There’s a strain of thinking in some Washington political circles that goes like this: Donald Trump isn’t going to get re-elected and may not even last out his entire first term. Given that, he’s rightly seen as a bump in a much longer road – and one that will be forgotten soon after he leaves office. That logic is flawed. And Trump’s decision to pull the US out of the Paris climate accord, which has not yet been announced but is being widely reported, shows why. Simply put: Decisions he makes – every day – change the course of the country on everything from climate to immigration to trade.  The idea that all of this can be undone the second Trump leaves office – whether in four or eight years – is a massive misjudgment of not only how difficult it is to turn the ship of state but also of the ways in which the world perceives the U.S. will have changed in that time. Let’s go back to the beginning on the Paris deal. Trump railed against the climate deal – agreed to by then President Obama in 2015 – during the 2016 campaign and held it up as a prime example of how the US makes bad deals. “We’re going to cancel the Paris climate agreement and stop all payments of United States tax dollars to UN global warming programs,” Trump promised during a major energy speech in late May 2016. “This agreement gives foreign bureaucrats control over how much energy we use on our land, in our country. No way.” (Worth noting: The 195 signatories the climate accord, which proposes goals for lowering carbon emissions, did so voluntarily.  There is no ability of one country in the accord to dictate the emissions policies of another country.) Many people assumed Trump’s harsh language on climate was simply campaign posturing – designed to prop up his “America First” messaging to the Democratic base. Even after Trump won, there was doubt he would make good on his pledge – especially given that the likes of Ivanka Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson were advocating for the country to remain in the accord. Trump appears to be ready to do just that, however.  And, it’s the latest in a series of statements and decisions he has made – his rejection of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, his tough talk on immigration, his views on NATO – that not only reverse course from the previous administration but also break with the broader post-World War II ideas of what America is and will be on the world stage. Trump’s performance during last week’s foreign trip provides further evidence. He got along famously with Saudi Arabian leaders, for example, and clashed with the likes of Germany’s Angela Merkel and France’s Emmanuel Macron. Need more examples? His ongoing unwillingness to condemn Russia. His praise for Turkey Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte. And so on. To dismiss Trump as ineffectual or anomalous is to miss the broader point. Trump may not get all or even most or even a majority of his agenda passed through Congress. But, the simple act of being president every day – and the decisions, big and small, that Trump is making – has a profound effect. Related video What happens if Trump quits climate accord? Pulling out of the Paris accord doesn’t mean the US will never, ever again deal with the issue of climate change on the world stage. Just as pulling out of TPP or green-lighting the Keystone XL pipeline doesn’t mean the next president won’t be able to reverse some of the effects of those decisions – if he or she so chose. But, there’s no doubt that the direction Trump steers the ship of state matters. Bigly. And is not something that will be easily undone.


Airstrikes take out a bridge in Mosul ahead of an Iraqi-led offensive, witnesses say ISIS executes members trying to flee the Iraqi city before the operation begins A long-awaited operation to seize the key Iraqi city of Mosul after two years of ISIS control is imminent, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi announced Sunday. “We have been battling ISIS for more than two years,” Abadi said during a televised meeting with journalists and political analysts. “We started fighting ISIS in the outskirts of Baghdad, and thank God we are now fighting them in the outskirts of Mosul, and God willing the decisive battle will be soon.” The announcement came hours after Iraqi forces dropped leaflets over Mosul, telling residents not to panic and to seal their doors and windows. Battling horror of ISIS: Iraq’s bloody crisis up close “We promise you that victory is near and that it will be a great victory fitting with the greatness of Iraq and its history and its people,” Ahmed al-Assadi, a lawmaker and spokesman for the Popular Mobilization Units, or PMUs, which include dozens of militias fighting together, said earlier. Witnesses on Sunday said airstrikes had taken out one of the city’s main bridges, the latest move as forces warm up for the much-anticipated offensive on Mosul, a key city in the ISIS network and the militant group’s last bastion of power in Iraq. It was unclear who was behind the airstrikes in Iraq’s second-largest city, though Amaq, the news agency affiliated with ISIS, blamed US warplanes in a statement online. The operation to liberate Mosul is expected to be a “messy and prolonged battle,” CNN senior international correspondent Ben Wedeman said in the Iraqi city of Irbil, adding that the battle would likely come down to “street-to-street fighting.” Related video Iraqi PM vows liberation from ISIS in Mosul The PMU groups are fighting alongside the Iraqi military and are made up of mostly Shiites but also Sunnis, Christians and other ethnic and religious groups. Analysis: Stakes for Iraq’s future couldn’t be higher The majority of the PMU groups are mobilizing in coordination with Iraq’s Internal Security Forces and the joint command for the looming battle, Assadi said. Forces have been moving toward Mosul and preparing for this battle – to take place from the air and on the ground – for more than 15 months. Sunday’s airstrikes badly damaged al-Hurriya Bridge, though they appeared to be targeting four boats in the Tigris River. The bridge was not directly hit, but one of its columns was damaged, witnesses said. Ordinary Iraqis flee nightmare of horrors The bridge is one of five connecting the two parts of the city separated by the Tigris. ISIS militants blocked both ends of the bridge to prevent people from using after it was hit. The militia’s announcement that the battle would begin in days echoes a stern warning delivered by the Iraqi air force, which dropped thousands of leaflets on Mosul overnight. Related video Mosul awaits assault on ISIS The four-page leaflets told residents that Iraqi-led forces, supported by the US-led coalition against ISIS, were making advances on the city and that no one should panic. Residents were asked to stay away from certain parts of the city, avoid ISIS positions, remain in their homes and seal their windows and doors. A phone number for Mosul residents to report ISIS activity was included. “It’s victory time” blared a headline on the newspaper-style leaflets, quoting Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi in remarks directed at Mosul’s residents. “Time to celebrate a clean Iraq without ‘Daesh’ (ISIS) or any dark belief.” Residents have had limited access to the outside world since Mosul fell to the terrorist group in June 2014. ISIS imposed extreme restrictions on travel in and out of the city and banned satellite dishes. The warning to residents came hours after ISIS started telling wounded fighters in Mosul that they could go to the group’s power base in Syria as Iraqi forces and others prepared to retake the city, a source inside Mosul told CNN. ISIS also is releasing some low-level prisoners, the source said, such as those jailed for their beards, cigarettes or clothing offenses. Wounded ISIS fighters have been told to go to Raqqa, Syria, the group’s de facto capital, the source said. Witnesses inside Mosul said they saw six buses loaded with ISIS members leaving the city early Saturday. Women and children were seen inside the buses. Later Saturday, 14 members of ISIS were executed after trying to flee with their families from Mosul to Raqqa, the witnesses said. Related video ISIS sets oil wells on fire Sources said they believe those executed could have been the same people seen leaving by buses earlier Saturday. The source inside Mosul said a tunnel network is growing, including one big enough for motorbikes, from the outskirts of the city to the nearby village of Hamdania. A man imprisoned by ISIS in Mosul for two months said he was forced to help dig more than 12 tunnels on the eastern side of the city. On Friday, ISIS set fire to trenches filled with crude oil outside northeastern Mosul, according to military sources. Black smoke intensified Saturday. PMU members met Saturday with the Iraqi prime minister to discuss support of the Iraqi Security Forces on the ground in the Mosul operations. They also talked about fighting ISIS in Hawija, about 100 miles south of Mosul. “The troops of the Popular Mobilization Forces are waiting for the launch of the zero hour to participate in the battle to liberate Mosul,” said Assadi, the PMU spokesman. Kurdish Peshmerga forces also are readying for the battle. Masoud Barzani, President of the Kurdistan Regional Government, tweeted Saturday, “The time has come to begin the liberation of Mosul.” The time has come to begin the liberation of Mosul https://t.co/vyvP1WzJEH “Baghdad and Irbil (the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan) have also agreed to establish a joint higher political committee whose task would be to supervise the affairs of Mosul after the liberation,” Barzani said in a statement As forces push toward Mosul, Baghdad has become a target of ISIS suicide attacks. On Saturday, at least 34 people were killed and 35 others wounded in a suicide bombing that targeted a Shiite gathering in the Iraqi capital’s al-Shaab district, according to police sources. ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack in a statement released by Amaq. CNN’s Schams Elwazer, Ray Sanchez and Nick Paton Walsh contributed to this report.


The "natural" or "gentle" C-section has been developed over the past decade Equally safe as a traditional C-section, this method better integrates parents into the process A woman is lying on an operating table. In front of her is a big curtain, usually blue, that separates her from the surgical field: her own pregnant belly. Beside her, near her head, her partner is sitting. During a cesarean delivery, neither can see what is happening to her belly. Behind the curtain, the doctor makes an incision into the woman’s abdomen, cuts into her womb and pulls out a baby. After being born, the baby is immediately taken away, to another part of the room or another room entirely, where pediatricians do some initial examinations. The partner will usually leave the mother to take pictures of the baby and then return to show the photos to the mother. “Isn’t this odd that the first time a mother sees her baby is on the screen of a camera?” thought Dr. William Camann. As director of obstetric anesthesia service at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Camann had observed this same sequence of events countless times during C-sections he performed. And so, Camann imagined using a clear curtain instead of a blue one, so the mother could see through it and watch as her baby was born. This way, the mother “could be much more involved with the baby in a visual sense much sooner,”  said Camann. This happened more than a decade ago, around the time doctors around the world began tweaking a mother’s experience during a cesarean delivery. Today, this ancient surgical procedure, which is depicted in ancient Chinese etchings and referred to in Greek mythology, looks quite different from how it once appeared. At least on the surface. Life-saving cesareans, in which the mother’s abdomen and womb are cut open and her baby is removed rather than birth through the vaginal canal, are generally performed when mother or child is experiencing an emergency condition. These include fetal distress, obstructed labor (when the baby is positioned feet-down) and maternal medical conditions such as infections and diabetes. Related article Births to older moms rise as teen birth rate drops Cesareans can have more complications than vaginal births, including excessive bleeding, infection or ruptured uterus. Since it is a surgical procedure, a natural C-section cannot entirely dispense with the safety rules of an operating room, but it allows women to bond with their babies as they would during and after a vaginal birth, according to a presentation delivered at the Euroanesthesia conference in Geneva, Switzerland, on Sunday. A gentle C-section, as the reinvented technique is sometimes called, is as safe as the traditional form, said Dr. Felicity Plaat, who presented the research and works as a consultant anesthetist at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust in London. In 2008, she and her colleagues developed a technique at Queen Charlotte’s Hospital in London to help the many women who give birth via C-section: up to a quarter of all pregnant women in the United Kingdom and about 32% in the United States. Compared with cesarean section, vaginal birth provides more maternal satisfaction and has better bonding and breastfeeding outcomes, according to Plaat. “We said, ‘Could we import these aspects of vaginal birth into the operating theater? And would they be safe, and would they have the same advantages?’ That’s what started it,” said Plaat, who credits Jenny Smith, a midwife and co-author of a study published in BJOG, An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, as the “moving force” behind the development of this technique. In the UK, the natural C-section begins in essentially the same manner as the traditional form. Once in the operating room, though, doctors lower the obstructing drape so that both parents are able to see their baby’s birth. The baby is slowly removed from the abdomen. Parental wishes, such as lowering lights or playing music, are respected as much as possible within the bounds of safety. Related article How shortchanging dads hurts the whole family More research is needed, said Plaat, and a randomized controlled trial has already been carried out at Charité University Hospital in Berlin. Comparing gentle C-sections with the traditional form, the German researchers found no increase in complications for mother or child, but the “gentle” procedure improved breastfeeding rates and provided an overall better experience for the mothers. Cumella said that with no medical differences between the two, there’s no doubt both are equally safe. The German study also found no increase in the rate of maternally requested C-sections. Plaat said the same is true in the UK, while Camann emphasized that “no one is trying to increase the C-section rate.” Instead, “if you need to have a cesarean, for whatever the medical reason is, at least we can make it a better experience for you.” “As far as the anesthetic is concerned, what we want to do is obviously make sure the mum has got sufficient anesthetic so she’s completely comfortable, but we don’t want to make her sort of more numb than she needs to be,” Plaat said. “Particularly, we don’t want the anesthetic if possible to affect her upper body or her arms, because she will have a baby to look after and cuddle.” Producing a local anesthetic effect is not a precise science. The technique Plaat uses is a combined spinal epidural: The mother gets a spinal block – a single injection of anesthesia into the spinal fluid – and an epidural, in which anesthesia is administered, either continuously or periodically, into the spinal cord to provide numbness in the abdominal region. The epidural allows the anesthesiologist to top off the original injection and keep the anesthetic going as long as is needed. “It just means you can be more subtle with the doses,” Plaat said. So instead of giving a large dose to start, a doctor can give the mother a moderate dose and add to it if necessary. Camann, who teaches at Harvard Medical School, said the combined spinal epidural is used for all C-sections, traditional and gentle, performed in the United States. He has been doing his own version of C-section for a decade or so. Along with a clear curtain to allow for visual interaction, “we put the EKG leads on the side, very far laterally, so they’re not right on the mother’s chest, so the mother’s chest could be free of these electronic monitoring devices,” Camann said. This allows the mother to interact with or even breastfeed her baby immediately. The mothers all love it, he said, while the partners “have some great photo ops.” Related article A better way to give birth Dr. Angelo Cumella, fellow of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists at Northern Westchester Hospital in Mount Kisco, New York, has been doing “gentle C-sections” for about two years. “It’s basically trying to integrate the patient as much as possible into the traditional cesarean section,” said Cumella, who also uses the clear drape, “so from the very beginning, it’s less claustrophobic.”  He also tries to get the baby immediately over to the mom so that they can bond, skin to skin, he said. “If they want to breastfeed, they can, right in the OR.” Cumella has been in practice for 30 years, so he’s delivered babies for women who have had both the traditional and updated C-sections. Mothers who have had both kinds appreciate the transformation. “It’s just a better experience for them,” Cumella said of the gentle version. Shannon Schoenfeld, a 36-years-old from Phoenix, Arizona, is one such patient. Eight years ago, she had a traditional C-section in New York when her daughter was born breech. Though Cumella held the newborn “up over the curtain,” Schoenfeld did not get to hold her new child immediately. Six months ago, Schoenfeld once again gave birth. A gentle c-section brought her third child into the world. “I’m fortunate I was able to experience that,” said Schoenfeld, who explains that because of her past history, this was a planned C-section, not an emergency. “I did enjoy the gentle C-section more, because I got to see the baby immediately,” said Schoenfeld. While she did not watch everything happening during the birth, she said, but “they gave [my baby] to me while they were still operating on me – I was nursing on the table.” “Personally, I was concerned about breast feeding cause I am older,” said Schoenfeld. “Though I have two other children, they’re 10 and 8, so it’s been awhile.  It’s a relief to have that immediate connection.” Some mothers, such as Srebrenka Robic Ingram, a 42-year-old from Decatur, Georgia, learned the benefits of a more natural cesarean only once she compared notes with her friends. “My goal was to have a natural vaginal delivery,” said Robic Ingram, a professor of biology at Agnes Scott College. “I had a doula and everything, so that was my plan A, and then I went into labor, and it was taking a long time.” In fact, after about 24 hours of unmedicated labor, her doula made a suggestion. “And you know it’s a sign when the doula says, ‘Maybe we should talk about options,’ ” Robic Ingram said, laughing. After an epidural and 10 more hours of labor, her baby started going into distress. Related article Why so many C-sections have medical groups concerned “His heart rate was going down to the point that everyone got concerned,” Robic Ingram said. She discussed it with her doula and her obstetrician, and they decided it was “probably best to just take him out.” Both her husband and doula went with her to the operating room, and the doula commented that often she is not permitted to attend women during C-sections. “That was the first more positive part of it,” Robic Ingram said. Though she wasn’t able to see the birth because of the drape, “as soon as they were taking him out, I was able to see him, and then I needed to be stitched up, obviously,” she said. During the 20 minutes of stitching, her baby was taken away, but her husband remained with the child. Once she was wheeled into the recovery room, “we were all in the same room together: my husband, the baby, my doula and I,” said Robic Ingram, who immediately attempted to breastfeed her son. Later, a friend who had a traditional C-section told Robic Ingram that she was not allowed to see her baby for a few hours, an experience the woman speaks of as “traumatizing.” Only after the fact, then, did Robic Ingram recognize her C-section must be considered “a family-friendly, gentle version.” See the latest news and share your comments with CNN Health on Facebook and Twitter. “I didn’t know any better. I didn’t know any other way,” she said. Cumella said almost all the C-sections he performs today are the gentle kind. “More and more physicians here at the hospital are incorporating it, so I think it’s a definite trend,” he said. Though not entirely different from the traditional version, one thing that is necessary is to bring everyone – the anesthesiologist, the neonatologist, the nurses – on board from the get-go. “It is a cultural change for the physicians themselves,” Cumella said.  “There are certain small changes that need to occur – but all are easily accomplished.” Camann said he’s often asked whether a gentle C-section costs any more: “And the answer is, ‘No, it doesn’t cost any more, because really it’s just a change of behavior.’ “ Ultimately, every doctor, hospital and birthing center that uses this technique has found the same thing, said Plaat, the anesthetist in London. “The women loved it because it changed the traditional cesarean, (which) is quite cold and clinical, into a sort of event that reflected how important one’s child’s birthday is.”


Editor’s Note: Tulsi Gabbard is the United States Representative for Hawaii’s 2nd Congressional District. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author. Tulsi Gabbard: I served in Iraq, know cost of war. U.S. on path to intervention in Syria without a plan. We need judgment, foresight She says she's resigned her DNC post to support Bernie Sanders; he'll bring peace, prosperity, be trustworthy commander-in-chief Every four years, we make a choice about who leads our country. It’s a choice that can determine whether our nation goes to war. As a veteran of two Middle East deployments, I know firsthand the cost of war. When I served in Iraq with a medical unit, one of my daily responsibilities was to go through a list of every injury and casualty in the theater of operations and make sure our troops were cared for. The names I saw every day were those of my brothers and sisters in uniform, those who carry the indelible wounds of war. Some of them never came home. All of them sacrificed for all of us. Our interventionist wars in Iraq and Libya have cost us trillions of dollars and thousands of American lives; and al Qaeda, ISIS, and other terrorist organizations are still strong. Today, America is again on a path of interventionism without a plan. Nowhere is this more apparent than in Syria, where we are supporting rebel groups allied with al Qaeda, ISIS and other terrorist organizations. We are spending billions of dollars to overthrow the Syrian government in a war that has led to hundreds of thousands of Syrians being killed or injured and a refugee crisis like we’ve not seen in decades. Our military and intelligence assets are on the ground, yet no one can answer a simple question: What happens if the regime falls?  If we succeed in overthrowing the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad, it will open the door for ISIS, al Qaeda, and other Islamic extremists to take over all of Syria, which will simply increase human suffering in the region, exacerbate the refugee crisis and pose a greater threat to the world. Related article For millennials, Sanders is a grandpa who gets them In the runup to the Iraq War, we heard from leaders with long legacies in the foreign policy realm. Voices of dissent were relegated to the fringes. We were told to follow those with experience. Our collective national experience with a decade of reckless interventionism and myopic regime change tells a different story. Judgment and foresight are the qualities we need most in our leaders. Related video Super Tuesday scenarios: Can Bernie Sanders slow Clinton? To have a strong national defense, we need to elect leaders who make the right decisions. The war in Iraq cost us thousands of American lives, damaged our economy and destabilized a region, unleashing more suffering and chaos in the Middle East. There’s one Democratic candidate who recognizes the quagmire in Syria. He showed these instincts when he voted against the war in Iraq. He knows that world leadership and being the world’s policeman are not the same. Related article Why Hillary Clinton beat Bernie Sanders I spoke with Sen. Bernie Sanders at length about his foreign policy vision. He understands the need for a foreign policy that robustly defends the safety and security of the American people. But he is committed to not wasting precious lives and money on interventionist wars of regime change.  He appreciates that such counterproductive wars undermine our national security and economic prosperity. Related article Atlanta mayor: Why Hillary Clinton is the right choice He has never allowed powerful interests or the circular reasoning of the chattering classes to sway him. He is who he appears to be: a man of principle, personal courage and a commitment to justice. That’s why I’m endorsing Bernie Sanders. As vice-chair of the Democratic National Committee, I have had to stay neutral in this contest. But I can no longer sit on the sidelines. The stakes are too high. As elections continue across the country, the American people are faced with a clear choice. We can elect a president who will lead us into more interventionist wars of regime change. Or we can elect a president who will usher in a new era of peace and prosperity. With this clear choice in mind, on Sunday I resigned my position with the DNC so I can wholeheartedly support Sanders as the Democratic nominee for president of the United States. America needs leaders we can trust. Others may have more experience in foreign policy, but it is judgment that matters most.  When it comes to the choice of our next commander-in-chief, I trust Bernie Sanders to know when to use U.S. military power and when not to use that power. Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion. Read CNNOpinion’s Flipboard magazine.


It's apparent that Russia and the U.S. have widely conflicting ultimate goals in Syria Russia is putting together an alternative anti-ISIS coalition, with Iran and the Syrian government The question is whether Russia will want to help fashion a post-Assad Syria The first Russian airstrikes in Syria have demonstrated the gulf between U.S. and Russian goals in Syria. They were unilateral and focused on areas in Homs and Hama provinces far from where the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria has a presence. Russian officials warned the United States to stay out of Syrian airspace while the missions were underway. There was an angry response from Washington and other Western capitals. U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said at a Pentagon news conference that the Russian strategy is “doomed to failure” and would “simply inflame the civil war.” French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told reporters at the United Nations that “the international coalition is striking Daesh (as ISIS is often called), France is striking Daesh, Bashar al-Assad only a little bit, and for the moment, the Russians not at all.” Related video French foreign minister reacts as Russia bombs in Syria Capturing the ugly mood, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said before a meeting with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry in New York: “Don’t listen to the Pentagon about Russian strikes.” “Our answer is honest and frank,” he said later. “At the request of Syrian government, we’re helping them to fight ISIS and other terrorist groups.” He gave no definition of “other,” but it apparently includes anyone deemed a threat to regime forces. The Russian strikes on Wednesday – eight in all, according to the Defense Ministry – were in areas where al Qaeda’s affiliate, Jabhat al Nusra, has a presence, as do other factions including the Islamist Ahrar al Sham and elements of the Western-backed Free Syrian Army, or FSA. Some strikes were around the town of Tabiseh in an area that straddles the critical north-south road between Homs and Hama. It’s an area the Syrian regime has been targeting recently as it tries to recover an important route for resupplying its strongholds. Related video U.S. and Russia release joint statement on Syria Torbjorn Soltvedt with risk analyst Verisk Maplecroft says the regime’s military efforts are “increasingly concentrated in northern Latakia and along the north-south highway.” “Maintaining control over the highway is essential for keeping Damascus linked with the coastal region as well as reinforcing troops in Aleppo, Soltvedt told CNN. By analyzing video from the Russian Defense Ministry and comparing it with satellite images, it’s clear that another heavy strike hit the outskirts of Ltamenah, a town near Hama. It hit not one of the Islamist groups but a little-known group within the FSA, Tajamu Al Ezza, which supports coalition airstrikes against ISIS. So there are now three separate air campaigns in Syria: al-Assad’s air force, Russian combat aircraft (mainly Su-24s) and the coalition strikes. Those of al-Assad and the Russians are clearly coordinated. But Peter Felstead, editor of IHS-Jane’s Defence Weekly told CNN: “I can’t see US and UK air assets co-ordinating their operations with Russia, since the latter has a completely different agenda in Syria that’s all about protecting a client state.” There is a risk of misunderstandings in these more crowded skies. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said Wednesday there has been “no real effort by the Russian side to de-conflict the Russian airstrikes in Syria with the ongoing U.S.-led coalition.” Kerry and Lavrov met late Wednesday and agreed there must be contacts on “de-confliction,” but the two sides’ ultimate goals in Syria remain far apart. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s argument is that the West’s strategy is bankrupt, and that getting rid of al-Assad is not a policy in itself because it could lead ISIS to the gates of Damascus and sentence Syrians to life under the “caliphate.” Related video France: If Russia hits non-ISIS, only aim is backing Assad He has a point, according to Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations. “Regime change could lead to regime collapse, paving the way to the disappearance of order in Damascus and to the establishment of a caliphate under ISIS,” he writes in the Financial Times. So in Moscow’s view, it was entirely legitimate to come to the aid of an ally who had requested help, especially as al-Assad’s control had been reduced to some 25% of Syrian territory. Western leaders still say al-Assad must go; he is part of the problem and morally responsible for the death of tens of thousands of Syrians. British Prime Minister David Cameron said in New York that al-Assad “has helped create this conflict and this migration crisis. He is one of the great recruiting sergeants for ISIL.” Related video UK: Maybe OK for Assad to stay in 'transitional period' But there does appear to be growing flexibility among Western governments over how any transition would be managed. Last week, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond talked of a transitional role for al-Assad. A French statement stressing the need for “a political transition, which combines elements of the regime and the moderate opposition,” hints at a similar drift. And former White House adviser Philip Gordon acknowledges that what’s needed is “a new diplomatic process that brings all the key external actors to the table and agrees on a messy compromise to deescalate the conflict – even if that means putting off agreement on the question of Assad.” The absence of a moderate alternative to al-Assad, not least because of the repeated failure of the U.S. to support a plausible rebel brigade (or even battalion), has also prodded other regional governments such as Egypt to accept that al-Assad may have to be part of the solution. Moscow is probably calculating that its decisive backing for al-Assad now will only hasten this process, putting it in the driver’s seat. Why Russian airstrikes in Syria are a big deal That fulfills a key goal for Putin, says Haass, because he is “anxious as ever to demonstrate that Russia is a great power that cannot be ignored (and) is exploiting the vacuum left in large part by the U.S. and European governments.” Related video Obama and Putin battle over ISIS In essence, Russia is putting together an alternative anti-ISIS coalition, with Iran and the Syrian government. Its relationship with Iran – another important player in supporting al-Assad – gives it additional leverage. In July, there was a flurry of meetings between Russian and Iranian ministers to agree on a “common position” on Syria that envisages a ceasefire and some form of transitional government. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani says he does “not see a coalition between Iran and Russia in the war against terrorism in Syria,” but there is certainly a higher degree of coordination. Iraq announced Sunday that it was also part of this group; its Joint Military Operations Command Iraq disclosed a new intelligence-sharing agreement with Russia, Iran and Syria in the battle against ISIS, in addition to its support for the U.S.-led coalition. The question is whether at some point Russia too will want to help fashion a post-Assad Syria – or, in pursuit of its own narrower interests, settle for nothing more than an Alawite Mediterranean enclave from which it can project power. Opinion: Why Putin’s Syria move is such a dilemma for Obama Russia can play the long game if it chooses to, according to Peter Felstead of HIS-Janes. “Latakia is safely within government control and, being on the coast, can be resupplied by sea. It’s a secure position from which to fly combat missions in support of Assad’s forces,” he told CNN. Russia also has plenty of airlift capability, analysts say, though it has been affected by the fact that Antonov, the company that supplies many of its transport planes, is Ukrainian. (Antonov recently spoke of the “interruption of cooperation with the north neighbor.”) CNN tracking of recent flights between Moscow and Latakia shows that the Russian air force has been using elderly Tu-154 planes on Syria runs, some of which had previously been taken out of service. Russian military transports also have to fly a long, circuitous route over Iran and Iraq to reach Latakia, as several countries have denied overflight rights. And Philip Stack, who follows the Middle East for analysts Verisk Maplecroft, says Russian combat aircraft in Syria may be at risk. “It is possible that some of them are optimized for suppression of air defenses, such as the SU-24s. But when flying close support missions, even advanced aircraft can be vulnerable.” But the Institute for the Study of War says there are signs that the Russians are in it for the long haul. They are upgrading their naval facility in Tartus, down the coast from Latakia. The Russian newspaper Kommersant reported last week that 1,700 Russian military “specialists” and security personnel are equipping and securing the facility and rebuilding its dock. Christopher Harmer at ISW says that “at a minimum, recent Russian activity in Tartus indicates that Russia views its military intervention in Syria as a long-term commitment rather than a short-term limited operation.” Russia’s Syria expedition: Why now? There are also domestic considerations for Putin, says Ulrich Schmid, a professor of Russian history at the University of St. Gallen in Switzerland. “Putin has used the patriotic wave in Russia after the annexation of Crimea as a resource of power,” he says. “This resource is limited, so Putin wants to refill the tank of national pride with new fuel,” but not to the extent of putting ground troops in Syria. Schmid told CNN that Ukraine is a busted flush for Putin. “He cannot aggravate the situation in Ukraine anymore, because the Russian public sees the situation in Ukraine more and more as a tragedy.” And so Syria represents to the new patriotic fuel. Russian involvement is likely, in the short term at least, to increase the amount of ordnance being dropped, the destruction and the civilian casualties. It will complicate efforts to create safe zones for the internally displaced in the north, a major goal for Turkey, and could thereby worsen the refugee crisis. It might even have the unintended consequence of strengthening ISIS on the battlefield, if the Russians pummel rival groups such as al Nusra in areas where it is competing with ISIS. The Russian strikes will probably galvanize the coalition into more intense action. Kerry said the coalition would “dramatically accelerate our efforts,” with an increase in strikes against ISIS targets in northwest Syria. In the long run, when all sides tire of a military stalemate, they may reinvest in a political solution for Syria. If Russia, Iran, the United States and Europe were to agree on a blueprint, al-Assad would have little choice but to accept it. But as someone once said in a different context, “In the long run, we are all dead.” Opinion: Putin’s Syria moves leave U.S. looking weak


Editor’s Note: Nazanin Boniadi is an actress. activist and a member of the board of directors at the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran. She co-starred on the award winning Showtime series “Homeland”, and will appear lead in the upcoming MGM and Paramount remake of “Ben-Hur”. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author. British-Iranian Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, imprisoned in Iran, arrested after returning with husband, baby, to visit family Nazanin Boniadi says it's one in a long line of such baseless arrests. This after Iran's Rouhani had urged Iranians to return Boniadi: Hardliners seek to isolate Iran, are threatened by outside views. Iran must release these detainees Once, I hoped to return to Iran. Like Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, the woman who now sits in an Iranian jail,  I longed to visit family, friends, the land of my birth. Her arrest last month, the latest in a string of arrests of dual nationals lured back to Iran, has thrown cold water on my hopes, for now. The oppressors, for the moment, have won. But it’s a hollow victory, and I do not believe a permanent one, as it only serves to starve Iran of the vitality and engagement with the world its citizens want and need. When I read about Nazanin’s arrest in Iran, I was struck by the deep connection I felt to this woman — and to the enormity of what sets us apart. Related article Hello to the Iranian Spring Both of us are Iranian-born young women, sharing the same given name, who made Great Britain our home and philanthropy our life’s work. Yet she sits in a detention center, while I enjoy the comforts of home. She has been virtually incommunicado and in isolation, deprived even of her 22-month-old daughter, while I am surrounded by family and friends. Why? Because she returned to the Islamic Republic of Iran, to visit her parents, and to allow them to see their granddaughter, while I live in an open society, where such philanthropic work is celebrated, not criminalized. How many more of Iran’s best and brightest, who return home to see their loved ones, or even to offer their talents to assist with the country’s growth, will be snatched off the streets and imprisoned, because the Islamic Republic’s security and intelligence apparatus wants to keep dual nationals — and their notions of freedom of speech and freedom of the press — out of Iran? Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe was not engaged in subversive work; she was an apolitical project manager with the Thomson Reuters Foundation, the charitable arm of the Reuters news agency. Jason Rezaian, held for 544 days in Iran, was not a spy, but rather a Washington Post journalist whose work aimed to increase cultural understanding between Iran and the world. Iranian-American Siamak Namazi, imprisoned since October 2015, is not a Western agent, but a businessman who came to promote Iran’s economic growth and revitalization.  And 76-year-old British-Iranian Kamal Foroughi, who has been imprisoned in Iran since 2011, was not involved in espionage, but rather oil industry consulting. There is also grave concern about the inhumane conditions faced by these prisoners. Amir Hekmati, a U.S. Marine veteran who was held for over four years, recently filed a lawsuit against the government of Iran, detailing his torture and abuse. There are many more I could add to this list, all good people, returning to Iran only to be put behind bars, at the whim of fearful officials who jealously guard their repressive world view against perceived “infiltrators.” When President Hassan Rouhani was elected in Iran in 2013, he welcomed back the far-flung children of Iran.   But one by one they have been arrested and imprisoned upon their return, a fate that has made me increasingly reluctant to risk going back to a homeland I’ve not seen since 1992. This is exactly what the hard-liners in Iran want. They want to keep us out. Their aim is to keep imprisoning us until no one dares return, and the Islamic Republic of Iran itself effectively becomes a prison, isolated from the rest of the world. I do not think they will succeed. I cannot imagine Nazanin’s pain right now. I cannot image the pain of a mother being separated from her young child — a child who can’t even be comforted by her father because the authorities have confiscated the baby’s passport (she has British citizenship only), making her an effective prisoner of Iran as well. Related article The pitfalls of a narcissistic foreign policy Zaghari-Ratcliffe has been imprisoned for over six weeks now, without charge and without access to a lawyer. She was only recently moved out of solitary confinement, into a communal cell, and was able to see her daughter for the first time only after more than five weeks — and only after her husband started a petition calling for her release that was quickly signed by over 600,000 people. Unless she is promptly charged with a recognizable criminal offense based on true public evidence, she should be released immediately. So, too, the other dual nationals held in Iran on baseless ground, as well as all the other prisoners unjustly incarcerated in politicized prosecutions. As the Islamic Republic seeks to normalize its relations with the world, let the global community state clearly that these detentions are not lawful or acceptable. The international community must speak out loudly and with one voice against this injustice. If Iran wants to stand among the community of nations as something other than a pariah, these seizures must stop. Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.Read CNNOpinion’s new Flipboard magazine. Nazanin Boniadi is an actress. activist and a member of the board of directors at the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran. She co-starred on the award winning Showtime series “Homeland.” The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.


Hear from the people who made the journey inside the minds and the hearts of ISIS. Watch Fareed Zakaria’s special report, “Blindsided: How ISIS Shook the World,” Monday at 9 p.m. ET/PT on CNN. The United States is “certainly vulnerable” to becoming a new front line in the fight against ISIS, Sen. Ron Johnson said Sunday. The Wisconsin Republican who chairs the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee told CNN’s Jim Sciutto on “State of the Union” Sunday that attacks inspired by ISIS, like one against a provocative cartoon contest in Texas a week ago, are allowing the group to convey a “winner’s message.” “The best strategy the U.S. can employ to defeat this is actually defeat ISIS in Iraq and Syria so that the reality is conveyed that this is not a winning organization, it is a losing organization,” he said. RELATED: ISIS activity prompts threat level increases at bases Johnson admitted, though, that tracking ISIS sympathizers in the United States is a particular challenge, since the group has communicated with potential recruits over social media and because law enforcement officers can’t track every possible suspect. “The problem is, what do you do with the not-guilty-yet?” Johnson said. “We do have laws, we have a Constitution, and it’s extremely difficult for law enforcement officials when you might have tens of thousands of sympathizers – how do you track them all?” Johnson cited a figure published in March: There are about 46,000 – though maybe as many as 90,000 – Twitter accounts that support ISIS. “Now, Twitter is starting to shut those things down,” Johnson said. “But just consider maybe 90,000 people drawn to this barbaric ideology. So we have got a very large haystack. We’re looking for a needle in it.” Brett McGurk, the U.S. envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL, said 22,000 foreigners have joined the terror group’s ranks in Iraq and Syria. Of those, McGurk said, 3,700 are from Western nations, and 180 Americans have sought to join the organization. Fifteen of those Americans have been charged with supporting ISIS by the Justice Department. Related gallery The ISIS terror threat “Long-term we are going to degrade and defeat this organization, but we have been clear from day one it’s going to take a long time,” McGurk said. Two other experts said the threat of ISIS now is greater than what al Qaeda posed to the United States at the time of the 9/11 attack. “We’re in much more serious circumstances today than we were after 9/11,” said Tom Ridge, who served as secretary of Homeland Security under President George W. Bush. He said al Qaeda is “now a global scourge,” and ISIS is growing, making the threat the groups pose “far more complicated today.” “Remember back then we thought about al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan and a few other places?” Ridge said. “Well, we’ve seen al Qaeda metastasize. It is now a global scourge. And you have the ascendancy of ISIL. The combination of those two groups – their appeal to the lone wolfs and we see them acting in Belgium and in France and in Canada and the United States so the threat factors and the nature of the threats are far more complicated and far more serious today than on September 12, 2001.” Ridge proposed having local and state law enforcement officers help the FBI track ISIS sympathizers in the United States. Mike Rogers, the Michigan Republican and former House Intelligence Committee chairman, said the FBI can’t do any more to track ISIS sympathizers in the United States. “If you treat this as a law enforcement issue that you’re going to deal with, we are going to lose and we’re going to lose badly,” he said. Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said on ABC’s “This Week” that he’s asking community leaders in meetings what they’re doing to counter the narrative of ISIS – which he said “is slick. It is effective.” Pushing back against that message, Johnson said, “has to come from within the community.” “It has to come from Islamic leaders, who frankly can talk the language better than the federal government can,” Johnson said. “And so when I meet with community leaders, Islamic leaders, that’s one of the things that we urge them to do,” he said. “Some have begun it.  We’ve seen some good progress, but there is a lot more that can be done.”


DMO Deejay was riding around London in a rented Bentley "It's not harassment," the officer says A black British DJ is angry after being stopped by London police and told “it’s a fact” black men dressed in “gangster-style clothing” commit crimes. The DJ and a friend are seen in a video – which was recorded from inside the car and edited – riding around. DMO Deejay is behind the wheel when a police car begins to follow him and his friend before pulling the Bentley over. An on-screen graphic asks “Am I doing anything wrong here?” The men are then seen talking with an officer on the sidewalk, as another on-screen graphic appears: “Once again stopped by the police as they thought I stole this Bentley.” The officer is heard on the video telling the men, “This isn’t racist, it’s a fact. Predominantly, the criminal profile of people who do it [commit crime] are black people. So, naturally, if you see a car full of black lads, maybe dressed in gangster-style clothing or whatever, when they’re driving down here, they’re getting stopped.” In a voiceover in the video, the DJ asks, “Are you hearing what this guy just said to me? Basically what he just said is that, if I’m in a car full of black guys and we’re dressed in gangster clothing … means that they’re getting stopped.” The police officer in the video continues: “It’s not harassment. You might not see that as a reason and some police officers would be scared to say that. But it’s a fact. We work on criminal profiles and unfortunately here, the criminal profile for robberies, what we suspect, is IC3 males, generally from Somalia.” IC3 is the police code for black men. DMO Deejay says he was not ticketed or arrested. Jack Griffith, a spokesman with London’s Metropolitan Police Service, said police officials were aware of the video and were reviewing how the stop was handled. “A senior officer will make contact with the man who was stopped to apologize and ask if he wishes to make a complaint. We can understand why based on what has been circulated in the footage it has caused frustration. The officers will be spoken to about the explanation that they provided and to ensure we fully understand the circumstances of what happened.” That wasn’t the first time the DJ had been stopped by the police that day. He said he had been stopped earlier while driving to a business meeting in a different vehicle. DMO Deejay told CNN it’s frustrating getting stopped so much. “It’s quite embarrassing actually,” he said. “They can stop you anywhere, anytime.” He decided to release the video to create awareness about what black male drivers go through. “This is happening all around the world,” he said. “I mean just because one black person does something wrong doesn’t mean all black people do.” He hasn’t had any other issues with the police since the last traffic stop. He’s been off the streets, working in the studio on new projects.


Edith Childs of Greenville, South Carolina, and Vietnam veteran Earl Smith of Austin, Texas, will both attend Tuesday's address The White House will also leave one seat empty in the first lady's guest box at the State of the Union address to represent victims of gun violence The White House on Sunday released the full list of guests who will be seated with first lady Michelle Obama at President Barack Obama’s final State of the Union Tuesday, including a Syrian refugee and Paris train attack hero Staff Sgt. Spencer Stone. Refaai Hamo, who received refugee status with his four children to move to Troy, Michigan, in December is among the first lady’s guests. Hamo fled his home after a Syrian government anti-personnel missile killed seven of his family members, including his wife and one daughter, according to the White House. Obama has been vocal in his support for Syrian refugees, warning the nation – as well as Republican presidential candidates – in the wake of terrorist attacks around the world to not respond with “fear” towards refugees. Another guest, Stone, was one of five men who officials say stopped a gunman from attacking passengers on an Amsterdam-to-Paris train in August. He rushed the gunman and was slashed several times with a box cutter in the process, almost severing his thumb, officials said. Other notable guests include Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy – a staunch supporter of gun control – and Ryan Reyes, whose partner Larry “Daniel” Kaufman died in the mass shooting in San Bernardino, California, in December. Guests that are seated in the first lady’s box are traditionally cited as examples in the State of the Union address to highlight administration policies and achievements. In a nod to the early days of Obama’s presidency, two notable supporters from his first White House campaign, Edith Childs of Greenville, South Carolina, and Vietnam veteran Earl Smith of Austin, Texas, will also attend the address. Childs became an icon to the Obama campaign in 2007 when she rallied a small group of 38 supporters in Greenwood County to chant, “Fired Up! Ready to Go!” drawing in more and more supporters as the cheer continued. The call-and-response chant became the unofficial slogan for the Obama campaigns of 2008 and 2012. Smith met Obama in 2008 at a Hyatt Regency in Austin, where he worked as the director of security. While Smith was in an elevator with the then-senator, Smith gave Obama a patch he had worn while serving with an artillery brigade in Vietnam that sustained 10,041 casualties and received 13 Medals of Honor. Smith held onto the patch for 40 years before giving it to Obama, who then carried it in his pocket for the rest of the 2008 campaign. In a 2009 interview with CNN’s John King before Obama’s first inauguration, Childs spoke about the importance of attending the event. “I never thought that I would be able to see this day, so I just need to be there. Don’t want to be nowhere near the front. I just want to be there,” Childs said. “It means everything to me, because I want to be treated as a person. Not because I’m Edith Childs and black, but because I’m a person.” Other guests include Cynthia Dias, a homeless veterans advocate, Cary Dixon, an opioid reform advocate and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella. The White House will also leave one seat empty in the first lady’s guest box at the State of the Union address to represent victims of gun violence, Obama announced Friday.


Dana King is an award-winning journalist and former CBS Morning News anchor In 2012 she changed her career and became an artist She sees her art as a continuation of her storytelling Dana King’s career used to take her to far-flung places like Rwanda, Kosovo and Afghanistan, where she would report on the latest news as part of her job as a TV journalist. These days however, the Emmy-Award winning reporter spends her time painting watercolors and crafting sculptures in her studio in the Bay Area of San Francisco. After a fruitful career in journalism spanning decades, which saw the 54-year-old anchor CBS Morning News and ABC’s “Good Morning America Sunday” King decided to go back to her original love – art. “I’ve always been an artist, it’s always been a part of me, even as a journalist. It’s the way I see things visually, it’s the way I interpret information,” she says. King’s art explores the human form, with her colorful clay sculptures examining the intricate musculature of both male and female shapes. She also produces charcoal drawings and oil paintings, and has created a public sculpture which for a time graced the corner of San Francisco’s Union Square. I still tell stories. But I tell stories with sculptures and I tell stories with paintings. Dana King King sees parallels between her former career and her art: “I still tell stories. But I tell stories with sculptures and I tell stories with paintings. “The difference is that a painting or a sculpture will last as long as the material lasts. A television story – it’s a minute, a minute and a half, two and a half if you’re really lucky, and if you didn’t see it when it aired, it’s gone,” she says. Her early work was heavily influenced by the strife and suffering she saw traveling the world as a journalist, and served as an emotional outlet for her to overcome the negative news that surrounded her in her professional life. “You have to find a way to tell those stories and survive them emotionally,” she says, “but I don’t have those stories in front of me anymore. Now I can do whatever, I don’t need to do the dark and often ugly as a way of staying okay,” she says. After a lifetime spent in the deadline-driven, fast-paced world of journalism, King says she relishes the time and space afforded to her by her art: “I like that feeling of not feeling rushed, of not feeling like I have to be in control of the process at all… and I’m just really along for the ride. I don’t feel any time constraints. I don’t feel anything pushing me to go from point A to B to C.”


Israel military says Palestinian teen hurled a Molotov cocktail at an army post Laith Fadel Khaldi, 17, was pronounced dead after suffering bullets wounds A Palestinian teen died Saturday after he was shot by Israeli troops during clashes sparked by the killing of a toddler in an arson attack, Palestinian medical officials said. Laith Fadel Khaldi, 17,  was pronounced dead after suffering bullets wounds Friday –  one to his chest and one to his abdomen, said  Dr. Ahmed Bitawi of the Palestine Medical Complex in Ramallah. An Israel military spokeswoman said a Palestinian hurled a Molotov cocktail at an army post near Beirzeit, a Palestinian town north of Ramallah. Soldiers fired toward the assailant, who was hit and taken to hospital by Palestinian medics, according to the spokeswoman. The teen was taking part in protests after a Palestinian family’s home was burned Friday in an attack that killed a toddler and critically injured at least three other relatives, Israeli and Palestinian officials said. The injured were the toddler’s parents and a brother, said Ghassan Douglass, a Palestinian official in charge of settlement activity north of the West Bank, where the attack occurred. The toddler who died, Ali Saad Dawabsha, was a boy of about 18 months old, Douglass said. Bitawi said three Palestinians had been killed in the past 24 hours, including the toddler. After the toddler’s arson death, authorities found the words “price tag” on the walls of the house in Duma, said Luba Samri, a spokeswoman for the Israeli police. A “price tag” attack is a term used by radical Israeli settlers to denote reprisal against Palestinians in response to moves by the Israeli government to evacuate illegal West Bank outposts, according to officials.


The Saudi Ministry of Labor launched a website this week called Ajeer, or "hired hand" It will allow people with visitor or work visas to apply for work permits with employers other than their sponsors Many Syrians and Yemenis are struggling to find work in the kingdom Syrians and Yemenis struggling for work options in Saudi Arabia have caught a break. They can now apply for temporary work permits and seek employment outside of the sponsors that brought them in the country. The Saudi Ministry of Labor launched a website this week called Ajeer, or “hired hand.” Its purpose is to allow those residing in Saudi under visitor or work visas to apply for six-month work permits with other employers that are eligible for renewal. The site is not restricted to Syrians and Yemenis, but it states that the goal of Ajeer is serve Syrians and Yemenis who have proper documentation. Saudi Arabia has experienced a large influx of expatriates from the two war-torn countries. A reported 1.2 million Syrians are in Saudi Arabia under either work or visitor visas, and many are seeking employment. Until now, Syrians and Yemenis have not been able to legally work as visitors in the kingdom or outside the employment of their sponsors. Like several other Arab nations, Saudi Arabia implements this sponsorship – or kafala – system, to regulate migrant labor. The labor ministry’s new system will allow them to have more freedom to seek additional employment. But there are some restrictions. To join the site, members must have written consent from their Saudi host to work for another party. Host and applicant must register on the website, and members may only apply for  blue-collar jobs such as maintenance or construction. The members “are not required to give their passport or documentation,” said a customer service representative at the ministry. Saudi Arabia does not recognize these people as refugees, so they are not extended protections under United Nations regulations. Countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman and Bahrain) have been widely criticized for not taking in any Syrian refugees since the war began there in 2011. The GCC states are not signatories to the U.N.’s 1951 Refugee Convention. Despite lacking refugee status, Syrian visitors are treated well in Saudi Arabia, said a spokesman for the UNHCR, the U.N.’s refugee agency. “They are showing tolerance and are giving residence to Syrians,” said the spokesman, Mohammed Abu Asker. “Saudi Arabia has its own definition for helping Syrian refugees, not labeling them as refugees but as Syrian brothers and sisters.” The ministry said people in the kingdom have already started accessing the Ajeer portal that launched on Tuesday and submitting their applications seeking additional employment in the kingdom.


Editor’s Note: Brian McNair is the author of “Cultural Chaos.” His new book is “Communication and Political Crisis.” The views expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer. CNN is showcasing the work of The Conversation, a collaboration between journalists and academics to provide news analysis and commentary. The content is produced solely by The Conversation. World is in a "moment of phase transition," writes Brian McNair Period could be "chaotic, destructive and violent to a degree" that no one can imagine The scent of chaos hangs heavy in the air. Donald Trump evokes it in Cleveland. Islamic State sows it in Nice, Brussels, Paris, Orlando. Britain is immersed in it after Brexit, while the EU struggles to prevent its onset amid mounting crises of migration and political legitimacy. Ukraine and Syria are being torn apart by it, and Turkey looks fragile after a failed coup. To apply a metaphor from the science of chaos, we are, it seems, in a moment of phase transition. A state of relative global order – the Long Peace, as Steven Pinker describes it in ” The Better Angels Of Our Nature” – has existed since 1945. We’re now moving into a new configuration of competing powers and ideologies, the structure of which we cannot predict, except to assume it will be very different from what we have known. The intervening period of transition, which we may have entered, could be chaotic, destructive and violent to a degree that no one born after 1945 in the industrialized countries that constructed the post-war order can imagine. The great battles of the era now underway or emerging are not those which dominated the late 20th century – left versus right, east versus west, communist versus capitalist. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, these binaries have had less and less relevance. It is the dark forces of nationalism and religious sectarianism that now drive global politics, fueling the rise of a crude, xenophobic populism in the advanced capitalist world that we have not seen since the 1930s. Trump is the most vivid manifestation of it, but we see it everywhere we look in formerly stable social democracies – Germany, Denmark, the UK, France, Greece, even Australia, where the demagogue Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party was returned to the Senate in the recent election. Appeals to nationalism and fear of the “other” are replacing notions of collective security, common interest and the moral duty to care for those in need such as asylum seekers. Trump openly praises Putin and Saddam Hussein for their leadership and effectiveness (which in Saddam’s case, lest we forget, included the use of chemical weapons on his own people). NATO, he declares, is past its sell-by date, as are all international climate change and trade agreements which he judges to be against America’s interests. In 2006, two years before the global financial crisis, and five years after al-Qaeda’s September 11 attacks on New York and the Pentagon, I wrote about the cultural chaos then emerging as an unforeseen, unintended consequence of the internet. “Its roots,” I wrote then, “lie first in the destabilizing impact of digital communication technologies … Not only is there more information out there, the speed of its flow has increased. The networked nature of the online media means that an item posted in one part of the world immediately becomes accessible to anyone with a PC and an internet connection, anywhere else – linked, signposted, rapidly becoming part of the common conversation for millions”. As a consequence, I argued, established elite power was leaking away, becoming more porous. As 9/11 showed, we had entered a world where affluent, stable democracies were vulnerable as never before to disproportionate disruption by terrorism. A world where policy – as in the case of the EU and the current migrant crisis – was driven not by rational calculation so much as the power of testimonies, narratives and images captured and shared on digital media. No one doubts the humanitarian impulse underpinning Angela Merkel’s decision to offer open house to millions of refuges from the Middle East. This policy was fueled by distressing, globally networked accounts of desperate people drowning in Mediterranean waters, and pictures of children dead on the tourist beaches of southern Europe. But if it contributes to the rising influence of anti-immigrant party AfD and the rise to power of its equivalents in France, Italy, the Netherlands, it will come to be seen as having hastened the fragmentation of the European Union; to have been an ill-considered response to a crisis amplified and intensified by 24-hour, always on, real time news and social media culture. Notwithstanding the huge benefits brought to people and societies all over the world by the internet, then, it also presents challenges to the capacity for the good governance and rational decision making on which our collective wellbeing depends. In a world where information of all kinds – nasty as well as nice, false as easily as true – travels faster, further, and with fewer possibilities for censorship than ever before in human history, authority and the exercise of power are uniquely precarious. Greater transparency and accountability of governing elites – what Sydney University professor John Keane calls monitory democracy – remains a positive benefit of digital technology. The internet made WikiLeaks, and the revelations of Edward Snowden and the Panama Papers possible. It gave every digitally networked individual on the planet all nine volumes of Sir John Chilcot’s report with its devastatingly forensic details of how and why Tony Blair took Britain to war with Iraq in 2003. You may choose not to read it, but it will be your choice, and no-one else’s. If power is built on knowledge, and effective democracy requires that citizens be informed about their environment, the age of digitalisation has also been one of global democratization. It has made popular challenge to authoritarian rule easier to organize (if not necessarily to succeed). Cultural chaos, like chaos in nature, can be a constructive as well as destructive force. This media environment sees isolated events which would once have been of mainly local importance, such as the Lindt Café siege in Sydney (a “lone wolf” terrorist attack in which two people were killed), become global in their impacts through the immediacy and visceral nature of their media coverage. But it is also an efficient way to disseminate anxiety, panic and fear. Donald Trump understands this, and uses Twitter like no other presidential candidate before him. He is able to further stir up his already enraged constituency with simplistic, authoritarian solutions to complex social problems like illegal migration and global terrorism. IS, like al-Qaeda before it, understands it. Jihadi John cuts off the head of an American or Japanese journalist, and the uploaded, socially networked video becomes a weapon of mass psychic torture, spreading virally. Some Britons voted for Brexit because they had seen those videos, or heard about them. They believe they can be quarantined from radical Islamism by rejecting Merkel’s humanitarianism and closing the doors on the continent. 9/11 cost al-Qaeda $500,000. It cost the world trillions in military expeditions, heightened airport security and other responses, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of deaths inflicted in the “war against terror” since 2001. IS atrocity videos are well produced, but cheap to make, and the communicative power of digital networks does the rest. They are at the heart of a new kind of asymmetrical warfare. The chaos Edward Lorenz described in nature applies also to our globalized, digitized societies. From small bifurcations in the social fabric emerge catastrophic, potentially system-destroying consequences. One crisis feeds into another. Trump’s success fuels French National Front leader Marine Le Pen. The UK Independence Party’s Nigel Farage encourages Putin in his dream of winning back Ukraine and the Baltic states. And as the mass murderer of Nice follows the attack at Ataturk airport, both outdone by the atrocity of Bataclan, we enter a period of cascading, interconnected crises, where “black swan” moments become part of everyday life, and the unthinkable becomes mainstream. Have we reached the tipping point between order and chaos at the global level? Is it too late to stop this slide backwards into the vortex of violent nationalism, sectarian hatred and authoritarianism that caused World War II? After a century of unparalleled progress in democratization and the extension of human rights to women, ethnic and sexual minorities, are we now at the top of the ladder, the peak of a cycle, with nowhere to go but down? No one knows, because by definition the onset of chaos is non-linear and unpredictable. Its precise causes are impossible to identify, and its consequences unknowable. Personally, I think not. I believe not, because I am an optimist and I have confidence in the essential goodness of most people. We – that is, those of us who don’t wish to build walls, or erect borders where there were none, or to prevent others from harboring beliefs, religions or values different to our own – are still the majority, as far as I can see. Our law governed liberal states still define the rules and set the tone for global culture and politics. Barack Obama won two elections with convincing majorities. If we can engage in this global struggle with the same confidence and commitment as the other side engage in their jihads and nationalist hate-mongering and fascistic public gatherings, not with military hardware but with ideas and words, it is not too late. The journalists of Charlie Hebdo did that, and paid the price. Human rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali called for reformation of Islam, and has been condemned not only by the mullahs who regard her an apostate but by some western non-Muslims for doing so. We must support voices like Ali’s, and add to them, at the same time as we challenge the racists and xenophobes who are feeding off fundamentalist Islam’s excesses. That the global system is under unprecedented stress is by now undeniable. The role of the digital media in increasing that stress is also clear, as is its potential to be utilized for progressive reform and democratic accountability. We have to be wise in responding to the first, and smart about fulfilling the second. As to their impact on political outcomes, that remains stubbornly unpredictable. The Arab Spring failed to become a summer. With that knowledge, all we can do is what we must do. Resist the censors, the haters, the authoritarians, religious and secular, the builders of walls, and declare them the enemy of us all, this human race, which will not be dragged against its will into a new dark age.


Fifty years ago, we were eating better bananas. They tasted better, they lasted longer, they were more resilient and didn’t require artificial ripening. They were – simply put – a better fruit, because they belonged to a different species, or cultivar in banana parlance. It was called Gros Michel and it remained the world’s export banana until 1965. That year, it was declared commercially extinct due to the Panama disease, a fungal disease that started out from Central America and quickly spread to most of the world’s commercial banana plantations, leaving no other choice but to burn them down. The banana industry was in deep crisis, and had to look for alternatives. It settled with the Cavendish cultivar, which was deemed an inferior product but carried the distinction of being immune to the disease. It was quickly adopted by banana growers worldwide. Today, the Cavendish is a universal foodstuff, much like a Big Mac: supermarket bananas are pretty much identical anywhere you buy them. That’s because they have nearly no genetic diversity – the plants are all clones of one another. The Cavendish is a monoculture, which means it’s the only variety that most commercial growers plant every year. Which is also why it is now under threat itself, from a new strain of the Panama disease. And once it infects one plant, it can infect them all. Fifty years on, one of the most popular commercial foods in the world is once again under threat. There are hundreds of banana varieties in the world, but the Cavendish alone accounts for nearly the totality of exports. “Starting in the late 1980s, banana growers realized more diversity was needed to prevent the problem from happening again. They were begging their bosses for it, but it never happened,” Dan Koeppel, author of the book “Banana: The fate of the fruit that changed the world,” told CNN. The banana plant is not a tree, but the world’s largest herb.The fruit itself is, botanically, a berry.Bananas are very slightly radioactive, as they naturally contain potassium-40, a radioactive isotope.They are grown in over 100 countries.India is the world’s largest producer.Ecuador is the world’s largest exporter. The banana plant is not a tree, but the world’s largest herb.The fruit itself is, botanically, a berry.Bananas are very slightly radioactive, as they naturally contain potassium-40, a radioactive isotope.They are grown in over 100 countries.India is the world’s largest producer.Ecuador is the world’s largest exporter. The disease now has a different name, “Tropical Race 4,” and it started out in Malaysia around 1990, but it’s otherwise very similar to the one that wiped out the Gros Michel: “It’s caused by a really common type of fungus called Fusarium, which was probably already in the soil there. A single clamp of contaminated dirt is enough to spread it like wildfire, and it can be transported by wind, cars, water, creating an infection wherever it goes,” explained Koeppel. “Everyone who’s ever had athlete’s foot knows how hard it is to get rid of a fungus.” The pathogen affects the plant’s vascular system, preventing it from picking up water. Since its “second coming,” TP4 has spread to South-east Asia, then across thousands of miles of open ocean to Australia and finally, in 2013, to Africa. “Its recent discovery in the Middle East and in Nampula, Mozambique, indicates that the disease is spreading and threatening bananas worldwide,” George Mahuku, Senior plant pathologist for the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, told CNN. “It’s a serious threat to livelihoods and food security in the Nampula province, country and the continent, should it spread. In Africa, bananas are critical for food security and income generation for more than 100 million people,” he added. Even though the disease appears to have spread to just two plantations in Mozambique, the impact on the local economy is already severe: “The disease has already cost Matanuska, the company that owns the plantations, about $7.5 million. A total of 230,000 plants have been affected and destroyed. At the current rate of infection, the farm is losing 15,000 plants per week, translating to $236,000 per week,” said Mahuku. With Matanuska contributing over $1.5 million per month to the local economy, the potential loss of livelihood is very real. Mahuku’s job is to coordinate efforts to slow down the disease, prompting collaboration from around 20 African countries: “The East and Central Africa region has over 50% of its permanent crop area under banana cultivation. That’s around half of the African total, with an annual production of 20.9 million tonnes valued at $ 4.3 billion. Bananas are an indispensable part of life in this region providing up to one fifth of the total calorie consumption per capita. If TR4 were to spread into this region, the effects would be unimaginable.” Many of these bananas are not Cavendish, but local varieties, or “village bananas,” and they are also under threat from the disease: “Preliminary results from evaluation of nine East African Highland bananas and plantains revealed that they can be infected with TR4. Only one cultivar remained disease free after eight months,” said Mahuku. There is also an issue of consumer trust associated with the discovery of the disease, according to Joao Augusto, a plant pathologist working with IITA in Mozambique: “One of the biggest threats is the negative perception that the rest of the world may have on perceived risk of the African banana. Although the spread of the pathogen through the fruit is almost nil, possible rejection of African banana exports could seriously damage the banana business in Africa.” The disease is not more virulent than the one that killed the Gros Michel, but it’s spreading because the bad practices from 50 years ago are still in place: “The banana industry is in denial about this, and standard agricultural quarantines like fencing the crops and cleaning the equipment are not enough,” added Koeppel. The only solution would be to burn the plantation down and start over, but with a different crop. Restarting with bananas doesn’t work because the fungus stays in the soil. Africa is currently fighting another serious disease that affects bananas, called Xanthonomas wilt or BXW, a bacterial disease that started spreading from Uganda in 2001. Although mostly limited to East Africa and Congo, it significantly reduced crop yields at the time of its most virulent spread, around 2005. So far, no cultivar has been found to be resistant to the disease, which spreads through contaminated soil, tools, and insects. That, however, means the end of the business: “I understand growers don’t want to throw the towel,” Koeppel noted. In Africa, a 12-month emergency project funded by FAO is underway to tackle TP4, and Mahuku is optimistic that the disease can be contained to the areas where it has been observed: “To achieve this, financial resources are needed, otherwise inaction due to lack of resources will be catastrophic, especially for small farmers who depend on bananas for their livelihoods,” he said. According to Augusto, there aren’t many options to effectively control the disease: “It cannot be eradicated, but it can be limited if a wide range of strong preventive and mitigation initiatives are put in place and rigorously implemented. In countries where the disease is endemic, the banana growers have learned to live with it.” Ultimately, history could well repeat itself and prompt banana growers to look for a new alternative. There is no good candidate at the moment, but hybrids and GMOs are being considered. The disease is not the only problem, though. Just as the Cavendish is under attack from the pathogen, local varieties are under attack from the Cavendish: “India had about 600 varieties, but over the past two decades the Cavendish has pushed out and replaced many of those. And when you replace a varied multiculture with a monoculture, if a disease happens, you’re in trouble: nature comes back and bites you,” said Koeppel. “Monoculture to me is just as much a disease as TP4,” he added. While diversity has been embraced by most other vegetable and fruit industries, the Cavendish – called “the hotel banana” in India – is still the only banana in town in most export markets. Hopefully its dominance won’t lead to its downfall. Sara Delgrossi contributed to this report.


Charity groups, EU border control agency argue over best way to deal with migrants in the Mediterranean Charities say they are saving lives; border control says their presence encourages migrants to risk lives Calm seas, desperate migrants and ruthless human traffickers all played a role in a record-breaking weekend of maritime rescues in the Mediterranean Sea between Italy and Libya. But even as the rescue vessels race against time to save lives, another battle is brewing with accusations from the European Union’s border control agency Frontex against nongovernmental organizations like Doctors Without Borders and the Mobile Offshore Aid Station, or MOAS, that run so-called charity rescue ships. Frontex says the charity rescue vessels create a pull factor for migrants and traffickers; the NGOs say they are out there in the absence of an EU strategy to save lives at sea and a lack of initiative to provide a safe corridor option for migration and asylum. On Sunday evening in Italy, the Italian Coast Guard estimated the number of those rescued since Friday was approaching 7,000, though that number will surely grow as a steady stream of rubber dinghies and rickety wooden fishing vessels were still being spotted off the coast of Libya. At least 20 cadavers, including that of an 8-year-old boy recovered during rescue operations, were also brought to Sicily and the Italian mainland with the survivors. Related article Rescuers battle rough seas to save hundreds of stranded migrants The migrants and refugees were rescued by Italian Coast Guard boats, passing merchant ships and more than a dozen NGO charity ships that have filled the vacuum created when Italy’s Mare Nostrum search and rescue program ended in 2014 because of budget concerns. The Mare Nostrum project cost Italian taxpayers €9 million ($9.5 million) a month, according to the Italian Navy. The charity ships, which rely on donations, have estimated operating costs of around €11,000 ($11,666) a day, charities say. European authorities and charity ships face a daunting task. Since the beginning of the year, 32,750 migrants and refugees have arrived on European shores, not including those rescued this weekend, according to UNHCR. In 2016, the total number topped 355,000. Frontex has two programs at sea. The Sophia program is designed to destroy smuggler’s ships after rescues are complete and to train the Libyan Coast Guard to stop boats from leaving. The Triton program enlists member states to provide assets for search and rescue operations. Over the busy weekend, Frontex says the Norwegian Siem Pilot, currently on rotation for Frontex’s Triton program, rescued more than 500 of the nearly 7,000 people pulled to safety. In March, Italian prosecutor Carmelo Zuccaro from Catania launched an investigation into the funding of the charity ships, essentially accusing them of colluding with the traffickers. “I am convinced that it is not always the operational center that calls on the NGOs,” he told a parliamentary committee in Rome in March. “We also need to investigate the evolution of the phenomenon and find out why there has been such a noted proliferation of these ships and how they deal with such high operational costs without having a return in terms of economic profit.” No charges have been filed but Zuccaro told CNN he would seek to sequester the charity ships if he found just cause to do so. The NGOs have accused Zuccaro of starting the investigation on behalf of Frontex as an attempt to remove them from the sea. Zuccaro says he is not acting on behalf of Frontex, but that he is concerned that the rescue vessels are creating an open border into Europe as thousands of irregular migrants reach Italy each year. With this weekend’s rescues, the number to reach Europe this year so far has topped 40,000, according to United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. When reached for comment about Zuccaro’s legal case, Frontex did not provide a comment. The NGOs, on the other hand, have not minced words. Related article How some European countries are tightening their refugee policies “We are surprised at the timing of these allegations, more than a year after we and others have been in service,” said Sophie Beau, co-founder and vice-president of SOS Mediterranee, which runs the Aquarius rescue boat together with Doctors Without Borders. “We know exactly what will happen if we are not out there. More people will die. We know we need to be out there, we have to be out there.” In a press release, MOAS co-founder and director Regina Catrambone agreed. “Every day people continue to risk their lives while we, as civil society, stand witness. We must continue to call on European governments to act so that people, such as those rescued by us today, do not die, not in Libya nor in the Mediterranean Sea.” Those frustrations are echoed by the other NGOs, with many of the rescue operators tweeting accusations directly against the European Union and Frontex. Doctors Without Borders, or MSF, tweeted, “EU ‘leaving migrants to drown’ say rescuers who saved 2,000 in single day.” And “How many lives could have been saved in the last two years if the #EU had conducted a proactive search and rescue operation? #WhereIsFRONTEX” Two of the charity ships, each filled beyond capacity after rescuing scores of migrants from rubber dinghies and unseaworthy wooden fishing vessels, made May Day calls to the Maritime Rescue Coordination Center run by the Italian Coast Guard in Rome to ask for assistance on Sunday. The Iuventa rescue ship operated by the German NGO Jugend Rettet reported navigational failure under the weight of the migrants and the German NGO Sea Eye also reported difficulty due to overcrowding. “#Iuventa and @seaeyeorg are unable to move due to the high amount of people on board and nearby us in rubber boats! We need help by #MRCC” the Jugend Rettet tweeted. It reported having as many as seven pregnant women on board. Italian Coast Guard confirmed that vessels were headed to the area to assist offloading some of the migrants. Related article Why migrants are risking their lives to reach Italy MOAS also tweeted messages about its rescue ship Phoenix after spending the night watching a number of packed rubber dinghies whose passengers the ship was unable to assist because of its own overcrowding. “Hour 40 of ongoing rescues & crisis management for #Phoenix crew. They are still waiting for help to arrive; and we have lost all words #Med” The voice that is often missing from the discussion is often that of the migrants themselves. On Sunday, 649 people rescued in a number of operations by the MSF Prudence arrived in Reggio Calabria. Among them were men with gunshot wounds from traffickers and women who were tortured, according to rescuers at the scene. At the port, a group of teenage Nigerian boys who had arrived as unaccompanied minors by way of sea rescues earlier this year waited at the shore to see if their missing family members were among the arrivals. When asked if the charity boats made a difference in their decision to make the dangerous crossing, they had no idea what was meant by the question. “The gun to my head made the difference,” a young man called Caleb said after describing how he was forced onto a rubber dinghy late one night and losing sight of his father. “We don’t have a lot of choices. We are just lucky we got out of Libya alive.” Barbie Latza Nadeau is a CNN contributor, the Rome bureau chief for The Daily Beast, and the author of an upcoming book about sex trafficking of Nigerian women and girls to Italy.


Editor’s Note: CNN national security analyst Juliette Kayyem is the author of the best-selling “Security Mom: An Unclassified Guide to Protecting Our Homeland and Your Home.” She is a professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School, a former assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security in the Obama administration, host of the national security podcast “The SCIF” and founder of Kayyem Solutions, a security consulting firm. The opinions expressed in this commentary are hers. Juliette Kayyem: Trump drama overshadows and undermines intelligence community The timing could not be worse with terror threat at one of its highest levels, she says What happens when the Department of Homeland Security extends a terror advisory and no one pays attention? Late Monday, in the midst of a 24-hour news cycle that included the bombshell about President Donald Trump’s purported handling of classified information, the department warned of the dangers posed by homegrown terrorists. But the relative lack of interest in the warning, a sort of “nothing to see here” response, is a reflection of the drama’s surrounding the Trump White House.  The President’s consistent actions threaten to undermine our confidence in the entire national and homeland security apparatus. Trump has a tendency to end statements with “believe me.” We would be safer if, in the context of our intelligence agents, he could say with authority, “Believe them.” “We face one of the most serious terror threat environments since the 9/11 attacks as foreign terrorist organizations continue to exploit the Internet to inspire, enable, or direct individuals already here in the homeland to commit terrorist acts,” said the bulletin, issued through the National Terrorism Advisory System. As a result, further actions are being taken to help local authorities prevent and prepare for a potential attack. Knowing the alert system intimately, I do not doubt the veracity and care that went into this announcement. A comprehensive review process is involved to ensure that politics and haste do not guide or politicize how intelligence analysis is shared with the American public. Related article Republicans' patience with Trump may be running out This present advisory is an extension of what we already know: that the threat of ISIS-inspired terror exists here in the homeland.  From news accounts, there is also growing and imminent concern about whether laptops are being weaponized to be detonated on a plane and whether the present laptop ban will be extended to more countries. In other words, the threat is real. The intelligence is disconcerting. We face serious risks with potential consequences for the safety and security of our nation. The dedicated working men and women in our intelligence and national security apparatus spend (and risk) their lives to provide objective data that can be assessed by political and policy leaders to help guide their actions. And the hardest challenge for those in the apparatus is to provide guidance and clarity to the American public so that they will have confidence in what their government is telling them and be prepared for the risks we face. Trump has trivialized, at best, that entire effort. Whether what he said in the Oval Office with the Russians and the disclosure of “code word” intelligence regarding ISIS was legal is beside the point. His blurting, in the best light possible, was careless. Related article Trump again reveals his dangerous incompetence And while the new advisory was issued Monday night, Tuesday’s disclosures regarding a memo written by former FBI Director James Comey describing a meeting where Trump, again in the best light possible, allegedly stated his hopes to Comey that he would end the ongoing investigation of former national security adviser Mike Flynn, provided yet more proof of a presidency unwilling to abide by the standards that guide our security apparatus. Whether it is obstruction of justice is for lawyers to decide. But the verdict is in – he denigrated those who work tirelessly to protect the nation from foreign threats, mainly Russia. Where all this White House controversy ends no one can say. But as we watch Washington burning, we should be concerned that another threat is looming over the horizon. And the present behavior of the President implies more than just recklessness or lack of respect of boundaries or norms. He personalizes intelligence: “You are with me or against me.” This disregard for the notion of objective “intelligence” – a disregard that actually began when he questioned and mocked the intelligence community during the transition and used his first visit to the CIA as a political rally – is dangerous because it threatens to undermine the American public’s confidence in the very apparatus that the President flouts. Sign up for CNN Opinion’s new newsletter.Join us on Twitter and Facebook Our homeland and national security apparatus serve the nation and the American public. They are not in service to Trump’s base, his mood or his potential legal difficulties ahead. With all the drama surrounding this White House, the Department of Homeland Security’s terror alert was a direct reminder that Trump has yet to face a crisis in the homeland from a dangerous enemy. Some attack will, more likely than not, happen during his presidency and that is the moment when we will want public confidence in our homeland apparatus – even if the President does not. Believe them.


The soldier was killed Saturday while conducting operations in Afghanistan against Khorasan, the local branch of ISIS there The soldier was mortally wounded late Saturday during an operation in Nangarhar Province An Army Special Forces soldier was killed while conducting counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan late Saturday, US forces in Afghanistan have announced in a release. The soldier was mortally wounded while helping Afghan forces conduct operations against Khorasan, the local branch of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, Navy Capt. Bill Salvin, a spokesman for the NATO-led coalition in Afghanistan, told CNN. The commander of US forces in Afghanistan, Gen. John W. Nicholson, offered “deepest condolences to the family and friends of our fallen comrade” on behalf of all US forces there. “We will always remember our fallen comrades and commit ourselves to deliver on their sacrifice.” US troops regularly perform counterterrorism operations against the ISIS affiliate, which has a presence in Nangarhar Province, where the soldier was killed. Those operations are sometimes carried out in conjunction with Afghan forces. The US counterterrorism mission is separate from the NATO-led effort to train, advise and assist the Afghan army and police force. There are about 8,400 US troops in Afghanistan. This is the first US combat death in Afghanistan in 2017. The number of US casualties in Afghanistan has fallen sharply since the end of US-led combat operations in 2014.

US counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan