: Julian Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University and a New America fellow. He is the author of “Jimmy Carter” and “The Fierce Urgency of Now: Lyndon Johnson, Congress, and the Battle for the Great Society.” He is the co-host of the podcast Politics & Polls. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own. Julian Zelizer: Trump could be using social media platform to engage citizens with politics; instead he's inflaming them Zelizer: To keep America safe, Trump should follow some ground rules for tweeting It doesn’t seem like President-elect Donald Trump is going to stop tweeting any time soon. Unless his advisers take away his Internet access, the basic means of communication that he used as a candidate will become his bully pulpit as president for the next four years. He will continue to provide, in 140-character bursts, nonstop commentary from the Oval Office and – on the weekends – from Trump Tower in New York City. This past weekend, “Saturday Night Live” featured a blistering skit, with Alec Baldwin as Trump, obsessing over retweeting the rants of his followers, from high schoolers on up, instead of paying attention to security briefings from officials who are having trouble swallowing that the inauguration is weeks away. Of course, in real life, Trump couldn’t resist tweeting a response: “Just tried watching Saturday Night Live – unwatchable! Totally biased, not funny and the Baldwin impersonation just can’t get any worse. Sad.” Just tried watching Saturday Night Live - unwatchable! Totally biased, not funny and the Baldwin impersonation just can't get any worse. Sad There are some virtues to what he has done. Every so often, a new president displays a feel for media and demonstrates how it can be used to make his case politically. In the right hands, Twitter could indeed become a powerful way for elected officials to break through some of the rigid barriers imposed by the news media, interest groups and partisan leaders. As with radio in the 1930s, back when many Americans felt that Franklin D. Roosevelt was speaking directly to them in their living rooms amid a horrendous economic crisis, Twitter creates a sense of intimacy, letting citizens know what is going on and connecting them to their politicians. Related video Trump Twitter coverage overdone? But that’s not what we’ve seen from most of Donald Trump’s tweets. Perhaps before he starts his time in the White House, it would be useful to lay down a few of the ground rules about what politicians should avoid when they start to tap characters into the “What’s Happening” box and instantly share them with the world. Some rules: One of the most difficult parts of serving as the commander in chief is handling the delicacies of foreign policy. Each statement uttered by the president of the United States can have huge ramifications, even creating dangerous situations for our military and our citizens. Some Soviet leaders were reportedly shaken when word leaked that President Reagan, who was joking, said during a microphone check before a 1984 news conference: “My fellow Americans, I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.” International relations are extremely tricky, given that the president is dealing with so many nations, each with its own history, its own perception of events, its own internal tensions. When foreign leaders hear or read something from the president, they will naturally read into the statement some kind of signal about what the US might do. It’s not always easy to know when someone is joking. The wrong statement can easily insult a leader or even instigate a movement in another country, resulting in violence or the breakdown of diplomatic relations. So when Fidel Castro passes away, tweeting “Fidel Castro is dead!” is exactly the kind of tweet that can’t be acceptable. Fidel Castro is dead! Trump’s tweets after Castro’s death, including “If Cuba is unwilling to make a better deal for the Cuban people, the Cuban/American people and the US as a whole, I will terminate deal,” amounted to diplomatic threats. If Cuba is unwilling to make a better deal for the Cuban people, the Cuban/American people and the U.S. as a whole, I will terminate deal. After coming under criticism for taking a call from the president of Taiwan, breaking four decades of diplomatic practice, Trump responded by firing off more tweets:  “The President of Taiwan CALLED ME today to wish me congratulations on winning the Presidency. Thank you!” The President of Taiwan CALLED ME today to wish me congratulations on winning the Presidency. Thank you! And then: “Interesting how the U.S. sells Taiwan billions of dollars of military equipment but I should not accept a congratulatory call,” as he sank deeper into potentially threatening a showdown with China. Interesting how the U.S. sells Taiwan billions of dollars of military equipment but I should not accept a congratulatory call. Soon after this happened, China lodged a complaint with the United States about what the President-elect had done. “We urge the relevant side in the US to adhere to the ‘one China’ policy, abide by the pledges in the three joint China-US communiqués, and handle issues related to Taiwan carefully and properly to avoid causing unnecessary interference to the overall China-U.S. relationship.” What did Trump do? Push out tweets critical of China’s handling of its currency and of its actions in the South China Sea. Did China ask us if it was OK to devalue their currency (making it hard for our companies to compete), heavily tax our products going into.. their country (the U.S. doesn't tax them) or to build a massive military complex in the middle of the South China Sea?  I don't think so! Our national security challenges require great caution from leaders. With terrorism as the major threat that we face on a daily basis, elected officials have the difficult job of keeping calm amidst tragedy and remaining extremely cautious when making statements about what has happened in a given event: the wrong words can dangerously inflame passions or provide skewed interpretations. Many older Americans will remember how the media initially blamed Muslims for the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, although it turned out that white nationalists were behind the carnage. The role of the leader is to maintain a national security infrastructure that protects citizens, to guide Americans through troubled times and to maintain calm as the government responds to acts of violence. His job is not to target particular social groups or make poorly informed statements about public policy. After the recent Ohio State University shooting, Trump responded: “ISIS is taking credit for the terrible stabbing attack at Ohio State University by a Somali refugee who should not have been in our country.” ISIS is taking credit for the terrible stabbing attack at Ohio State University by a Somali refugee who should not have been in our country. It seems inevitable, unfortunately, that during Trump’s presidency there will be more acts of violence, and he would do better if he refrained from using this medium to make statements about what happens, other than to offer calming words. It is absolutely vital to the health of our democracy that journalists feel that they have the freedom and the space to produce honest accounts of what’s going on in Washington and to offer readers and viewers hard-hitting stories about our nation’s leaders. To be sure, they shouldn’t expect that this will be easy. Presidents have often lashed out against the press when they come under attack; recall President Nixon’s hostility to the press and his vice president, Spiro Agnew, commenting on the “nattering nabobs of negativism.” In his recent tweets, Trump has gone after specific people. When CNN’s Jeff Zeleny reported that there was no evidence to support Trump’s assertion of massive voter fraud, Trump retweeted aggressive statements from his followers – “what PROOF do u have DonaldTrump did not suffer from millions of FRAUD votes? Journalist do your job!” and “just another generic CNN part time wannabe journalist!” "@HighonHillcrest: @jeffzeleny what PROOF do u have DonaldTrump did not suffer from millions of FRAUD votes? Journalist? Do your job! @CNN" After a few more of those, Trump issued his own blast against @CNN. These kinds of tweets should not be part of the presidential arsenal. In an atmosphere that quickly turns hostile and aggressive (many Jewish journalists, for instance, found themselves under attack from anti-Semites during this campaign) the president can’t legitimize such practices. Journalists may become scared of reporting on the facts, and news organizations may fear punitive action against them for being too tough on the White House. The thing about Twitter is that there are no editorial filters. When the president makes a claim, it instantly goes out to all his followers, becomes the subject of reporting and national conversation and can quickly be seen as the truth. While it is true that all presidents tell lies, it has only been a few weeks since the election, and we have seen the President-elect make a series of stunning claims that have no foundation in serious evidence. Many were taken aback when Trump tweeted that “In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.” Trump went on to claim that there was “serious voter fraud” in states like Virginia, New Hampshire and California. In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally Not only is his claim patently false, but it undermines public confidence in the election process without any justification, continuing a strategy he employed in the final month of his election when he couldn’t stop speaking about a “rigged election.” More troubling is the fact that this assertion will lend support to the ongoing campaign among some conservatives to make voting more difficult and cumbersome through voter fraud laws. In an era when it is becoming harder to tell fact from fiction, the president must be an apostle of truth, demonstrating extreme discipline and not putting out false claims that produce dangerous decisions. Sign up for CNN Opinion’s new newsletter.Join us on Twitter and Facebook Twitter is not an appropriate mechanism for the president, or president-elect, to start issuing threats. In one of his recent tweets, Trump started to threaten any business that moved its factories overseas with a 35% tariff. without retribution or consequence, is WRONG! There will be a tax on our soon to be strong border of 35% for these companies ...... Most economic experts are dubious that the president would have this legal authority. But even if he did, Twitter is not a platform for the president to use his authority to try to scare people into action. This can have dangerous consequences for the market and for civil liberties. Given Trump’s extensive business interests – and it is unclear if he is planning to let go of any of them while he is president – this will also cause concerns about how he might be using his office to advance his own economic interests. The Twitterverse is already toxic enough. There is no room for the president to fuel that atmosphere. The power to tweet is serious when one is the leader of an entire country. Donald Trump already demonstrated some of the destructive ways this tool could be used during the campaign. The costs were already high then, as some of his statements encouraged a new level of vitriol and anger than we ordinarily see in America. In the hands of the most powerful politician in the country, and one of the most powerful individuals in the entire world, one wrong tweet can have disastrous consequences.


President Donald Trump declared “nobody has been tougher on Russia” during a meeting with the heads of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to the White House on Tuesday, while also repeating his desire to have a good relationship with President Vladimir Putin. The declaration comes as tension between Russia and the United States has ratcheted up in recent weeks and as Trump met with the Baltic leaders who have grown deeply skeptical of Putin in recent years. Trump, throughout the Baltic leaders’ time at the White House, maintained that he had come down hard on Russia for a series of transgressions. But even his tough talk contained conciliatory remarks about Putin, a familiar posture for the President. “Getting along with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing,” Trump said during a luncheon with the three leaders. “Now maybe we will and maybe we won’t. Probably nobody’s been tougher on Russia than Donald Trump.” Related article Russia and the US can replace expelled diplomats Trump added that “just about everyone agrees” getting along with Russia is a good thing “except very stupid people.” A reporter asked if Russian President Vladimir Putin is “a friend or a foe, to which the President said “we’ll find out.” “I’ll let you know,” Trump said. “There will be a time when I’ll let you know. You’re going to find out very quickly.” During a joint news conference with the Baltic leaders – Estonian President Kersti Kaljulaid, Latvian President Raimonds Vējonis and Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaitė – Trump made his first public comments about the 60 Russian diplomats that the United States expelled from the country last month. “We did 60. There is nobody been tougher on Russia,” Trump said. Still, he added: “I think I could have a very good relationship with Russia and with President Putin. And if I did that would be a great thing. And there is a lot a great possibility that that won’t happen. Who knows.” Trump has been critical of NATO members – such as Latvia and Lithuania – which had not met their 2% defense spending annual benchmark for the group. But the three Baltic states have begun to worry about the threat posed by Russia and, like other NATO members, have pledged to increase their defense spending in the face of Russian aggression, especially the 2014 annexation of Crimea from Ukraine by Russia. Trump on Tuesday commended the leaders for their contributions to NATO and asked Lithuania’s Grybauskaitė, “Has Donald Trump made a difference on NATO?” “This is a very risky question,” Trump joked. Grybauskaitė responded: “We expect together with the United States to go ahead with deep reforms of NATO, especially on decision-making, on decisiveness, on the denial that we expect to see from Russia in case of aggression.” Russia has loomed large over the Trump administration for much of the President’s time in office as special counsel Robert Mueller investigates the country’s meddling in the 2016 election and any collusion between Trump’s orbit of supporters and Russian operatives. Tension between the United States and Russia reached a high point under Trump last week when Russia expelled 60 US diplomats and closed the US Consulate in St. Petersburg in response to the United States expelling the same number of Russian diplomats and closing their Seattle consulate. The US decision was made after the US and United Kingdom government blamed Moscow for the poisoning of a former Russian double agent, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter, Yulia Skripal, on British soil on March 4. CORRECTION: This story has been updated to remove Estonia from a list of countries that had not been meeting their NATO defense spending annual benchmarks.


A famous Nigerian painting that has been missing for decades has finally been found in a London home and will be up for auction at the end of the month. “Tutu” is part of a set of three paintings created by Nigerian artist Ben Enwonwu around 1973, just a few years after Nigeria’s bloody civil war ended. The story goes that Enwonwu was walking in the Nigerian countryside when he met a beautiful young woman whom he just had to paint, according to Bonhams auction house in London. Her name is Adetutu Ademiluyi, abbreviated as Tutu, and she was a princess in her city of Ife in south-western Nigeria. Enwonwu painted two other versions of the woman but all three were lost. The paintings gained fame not only for their beauty but also for their disappearance. The discovery is partly thanks to the efforts of Giles Peppiatt, Director of African art at Bonhams, who for years made it his mission to find the paintings. People brought him prints many times but they all turned out to be fake, until one day in December 2017, he finally found the real thing. After receiving a tip, Giles made a visit to a modest apartment in north London and discovered the painting had been hanging there for the last 30 years. Giles said, “I was absolutely staggered when I first saw the piece. The owners, who had inherited it, had no idea of its current value,” according to Bonhams. “On discovering the long-missing work,” continued Peppiatt, “I felt a little like Howard Carter peering into Tutankhamen’s tomb. When Carter was asked by Lord Carnarvon ‘What can you see?’, Carter replied ‘Wonderful things… Wonderful things.’ And so it was for me on that dark December night.” Bonhams plans to put the “Tutu” up for auction on February 28. It’s still unknown where the other two paintings are.


Work is beginning in the English city of Salisbury to decontaminate potentially toxic “hot spots” linked to the nerve agent poisoning of former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. Residents were briefed Thursday evening by government and local officials on the cleanup operation in nine locations across the city, according to Britain’s Press Association news agency. Police believe the pair first came into contact with the substance, identified by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons as a Novichok agent, at Sergei Skripal’s home. The highest concentration of the substance was found on the front door. A number of sites around the city – including a pub and restaurant visited by the Skripals – have been cordoned off since the March 4 attack. “We have to make an assumption that in certain circumstances there will be relatively high concentrations, probably in very, very specific locations, which could be at levels that could be toxic to individuals,” Ian Boyd, chief scientific adviser of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, told residents, according to the Press Association. Related article UK intel: Russia tested nerve agent on door handles before Skripal attack “That’s an assumption, it’s also one we’ve tested in some circumstances and we do know that there are hot spots like that around, so we have to make those assumptions that some of the hot spots we’ve still got to find. “But those hot spots will still be in the locations we are talking about. In these locations, there may well be higher concentrations that we still have to find, but we already know there are some high concentrations within those locations.” Salisbury’s Bourne Hill offices, which house the police station and local government, are closing for up to eight weeks as part of the cleanup operation. Decontamination efforts will focus on the evidence storage area and two lockers, Wiltshire Council said, with other areas being cleaned as a precaution. #Salisbury's Bourne Hill offices (the new extension) home to some of our services and the police station, will close to staff and public from Friday 20 April for up to eight weeks, as part of the decontamination plans announced yesterday https://t.co/CdoUz8djuj pic.twitter.com/FsPs3iUGUa “Our No. 1 priority is to bring the potentially contaminated sites back into use as soon as possible,” said Paul Mills, deputy chief constable of Wiltshire police, adding that it was an “unprecedented situation” for the city. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said earlier this week that nine sites, three in the city center, had been “identified as requiring some level of specialist cleaning.” “Work to clean each site will involve a process of testing, removal of items which may have been contaminated, chemical cleaning and retesting,” it said. Health and defense experts will be involved, with about 190 specialists from the British army and the Royal Air Force supporting the operation. Yulia Skripal was discharged from the hospital April 10 and is being kept in an unknown location. Her father remains hospitalized but is no longer in critical condition. Relations between London and Moscow have steadily worsened since the UK government pointed the finger at Russia over the poisoning. Russia denies all involvement.


Given the chance to walk away from his Assad-Hitler comparison, Spicer made it worse He later apologized for the remark It was supposed to be a slow week in Washington. Congress was gone for the Passover and Easter holidays. President Donald Trump was headed to Mar-a-Lago – natch – for a long weekend with promises that it would be newsless. For White House press secretary Sean Spicer, it seemed perfect: Knock out a few press briefings early in the week and then coast into a much-deserved break. Didn’t turn out that way. On Monday, Spicer was asked what the Trump administration’s policy was as regards Syria – following on Trump’s decision to launch 60 Tomahawk missiles at an air base believed to be the launch site of a chemical attack on civilians. Here’s what he said: “If you gas a baby, if you put a barrel bomb into innocent people, I think you will see a response from this President.” Hours later, Spicer was out with a clarification. “Nothing has changed in our posture,” he said. Ok. Not great. But, a mistake relatively quickly fixed isn’t a big deal. Then came Tuesday – a day Spicer would like to erase from history. It all started when he sought to explain the outrageous actions taken by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in gassing his own people. “You had someone who was despicable as Hitler who didn’t even sink to using chemical weapons,” Spicer said, breaking the first rule of politics – never, ever compare anything to Hitler or Nazi Germany. Spicer was then given the chance to walk away from his Assad-Hitler comparison. Somehow, he made it worse. “[Hitler] brought them into the Holocaust centers, I understand that,” Spicer said. “But in the way that Assad used them, where he went into towns and dropped them down to innocent in the middle of towns.” Er, no. Trying to fix your mistake by using a technicality that Assad dropped the chemical weapons on his people while Hitler didn’t is, um, a stone cold political loser. Also, “Holocaust centers”? Seriously? The White House press office subsequently released two other statements trying to clean up Spicer’s mess. Spicer finally got it right in an interview with Wolf Blitzer on Tuesday afternoon. “Frankly, I mistakenly made an inappropriate and insensitive reference to the Holocaust, for which there is no comparison,” Spicer said. “And for that I apologize. It was a mistake to do that.” The damage was very much done. The director of the Anne Frank Center called for Spicer’s resignation. So did Colorado Republican Rep. Mike Coffman. As of this writing, Spicer was still hanging on. But, for a President who doesn’t like when his underlings a) screw up or b) when those screw-ups make news, the past week hasn’t been a good one for Spicer’s long-term future with the White House. Sean Spicer, for forgetting Godwin’s Law, you had the Worst Week in Washington. Congrats, or something,


"He intentionally passed Obamacare. He intentionally passed Dodd-Frank. He intentionally went into this crazy deal with Iran -- the nuclear deal," Conant said "Marco is running for president, because he believes America is a special place and he wants to keep it a special place," he added Marco Rubio believes President Barack Obama is “intentionally” trying to destroy America, the Florida senator’s communications director said Tuesday. Asked by CNN’s Chris Cuomo if the senator believes Obama is “intentionally trying to destroy the country,” Rubio spokesman Alex Conant said, “Absolutely.” “All evidence confirms that,” Conant said on CNN’s “New Day.” “He intentionally passed Obamacare. He intentionally passed Dodd-Frank. He intentionally went into this crazy deal with Iran – the nuclear deal. He’s absolutely trying to make America more like the rest of the world.” “Marco is running for president because he believes America is a special place and he wants to keep it a special place,” he said. Conant asserted that all Republicans would agree with Rubio that Obama is purposefully trying to destroy America. “He is. I think that most Republicans, I think that all Republicans would agree with that. Barack Obama has been an incredibly divisive president precisely because of this,” he said. “Because he goes around the world apologizing for America. Because he passes policies that are trying to change our country. That’s why he’s so unpopular. That’s why he’s a failed president. It’s why we have to elect a Republican in 2016.” RELATED: Marco Rubio on debate criticism: There’s a reason everyone is attacking me Rubio trails GOP front-runner Donald Trump in New Hampshire polling, where voters are casting ballots on Tuesday. Another rival, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, took aim at the Florida senator on CNN’s “New Day,” saying Rubio’s resume is not that different from Obama’s. “I like Marco Rubio. He’s a nice guy. He may have a great future. His future is just not now,” he told CNN’s Chris Cuomo. “Our country is too messed up to put somebody in there who is a first-term United States senator after coming off seven years of a first-term United States senator, who’s never managed anything. Neither has Sen. Rubio.” Christie said he did not attack Rubio personally in the most recent debate, but aimed to highlight that the senator is not yet prepared to defeat Democrats and the lead the U.S. “On Saturday night, Sen. Rubio didn’t perform and I did and that means I’ll perform against Hillary Clinton,” Christie said.


NEW: The woman was seized as she traveled by car with her driver, Afghan police said Two Australian citizens were abducted in Afghanistan earlier this year An Australian woman has been kidnapped by unknown gunmen in Afghanistan’s capital, Kabul, Afghan police said Sunday. The woman was seized in Kabul’s Qala e Fatullah area area on Saturday evening as she was traveling by car with her driver, said Basir Mujahid, a spokesman for Kabul’s police chief. Police are investigating the abduction, said Mujahid. He said the woman, who is an Australian citizen of Pakistani origin, works for the Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief (ACBAR,) which describes itself as an Afghan independent body bringing together more than 150 national and international NGOs operating in the country. The Australian Embassy in Kabul is making urgent inquiries into the reported kidnapping, a spokeswoman for the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade said in a statement. “Due to the nature of the incident we will not be commenting further,” the statement said. “We continue to advise Australians not to travel to Afghanistan because of the extremely dangerous security situation, including the serious threat of kidnapping.” Related video US forces involved in failed hostage rescue Both Afghans and foreigners face the risk of abduction in Afghanistan, with two previous cases this year also involving Australians. An Australian aid worker was abducted from her home in Jalalabad in Afghanistan in April, but was freed in August. Afghanistan’s National Directorate of Security said Kerry Jane Wilson was released after it conducted a special operation. An American and an Australian were also kidnapped from American University in Kabul in August. A rescue attempt by US Special Operations Forces from SEAL Team 6 failed when they were not found at the location targeted. In June, nearly 200 people were kidnapped by Taliban fighters in Afghanistan’s northeastern province of Kunduz, police said. The majority were released but the fighters killed several people and kept around 20 hostage. CNN’s Ehsan Popalzai reported from Kabul and Laura Smith-Spark wrote from London. CNN’s Tomas Etzler contributed to this report.


China's Supreme People's Court reiterates its "judicial power" over South China Sea Statement comes after landmark Hague ruling against China's territorial claims China has sent a clear warning to foreigners who enter contested areas of the South China Sea – stay away or you’ll be prosecuted. The warning came in a detailed explanation of last month’s Hague ruling, which found that China’s territorial claims in region have “no legal basis” under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea. China claims almost all of the South China Sea, including islands more than 800 miles (1,200 kilometers) from the Chinese mainland, despite objections from neighbors including the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Vietnam. On Tuesday, the Chinese Supreme People’s Court issued a regulation on judicial interpretation saying there was a “clear legal basis for China to safeguard maritime order, marine safety and interests, and to exercise integrated management over the country’s jurisdictional seas.” Michael C. Davis, a law professor at Hong Kong University, told CNN the supreme court’s statement was “worrisome.” “This is kind of an ominous suggestion that they will be prosecuting people who enter the waters that China claims,” he said. The Hague ruling found that China had no historic title to the waters and had breached the sovereign rights of the Philippines, which brought the case. The court also ruled that many purported islands controlled by China are not in fact, islands, but instead reefs or rocks, which do not generate territorial rights. China’s top court did not directly reference the Hague ruling, but said that “judicial power is an important component of national sovereignty.” China fiercely guards what it regards as its territorial waters, attacking and arresting foreign fishermen who work near islands controlled by Beijing. The supreme court said Chinese citizens or foreigners who engage in illegal hunting or fishing in the waters will be criminally prosecuted. It classified several situations as “illegally entering Chinese waters,” including remaining or reentering waters “after being warned and driven away,” that could result up to a year in prison. In May, Vietnamese fishermen told CNN how Chinese-flagged vessels raided their boats and stole equipment in the waters near the Paracel Islands. Davis warned that the direction could mean Filipino fishermen operating in waters the UN tribunal ruled belong to the Philippines could be apprehended by Chinese vessels and be “prosecuted in direct contradiction of the (Hague) ruling.” The supreme court also said that Chinese fishermen who violate environmental protection laws in the South China Sea could be prosecuted. Davis said that this could be “a signal they will require their fishermen to adhere to environmental standards, which they haven’t in the past.” The Hague tribunal found that Chinese fishermen and reclamation projects had caused “irreparable harm” to the region’s marine environment. In recent months, Beijing has reacted angrily to U.S. and Australian freedom of navigation operations in the region, scrambling fighter jets and boats and denouncing the nations’ navies as “threatening Chinese sovereignty.” Last week, state-run Chinese newspaper Global Times accused Australia of making itself “a pioneer of hurting China’s interest with a fiercer attitude than countries directly involved in the South China Sea dispute.” Canberra was one of the first governments to voice support for the Hague ruling and encourage others to abide by it. However, while the ruling is considered legally binding, there is no mechanism to enforce it.


Sharbat Gula was greeted in the Afghan capital, Kabul, by President Ashraf Ghani She was deported from Pakistan after pleading guilty to illegally staying in the country Sharbat Gula, the woman known as the “Afghan Girl” for her appearance on a 1984 National Geographic cover, is now living in Afghanistan once more after being deported on charges of illegally staying in Pakistan. She was welcomed back by Afghan President Ashraf Ghani in Kabul on Wednesday, a presidential spokesman told CNN. Photographs released by the Afghan presidential office show Gula, in blue, and other family members standing and talking with the President. Related article The story behind the world's most famous photograph Gula, whose striking green eyes in a National Geographic cover photo made her face known around the world, was 12 when photographer Steve McCurry captured his iconic image of her living in a refugee camp for Afghan nationals in Peshawar. Now in her 40s, she was arrested in the same city last month for falsifying documents and illegally staying in Pakistan. Speaking to CNN last week from a hospital in Peshawar, where she was receiving treatment for a medical condition, Gula said: “I want to go back to Afghanistan, to my hometown.” She pleaded guilty to the charges of illegally staying in Pakistan and was sentenced to 15 days in jail and fined, her lawyer Mohsin Darwar, told CNN. The sentence took into account the fact she has Hepatitis C, the condition for which she is receiving treatment, according to Mubashir Nazar, another lawyer representing her. Gula’s nephew, Neimat Gul, told CNN that his aunt had never understood the attention she had received in response to the famous magazine cover. Related video 'Afghan girl' in iconic photo arrested “She is very innocent. She never understood her fame, or the reason for it, which is why hasn’t capitalized on it,” he said. “Otherwise she would not be in situations like this.” Amnesty International last week condemned the decision to deport Gula, calling it a “grave injustice.” Human Rights Watch said since July 1, Pakistan has repatriated 370,000 Afghans, nearly 220,000 of them registered refugees. “They are joining more than 1 million internally displaced Afghans who are struggling to survive in a country still wracked by conflict and crushing poverty,” the group said in a statement. CNN’s Euan McKirdy, Sophia Saifi and Rebecca Wright contributed to this report.


The leader of the union that represents Border Patrol agents slammed the deployment of National Guard troops to the border by the Trump administration, calling it “a colossal waste of resources.” In comments to the Los Angeles Times published Thursday, Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, said that despite his initial praise of the decision to deploy troops, the way the Guard has been used thus far has not helped the Border Patrol workload the way deployments under previous administrations have, to his recollection. The Trump administration has deployed roughly 1,600 troops thus far out of up to 4,000 that President Donald Trump and the Pentagon authorized. Troops are mostly assisting by monitoring surveillance feeds – which by law may not be pointed at Mexican territory when Guard troops are watching – conducting aerial surveillance flights, and maintaining and building infrastructure. Related article National Guard troops involved in 1,600 apprehensions at Mexican border In response to Judd’s comments, a Customs and Border Protection spokesperson said troops’ presence thus far has led to 4,116 arrests, 1,182 turned-back illegal crossing attempts and 3,554 pounds of seized illicit drugs. Those figures compare with roughly 38,000 total apprehensions by the Border Patrol in each of the past few months, and it’s unclear specifically what the Guard contribution was in each case. “National Guard personnel supporting Operation Guardian Support have already had an impact on U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Southwest Border operations,” the spokesperson said. “Their work allows agents to fulfill regular law enforcement duties by supplementing necessary support roles.” Judd and his union of roughly 18,000 Border Patrol agents endorsed Trump during the campaign and have remained vocally supportive of him, though they have criticized administration policies, including blaming “Obama holdovers” for policies they’re critical of. “We have seen no benefit,” Judd said of the deployment, saying he recalls previous administrations’ deployments as allowing the Guard troops to do more. “They’re not allowed to be in the public eye. They’re not allowed to be in our lookout and observation posts, even in Texas,” he told the Los Angeles Times. “We generally support the administration, but we’re not going to be cheerleading when things are not going well.”

Trump administration deployment of National Guard troops to the border


There are no indications of foul play, police said Police could not confirm the teens are still in Canada and did not provide updates on the other four teens Two of the six teenagers who were reported missing while visiting Washington for an international robotics competition have crossed into Canada, police said Thursday. The six teens represented Burundi, a small country in East Africa, in the inaugural FIRST Global robotics competition, competing alongside teams from more than 150 other countries. Metropolitan Police Department spokeswoman Aquita Brown said two were seen leaving the US for Canada. Police could not confirm they are still in Canada and did not provide updates on the other four youths. There are no indications of foul play, police said. The State Department directed questions to DC law enforcement. The six teens were last reported seen at the location of the event – DAR Constitution Hall on 18th St between C Street and D Street in northwest DC – the Metropolitan Police Department said. “On the night of July 18, FIRST Global learned the adult mentor of Team Burundi was unable to find the group of six students of the team who participated in the 2017 FIRST Global Challenge,” the competition’s organizers said in a statement. The mentor is identified in police reports as Canesius Bindaba. Bindaba stated that “he does not know where (they) could have went,” the police reports said. DC police tweeted names, ages, descriptions and photos of the six missing individuals. There are four boys and two girls, ranging in age from 16 to 18, according to the tweets. The teens were reportedly last seen at 5 p.m. ET, police said. An itinerary of the event says that the robotics competition was scheduled to end at 5:30 p.m., and closing ceremonies were to run from 5:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. FIRST Global President Joe Sestak called the police to report the students as missing, according to the organization’s statement, and “proper follow on reports have been submitted to the police who are investigating the case. “Security of the students is of paramount importance to FIRST Global. FIRST Global ensures that all students get to their dormitories after the daily competition by providing safe transportation to the students staying at Trinity Washington University who are always to be under close supervision of their adult mentor and are advised not to leave the premises unaccompanied by the mentor.” Anyone with information is urged to contact authorities at 202-727-9099. The competition attracted significant national attention after six girls on the Afghan team were denied visas for the competition, but later allowed to travel when President Donald Trump intervened. Ivanka Trump attended the event Tuesday, meeting with the Afghan girls. A country of about 10 million people, Burundi has endured years of unrest, with an estimated 300,000 people dying in a civil war that was fought from 1993 to 2003. In recent years, Burundi, and its capital, Bujumbura, have been marked by social instability, political tensions and economic hardship. “The political situation in Burundi is tenuous, and there is sporadic violence throughout the country, including frequent gunfire and grenade attacks by armed groups,” a June 23 US State Department travel warning said. Last month, a UN official briefed the Security Council about the deteriorating humanitarian conditions and large swaths of the population on the move, about 209,000 inside the country and more than 400,000 to neighboring nations. “Mass displacement continues, due to natural hazards, food insecurity and socio-political factors,” Assistant Secretary-General Tayé-Brook Zerihoun said. “Three million people in Burundi are in need of humanitarian assistance. Nearly 2.6 million others experience acute food insecurity, with over 700,000 in need of emergency food assistance.”