csmonitor--2020-06-19--How rule of law saved DACA, for now

How rule of law saved DACA, for now

“ It ’ s a [ win ] for rule of law , ” says Jonathan Masur , a professor at the University of Chicago Law School .
For now , it stands as an unusually significant , narrow ruling about administrative law .
But that itself is of great import for the Supreme Court and America in the Trump era .
The narrow ruling only prolongs their uncertainty , critics of the ruling say .
The program could still be declared unlawful in the future , and while members of Congress have called for a legislative solution , legislators @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through .
The decision yesterday didn ’ t touch the question of DACA ’ s legality , but it did strike a blow against the Trump administration , holding that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security had not followed proper procedure when winding down a program that let 650,000 people brought to the U.S. as children legally work and study .
This week brought two surprise decisions from the conservative-leaning Supreme Court that on closer inspection don ’ t look as surprising .
The first ruling , on Monday , enshrined LGBTQ civil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s ruling said the Trump administration moved arbitrarily and capriciously when it shut down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program set up by President Barack Obama .
The COVID-19 pandemic has left millions of Americans suddenly grappling with uncertainty .
Uncertainty was nothing new for Maria Valencia .
She arrived in the U.S. at age 6 , when her mom brought her to be with family .
After losing her job at Best Buy this spring due to the pandemic , and not being able to volunteer as a nurse – the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any good news is welcome .
The U.S. Supreme Court , with its second major ruling in a matter of days , gave her more than that yesterday when it voted to block the termination of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program ( DACA ) , a program that has allowed her to work and study in America despite being unauthorized , because she was brought here at a very young age .
“ It ’ s definitely a relief , ” she says .
“ If it was canceled I don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to continue [ college ] , because would I be able to get job ?
” The 5-4 ruling also represents the second surprising decision this week from the majority conservative court – although , like the landmark LGBTQ rights ruling earlier this week , on closer examination it may not be that surprising .
The decision yesterday didn ’ t touch the long-debated question of DACA ’ s legality , but it did strike a blow against the Trump administration , holding that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security ( DHS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when it decided to wind down the Obama-era program in 2017 .
The narrow ruling only prolongs the uncertainty for the roughly 650,000 DACA recipients living in the country , critics say .
The program could still be declared unlawful sometime in the future , and while members of Congress came out after the decision and called for a legislative solution , the legislators have said that before and not followed through .
For now , it stands as an unusually significant , narrow ruling about administrative law .
But that itself is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and America in the Trump era .
“ It ’ s saying [ the government ] didn ’ t follow the proper procedures to do so .
It ’ s a [ win ] for rule of law , ” says Jonathan Masur , a professor at the University of Chicago Law School .
“ The court is grappling with the Trump administration ’ s efforts to skirt the law and not follow the standard rules of law , ” he adds , “ and the court is pushing back on that .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is pushing back on that.
” In seeking to terminate DACA , the Trump administration made two critical errors , said Chief Justice Roberts , who wrote the majority opinion , joined by the court ’ s four liberal justices .
The first error came when then-Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen chose to affirm and further explain the initial reasoning the DHS had given for rescinding DACA – reasoning that a federal district court had ruled inadequate .
Because she didn ’ t choose to issue new reasons for rescinding DACA , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s ruling , “ she was limited to the agency ’ s original reasons , ” and her further explanations “ can be viewed only as impermissible post hoc rationalizations and thus are not properly before us.
” It ’ s a small , technical issue – “ an idle and useless formality , ” argued the Trump administration and , in a dissent , Justice Brett Kavanaugh .
Disregarding Ms. Nielsen ’ s memorandum sets a precedent in which it will be almost impossible for agencies to further explain decisions to courts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would make little sense for a court to exclude official explanations by agency personnel … and then to turn around and remand for further explanation by those same agency personnel.
” But restricting these post hoc rationalizations serve important values , Chief Justice Roberts wrote .
They ensure orderly review of agency decisions , promote agency accountability , and instill confidence that agency reasonings are genuine and not just language to win a lawsuit .
“ Each of these values would be markedly undermined were we to allow DHS to rely on reasons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chief justice wrote .
“ This is not the case for cutting corners to allow DHS to rely upon reasons absent from its original decision , ” he added .
Particularly “ when so much is at stake , ” he continued , quoting a 1961 dissent from Justice Hugo Black , “ the Government should turn square corners in dealing with the people.
” This ties into what the chief justice saw as the government ’ s second error .
DHS is within its discretion to rescind DACA , but in doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other things , reliance interests – the degree to which people have come to rely on a law .
Ms. Valencia has spent most of her life in Houston , and her decisions to stay there to work , go to college , and pursue a career are the kinds of reliance interests , the kind of stakes , that the court ’ s majority opinion is discussing .
“ DHS may determine , in the particular context before it , that other interests and policy concerns outweigh any reliance interests , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that difficult decision was the agency ’ s job , but the agency failed to do it , ” he added .
“ That failure was arbitrary and capricious.
” The Trump administration ’ s efforts to wind down DACA thus violated the Administrative Procedure Act .
“ The victory is huge for those with DACA , those who might request it for a first time in the future , and their families , ” says Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia , a professor at Penn State Law .
“ There ’ s a validation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the illegality of how DACA ended that is restorative I think to people , to the rule of law.
” It ’ s a narrow and technical ruling , the kind of ruling that the Supreme Court is supposed to favor over more sweeping decisions .
And it echoes another contentious 5-4 ruling from the high court where Chief Justice Roberts voted in favor of the administration .
His opinion upholding President Donald Trump ’ s travel ban in 2018 avoided bigger questions about the order ’ s constitutionality , focusing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law that , he wrote , “ exudes deference to the President.
” The two cases are “ really different legal questions .
[ But in both ] he chose to not accept an animus challenge , or a constitutional one , and instead look at reason , ” says Professor Wadhia .
His opinion yesterday “ was less surprising as a positive outcome [ for DACA ] that was also narrow , [ with ] a reliance on administrative law as opposed to trying to answer some of these bigger questions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roberts largely ignored those questions , some of his colleagues were happy to call him out on them .
And they may preview where the issue goes from here .
“ Today ’ s decision must be recognized for what it is : an effort to avoid a politically controversial but legally correct decision , ” wrote Justice Clarence Thomas in a dissent joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch .
Accusing the majority of “ timidity , ” he added that the opinion “ has given the green light for future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court rather than where they rightfully belong – the political branches.
” The court shouldn ’ t have reviewed the DHS decision to rescind DACA at all , he believes , because DACA was unlawful from the start .
Going forward , he continued , all agencies “ will be compelled to treat an invalid legislative rule as though it were legitimate.
” His dissent echoes many of the arguments made by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions , who had first advised DHS to rescind DACA .
For some legal scholars , however , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which deferred action has , lawfully , been taken .
“ There was no real analysis or understanding for the role of discretion in immigration , ” in the dissent , says Professor Wadhia .
“ No one else is talking about whether DACA is lawful .
No court has found it to be unconstitutional .
It was not the question that was before this court , and that was the air time we got from Justice Thomas , ” she adds .
At the other end of the ideological spectrum , Justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the majority opinion – scolded the majority for dismissing the claim that the DHS acted with racial animus .
The majority countered that allowing such a challenge would mean “ virtually any generally applicable immigration policy could be challenged on equal protection grounds.
” That approach echoes the approach the Supreme Court , and Chief Justice Roberts in particular , has taken in cases like the travel ban and the decision to block the Trump administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census .
Generally , the court “ has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mr. Trump says , and focus on the language of the policies themselves , ” says Professor Masur .
“ I was surprised by Chief Justice Roberts ’ vote , ” he adds .
But at the same time , “ Roberts seems to care about rule of law and procedural regularity .
”

“It’s a [win] for rule of law,” says Jonathan Masur, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School.
For now, it stands as an unusually significant, narrow ruling about administrative law. But that itself is of great import for the Supreme Court and America in the Trump era.
The narrow ruling only prolongs their uncertainty, critics of the ruling say. The program could still be declared unlawful in the future, and while members of Congress have called for a legislative solution, legislators have said that before and not followed through.
Court watchers have expressed concern about whether the Supreme Court would uphold its standard of judicial independence. In two rulings this week, the conservative-leaning court dealt blows to an administration that relied on it as an ally.
The decision yesterday didn’t touch the question of DACA’s legality, but it did strike a blow against the Trump administration, holding that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security had not followed proper procedure when winding down a program that let 650,000 people brought to the U.S. as children legally work and study.
This week brought two surprise decisions from the conservative-leaning Supreme Court that on closer inspection don’t look as surprising. The first ruling, on Monday, enshrined LGBTQ civil rights in the workplace. Thursday’s ruling said the Trump administration moved arbitrarily and capriciously when it shut down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program set up by President Barack Obama.
The COVID-19 pandemic has left millions of Americans suddenly grappling with uncertainty. Uncertainty was nothing new for Maria Valencia.
She arrived in the U.S. at age 6, when her mom brought her to be with family. After losing her job at Best Buy this spring due to the pandemic, and not being able to volunteer as a nurse – the college student’s chosen career – any good news is welcome.
The U.S. Supreme Court, with its second major ruling in a matter of days, gave her more than that yesterday when it voted to block the termination of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA), a program that has allowed her to work and study in America despite being unauthorized, because she was brought here at a very young age.
Why We Wrote This Court watchers have expressed concern about whether the Supreme Court would uphold its standard of judicial independence. In two rulings this week, the conservative-leaning court dealt blows to an administration that relied on it as an ally.
“It’s definitely a relief,” she says. “If it was canceled I don’t know if I’d want to continue [college], because would I be able to get job?”
The 5-4 ruling also represents the second surprising decision this week from the majority conservative court – although, like the landmark LGBTQ rights ruling earlier this week, on closer examination it may not be that surprising.
The decision yesterday didn’t touch the long-debated question of DACA’s legality, but it did strike a blow against the Trump administration, holding that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had not followed the proper procedures when it decided to wind down the Obama-era program in 2017.
The narrow ruling only prolongs the uncertainty for the roughly 650,000 DACA recipients living in the country, critics say. The program could still be declared unlawful sometime in the future, and while members of Congress came out after the decision and called for a legislative solution, the legislators have said that before and not followed through.
For now, it stands as an unusually significant, narrow ruling about administrative law. But that itself is of great import for the Supreme Court and America in the Trump era.
“It’s saying [the government] didn’t follow the proper procedures to do so. It’s a [win] for rule of law,” says Jonathan Masur, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School.
“The court is grappling with the Trump administration’s efforts to skirt the law and not follow the standard rules of law,” he adds, “and the court is pushing back on that. Particularly [Chief Justice John] Roberts is pushing back on that.”
No “cutting corners”
In seeking to terminate DACA, the Trump administration made two critical errors, said Chief Justice Roberts, who wrote the majority opinion, joined by the court’s four liberal justices.
The first error came when then-Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen chose to affirm and further explain the initial reasoning the DHS had given for rescinding DACA – reasoning that a federal district court had ruled inadequate.
Because she didn’t choose to issue new reasons for rescinding DACA, Chief Justice Roberts wrote in yesterday’s ruling, “she was limited to the agency’s original reasons,” and her further explanations “can be viewed only as impermissible post hoc rationalizations and thus are not properly before us.”
It’s a small, technical issue – “an idle and useless formality,” argued the Trump administration and, in a dissent, Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Disregarding Ms. Nielsen’s memorandum sets a precedent in which it will be almost impossible for agencies to further explain decisions to courts, Justice Kavanaugh argued. “It would make little sense for a court to exclude official explanations by agency personnel … and then to turn around and remand for further explanation by those same agency personnel.”
But restricting these post hoc rationalizations serve important values, Chief Justice Roberts wrote. They ensure orderly review of agency decisions, promote agency accountability, and instill confidence that agency reasonings are genuine and not just language to win a lawsuit.
“Each of these values would be markedly undermined were we to allow DHS to rely on reasons offered” by Secretary Nielsen, the chief justice wrote.
“This is not the case for cutting corners to allow DHS to rely upon reasons absent from its original decision,” he added.
Particularly “when so much is at stake,” he continued, quoting a 1961 dissent from Justice Hugo Black, “the Government should turn square corners in dealing with the people.”
The narrow path
This ties into what the chief justice saw as the government’s second error. DHS is within its discretion to rescind DACA, but in doing so it has to consider, among other things, reliance interests – the degree to which people have come to rely on a law.
Ms. Valencia has spent most of her life in Houston, and her decisions to stay there to work, go to college, and pursue a career are the kinds of reliance interests, the kind of stakes, that the court’s majority opinion is discussing.
“DHS may determine, in the particular context before it, that other interests and policy concerns outweigh any reliance interests,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote.
“Making that difficult decision was the agency’s job, but the agency failed to do it,” he added. “That failure was arbitrary and capricious.”
The Trump administration’s efforts to wind down DACA thus violated the Administrative Procedure Act.
“The victory is huge for those with DACA, those who might request it for a first time in the future, and their families,” says Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, a professor at Penn State Law. “There’s a validation just to the integrity of the court, and the illegality of how DACA ended that is restorative I think to people, to the rule of law.”
It’s a narrow and technical ruling, the kind of ruling that the Supreme Court is supposed to favor over more sweeping decisions. And it echoes another contentious 5-4 ruling from the high court where Chief Justice Roberts voted in favor of the administration.
His opinion upholding President Donald Trump’s travel ban in 2018 avoided bigger questions about the order’s constitutionality, focusing instead on a clause in federal immigration law that, he wrote, “exudes deference to the President.”
The two cases are “really different legal questions. [But in both] he chose to not accept an animus challenge, or a constitutional one, and instead look at reason,” says Professor Wadhia.
His opinion yesterday “was less surprising as a positive outcome [for DACA] that was also narrow, [with] a reliance on administrative law as opposed to trying to answer some of these bigger questions,” she adds.
Unlawful? Unconstitutional?
While Chief Justice Roberts largely ignored those questions, some of his colleagues were happy to call him out on them. And they may preview where the issue goes from here.
“Today’s decision must be recognized for what it is: an effort to avoid a politically controversial but legally correct decision,” wrote Justice Clarence Thomas in a dissent joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch.
Accusing the majority of “timidity,” he added that the opinion “has given the green light for future political battles to be fought in this Court rather than where they rightfully belong – the political branches.” The court shouldn’t have reviewed the DHS decision to rescind DACA at all, he believes, because DACA was unlawful from the start. Going forward, he continued, all agencies “will be compelled to treat an invalid legislative rule as though it were legitimate.”
His dissent echoes many of the arguments made by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who had first advised DHS to rescind DACA. For some legal scholars, however, those arguments ignore decades of history in which deferred action has, lawfully, been taken.
“There was no real analysis or understanding for the role of discretion in immigration,” in the dissent, says Professor Wadhia.
“No one else is talking about whether DACA is lawful. No court has found it to be unconstitutional. It was not the question that was before this court, and that was the air time we got from Justice Thomas,” she adds.
At the other end of the ideological spectrum, Justice Sonia Sotomayor – who joined almost all of the majority opinion – scolded the majority for dismissing the claim that the DHS acted with racial animus.
The majority countered that allowing such a challenge would mean “virtually any generally applicable immigration policy could be challenged on equal protection grounds.”
That approach echoes the approach the Supreme Court, and Chief Justice Roberts in particular, has taken in cases like the travel ban and the decision to block the Trump administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census.
Generally, the court “has decided to largely ignore the extracurricular things Mr. Trump says, and focus on the language of the policies themselves,” says Professor Masur.
“I was surprised by Chief Justice Roberts’ vote,” he adds. But at the same time, “Roberts seems to care about rule of law and procedural regularity.”


Daily for May 26, 2020

Hassan Mohamed Ali is asked the same question about his homeland so often that he has it printed on the back of his business card .
“ Where in the world is Somaliland ?
” the text reads , beside a map showing the location of the self-declared state in the Horn of Africa .
That is the trouble with being the minister of planning and national development for a country that technically doesn ’ t exist .
Most people don ’ t even know where to find you .
But Mr. Ali knows that Somaliland ’ s anonymity also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which peeled off from Somalia during its civil war in 1991 , is unrecognized but stable ; poor but peaceful .
It has somehow cobbled together a functioning state , with a democratic government , international borders , and its own currency and passport .
“ The world turned away from us and ultimately it was a blessing , ” says Mr. Ali .
“ We didn ’ t have help , so we were forced to develop our own homegrown system.
” For three decades , Somaliland has been locked out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ultimate necessities : diplomatic legitimacy , and with it , money .
If recognized , the nation could apply for World Bank loans .
It could benefit from bilateral aid agreements , and take a seat at the United Nations .
Without a doubt , being unacknowledged has cost the territory during its crucial early years .
But today the global system is in disrepute , with once taken-for-granted norms shaken by rising nationalism , go-it-alone leaders , and now a worldwide pandemic .
Some Western governments , including the Trump administration , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spending .
That trend seems all but sure to continue , now that developed countries are focusing their resources on COVID-19 crises at home .
While Somaliland goes it alone , neighboring Somalia offers a stark illustration of a world where foreign assistance falls short , often seeming driven as much by donors ’ interests as locals ’ needs .
Although pumped full of foreign aid , foreign expertise , and foreign guns , Somalia ’ s government can barely control its capital city .
Powerful militias govern much of its territory , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of global rankings for almost every measure of the quality of life .
While most experts find that aid does boost growth , it also creates powerful entanglements and obligations from which poorer countries struggle to free themselves .
“ There ’ s no free lunch in this world , ” says Sa ’ ad Mohamed Abdi Gedo , director of the Diaspora Department at Somaliland ’ s Ministry of Foreign Affairs .
“ Everyone has an interest behind the money they give.
” But Somaliland ’ s story offers up another possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was left to develop on its own , without the world ’ s help ?
Could it manage ?
Might it even thrive ?
Somaliland didn ’ t exactly intend to go it alone .
When it declared independence from Somalia in 1991 , its leaders thought international recognition would soon follow .
They quickly proved themselves in all the ways poor countries were “ supposed to.
” They held democratic elections ; disarmed rebel groups still roaming the countryside ; and set up a government that collected taxes , patrolled the borders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And they built it all , quite literally , from rubble .
The government in Mogadishu had violently suppressed the region ’ s fight for autonomy in the late 1980s ; estimates of how many people were killed range as high as 200,000 .
Most of its capital city was destroyed as Somalia ’ s president , Siad Barre , tried to bomb the north of his country into submission .
Some 750,000 Somalilanders fled their homes during the war .
The current deputy minister of foreign affairs , Liban Yousuf Osman , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 5 years old when his family returned to Hargeisa in 1991 , and remembers it through the eyes of a child : a “ city of stumps ” and “ ghost houses , ” where he and his friends played elaborate games of hide and seek , trying to avoid the land mines still inside .
But slowly , it was rebuilt .
Flung across a diaspora that stretched from neighboring Ethiopia to the United States , the Middle East , and Australia , Somalilanders began to return home .
They opened glossy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new mosques .
“ Immediately after the war there was no aid , no foreign investment , ” says Guleid Ahmed Jama , a lawyer and founder of the Human Rights Center , a Hargeisa-based human rights watchdog .
“ That means that the citizens were the ones in charge of building their country from the start .
It was their money , their investment.
” There was just one hitch : The rest of the world refused to acknowledge Somaliland ’ s existence .
There are many reasons , but they boil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today is extremely afraid of countries breaking in two , ” says Maria Gaheir , co-founder of the Center for Policy Analysis , a Hargeisa-based think tank focused on democracy and human rights .
The last big wave of new countries in the world came with the break-up of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s .
But since then , the world – bolstered by international bodies like the United Nations – has been nearly unified in its opposition to the formation of new states .
Only five have been recognized in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the argument against recognizing Somaliland is that it will open the floodgates , encouraging secessionist groups from Senegal to Tanzania to make their own cases for independence .
For the rest of the world , meanwhile , the argument is even simpler : Somalia says Somaliland is part of it .
And because of Somalia ’ s strategic location in the Gulf of Aden , other countries are inclined to respect its wishes .
And so Somaliland carries on , “ a reality in every aspect except recognition , ” says Mr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We have our territory .
We have our government .
We have our independence .
The only thing we don ’ t have is the world ’ s acknowledgement.
” In the center of Hargeisa , in a plaza where men while away hours drinking earthy camel milk tea and chewing thick bundles of khat , a local narcotic , and taxis idle waiting for customers , stands an old Somali fighter plane mounted on a tall pedestal .
Thirty years ago , this plane was part of the fleet that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it hovers above a city that , since then , has managed something few other countries in the region have : peace .
And for that alone , many Somalilanders argue , they deserve the world ’ s recognition .
But the value would also be deeply practical .
Because Somaliland doesn ’ t technically exist , it can ’ t get loans for big development projects from financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund .
It can ’ t sign bilateral aid agreements – the kinds that exist between two countries – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to most of the world , a country at all .
That leaves Somaliland deeply impoverished .
Its government estimates that in 2017 , gross domestic product was about $ 675 per person , which would make it among the 15 poorest countries in the world .
Its economy relies heavily on the black-headed sheep roaming its streets and scrubby countryside .
( Picture a typical sheep whose head has been dipped in a pot of ink . )
Those are exported by the millions to Saudi Arabia during the annual Hajj pilgrimage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Major aid organizations often fund Somaliland via their Somalia projects , quietly navigating the politics on both sides .
A Somaliland development fund channels money from the British , Danish , and Dutch governments .
But even adjusted for population – Somalia has about three times the population of Somaliland – the $ 150 million a year in total aid to Somaliland is a fraction of the $ 2 billion allocated to Somalia in 2018 .
As a result , its beige countryside is remarkably empty of the handwritten , rusting signboards from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ villages across Africa , announcing another successful project to dig wells , fund schools , or supply hospitals .
To fill that gap , Somaliland has leaned heavily on its diaspora .
Remittances account for more than half the GDP , according to a 2012 United Nations estimate .
By comparison , the World Bank estimates that there are only three recognized countries– Tonga , Kyrgyzstan , and Haiti – where remittances account for 30 % or more of GDP .
One of the world ’ s largest money transfer services , WorldRemit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a dozen different companies advertise their services on billboards across the capital , as ubiquitous as a New York Starbucks .
“ Here remittances are much more important than foreign aid .
We depend on them , ” says Mr. Gedo , of the diaspora department .
“ The diaspora knows our struggles , so their aid is more than money .
With international organizations , you never know when the funding will end .
But your uncle abroad will never abandon you.
” The proverbial “ uncle abroad ” has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ development over the last three decades , says Yousef Hussein , who leads a small nongovernmental organization called Garoodi , which supports a village near Hargeisa called Salahley .
That ’ s possible in large part because Somali society puts strong emphasis on a person ’ s ties to others , and particularly to extended community networks called clans .
“ In the West , you buy insurance , ” he says .
“ Here our clan is our insurance policy.
” Like many communities , Salahley was leveled by the war .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ its primary school was crumpled tin roofs and piles of rubble .
There was no functioning hospital .
The roads in and out of the village were gashes of dirt , which turned to muddy sinkholes whenever it rained .
And so the community turned to relatives in London and Boston and Abu Dhabi , asking for help rebuilding what they had lost .
In 2000 , a group of Salahley residents and their relatives abroad formed a small organization , which they called Garoodi for the name of a livestock-grazing area near @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concrete school , and installed a dormitory so that children of nomadic families could stop missing half the year .
And then , for the next 18 years , they also paid the salaries of the teachers who worked there .
After the school came the hospital , and after the hospital , the road to town .
In each case , Garoodi organized funds from its members abroad – first via a Yahoo group , and later , on the chat messaging platform WhatsApp .
The set-up is intentionally simple , says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and an accountant who lives near Boston .
Donors abroad can see what ’ s happening in Somaliland in real time – from cellphone photos of flooded roads , collapsed roofs , or shriveled crops – and send money directly to the organization ’ s bank account .
This means that unlike larger aid groups , Garoodi can respond to a disaster within days , or sometimes hours .
“ A lot of international aid is wasted on things we don ’ t need , ” says Mr. Ali , the minister of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diaspora knows the country much better than aid organizations.
” Garoodi charges its members in the diaspora a small annual fee , and does occasional funding drives for specific projects .
“ In Somaliland , after people start a project with their own initiative , then sometimes government comes in to assist further on , ” Mr. Hussein says .
In the case of the school , for instance , government now pays teachers ’ salaries .
It sends a doctor from Hargeisa to see hospital patients three times a week .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by government as well .
But there are also major limitations to relying on personal charity for development .
For one , it depends on strong ties to the diaspora , something that Mr. Geddi says becomes more difficult with each passing year , as emigrants die and their children , who have spent their lives abroad , take over as breadwinners .
And perhaps most importantly , much like foreign aid funders , Somaliland ’ s diaspora has things it likes to fund – and things it doesn ’ t .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ projects , orphanages , schools , and wells , ” says Ms. Gaheir , of the Center for Policy Analysis .
“ It ’ s much harder if you want money to end something like domestic violence , or support human rights.
” And that , she says , puts real limitations on how far Somaliland can develop on its own .
“ Of course when money comes from the outside , it complicates things .
But it ’ s naive to say we ’ d rather be poor and independent , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and organizer of the Hargeisa International Book Fair .
“ We are touching the ceiling of what we can do with our current funding .
And you can ’ t run a country on national pride.
” To get beyond its current impasse , he says , Somaliland needs international recognition .
That would unlock World Bank and IMF funding , as well as much larger donations from other countries – and a place in the global community of nations .
The nation , he says , has reached a pivot point .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ under age 30 , according to World Health Organization estimates .
That means they don ’ t remember a time before the nation ’ s independence , or the horrific violence its older residents endured .
“ My brother was killed in front of me during the war , so I know the price of peace , ” Mr. Jama says .
“ But for young people , peace is all they know , and what they ’ re saying now is that it ’ s not enough .
We also need jobs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lohani contributed reporting from Boston , and Asma Dhamac contributed reporting from Hargeisa .

How a DIY nation has made it this far Collapse
Hassan Mohamed Ali is asked the same question about his homeland so often that he has it printed on the back of his business card.
“Where in the world is Somaliland?” the text reads, beside a map showing the location of the self-declared state in the Horn of Africa.
That is the trouble with being the minister of planning and national development for a country that technically doesn’t exist. Most people don’t even know where to find you.
But Mr. Ali knows that Somaliland’s anonymity also gives it certain advantages. His nation, which peeled off from Somalia during its civil war in 1991, is unrecognized but stable; poor but peaceful. It has somehow cobbled together a functioning state, with a democratic government, international borders, and its own currency and passport.
“The world turned away from us and ultimately it was a blessing,” says Mr. Ali. “We didn’t have help, so we were forced to develop our own homegrown system.”
Ryan Lenora Brown/The Christian Science Monitor View caption Hide caption Hassan Mohamed Ali, Somaliland's Minister of Planning and National Development, says Somaliland's lack of international recognition has been a blessing in disguise for its development. “We didn’t have help [from the global community], so we were forced to develop our own homegrown system," he says.
For three decades, Somaliland has been locked out of a club that confers countries’ ultimate necessities: diplomatic legitimacy, and with it, money. If recognized, the nation could apply for World Bank loans. It could benefit from bilateral aid agreements, and take a seat at the United Nations. Without a doubt, being unacknowledged has cost the territory during its crucial early years.
But today the global system is in disrepute, with once taken-for-granted norms shaken by rising nationalism, go-it-alone leaders, and now a worldwide pandemic. Some Western governments, including the Trump administration, are arguing for steep cuts to aid spending. That trend seems all but sure to continue, now that developed countries are focusing their resources on COVID-19 crises at home.
While Somaliland goes it alone, neighboring Somalia offers a stark illustration of a world where foreign assistance falls short, often seeming driven as much by donors’ interests as locals’ needs. Although pumped full of foreign aid, foreign expertise, and foreign guns, Somalia’s government can barely control its capital city. Powerful militias govern much of its territory, and the country is near the bottom of global rankings for almost every measure of the quality of life.
While most experts find that aid does boost growth, it also creates powerful entanglements and obligations from which poorer countries struggle to free themselves. “There’s no free lunch in this world,” says Sa’ad Mohamed Abdi Gedo, director of the Diaspora Department at Somaliland’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “Everyone has an interest behind the money they give.”
But Somaliland’s story offers up another possible model. What if a poor country was left to develop on its own, without the world’s help? Could it manage? Might it even thrive?
Plan versus reality
Somaliland didn’t exactly intend to go it alone. When it declared independence from Somalia in 1991, its leaders thought international recognition would soon follow.
They quickly proved themselves in all the ways poor countries were “supposed to.” They held democratic elections; disarmed rebel groups still roaming the countryside; and set up a government that collected taxes, patrolled the borders, and printed its own currency.
And they built it all, quite literally, from rubble. The government in Mogadishu had violently suppressed the region’s fight for autonomy in the late 1980s; estimates of how many people were killed range as high as 200,000. Most of its capital city was destroyed as Somalia’s president, Siad Barre, tried to bomb the north of his country into submission.
Some 750,000 Somalilanders fled their homes during the war. The current deputy minister of foreign affairs, Liban Yousuf Osman, was among them. He was just 5 years old when his family returned to Hargeisa in 1991, and remembers it through the eyes of a child: a “city of stumps” and “ghost houses,” where he and his friends played elaborate games of hide and seek, trying to avoid the land mines still inside.
But slowly, it was rebuilt. Flung across a diaspora that stretched from neighboring Ethiopia to the United States, the Middle East, and Australia, Somalilanders began to return home. They opened glossy blue-windowed storefronts, reconstructed neighborhoods, erected new mosques.
“Immediately after the war there was no aid, no foreign investment,” says Guleid Ahmed Jama, a lawyer and founder of the Human Rights Center, a Hargeisa-based human rights watchdog. “That means that the citizens were the ones in charge of building their country from the start. It was their money, their investment.”
There was just one hitch: The rest of the world refused to acknowledge Somaliland’s existence.
There are many reasons, but they boil down to one: “The world today is extremely afraid of countries breaking in two,” says Maria Gaheir, co-founder of the Center for Policy Analysis, a Hargeisa-based think tank focused on democracy and human rights. The last big wave of new countries in the world came with the break-up of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. But since then, the world – bolstered by international bodies like the United Nations – has been nearly unified in its opposition to the formation of new states. Only five have been recognized in the last 25 years.
Jacob Turcotte/Staff
In Africa, the argument against recognizing Somaliland is that it will open the floodgates, encouraging secessionist groups from Senegal to Tanzania to make their own cases for independence. For the rest of the world, meanwhile, the argument is even simpler: Somalia says Somaliland is part of it. And because of Somalia’s strategic location in the Gulf of Aden, other countries are inclined to respect its wishes.
And so Somaliland carries on, “a reality in every aspect except recognition,” says Mr. Osman, the deputy for foreign affairs. “We have our territory. We have our government. We have our independence. The only thing we don’t have is the world’s acknowledgement.”
Turn to the “uncle abroad”
In the center of Hargeisa, in a plaza where men while away hours drinking earthy camel milk tea and chewing thick bundles of khat, a local narcotic, and taxis idle waiting for customers, stands an old Somali fighter plane mounted on a tall pedestal. Thirty years ago, this plane was part of the fleet that bombed Hargeisa into submission.
Today, it hovers above a city that, since then, has managed something few other countries in the region have: peace. And for that alone, many Somalilanders argue, they deserve the world’s recognition.
But the value would also be deeply practical. Because Somaliland doesn’t technically exist, it can’t get loans for big development projects from financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund. It can’t sign bilateral aid agreements – the kinds that exist between two countries – because it isn’t, according to most of the world, a country at all.
Ryan Lenora Brown/The Christian Science Monitor View caption Hide caption Children study in Salahley, near the Somaliland capital of Hargeisa. The school was constructed by an NGO called Garoodi, which receives money from the diaspora. “Growing up, education conditions were very difficult for us,” says Mustafa Ismail Jama, the school’s principal. “So we wanted it to be different for our children.”
That leaves Somaliland deeply impoverished. Its government estimates that in 2017, gross domestic product was about $675 per person, which would make it among the 15 poorest countries in the world. Its economy relies heavily on the black-headed sheep roaming its streets and scrubby countryside. (Picture a typical sheep whose head has been dipped in a pot of ink.) Those are exported by the millions to Saudi Arabia during the annual Hajj pilgrimage.
Some money still squeaks in. Major aid organizations often fund Somaliland via their Somalia projects, quietly navigating the politics on both sides. A Somaliland development fund channels money from the British, Danish, and Dutch governments.
But even adjusted for population – Somalia has about three times the population of Somaliland – the $150 million a year in total aid to Somaliland is a fraction of the $2 billion allocated to Somalia in 2018.
As a result, its beige countryside is remarkably empty of the handwritten, rusting signboards from international charities that stand at attention in villages across Africa, announcing another successful project to dig wells, fund schools, or supply hospitals.
To fill that gap, Somaliland has leaned heavily on its diaspora.
Remittances account for more than half the GDP, according to a 2012 United Nations estimate. By comparison, the World Bank estimates that there are only three recognized countries– Tonga, Kyrgyzstan, and Haiti – where remittances account for 30% or more of GDP. One of the world’s largest money transfer services, WorldRemit, was founded by a Somalilander, and a dozen different companies advertise their services on billboards across the capital, as ubiquitous as a New York Starbucks.
“Here remittances are much more important than foreign aid. We depend on them,” says Mr. Gedo, of the diaspora department. “The diaspora knows our struggles, so their aid is more than money. With international organizations, you never know when the funding will end. But your uncle abroad will never abandon you.”
The proverbial “uncle abroad” has been responsible for much of Somaliland’s development over the last three decades, says Yousef Hussein, who leads a small nongovernmental organization called Garoodi, which supports a village near Hargeisa called Salahley.
That’s possible in large part because Somali society puts strong emphasis on a person’s ties to others, and particularly to extended community networks called clans.
“In the West, you buy insurance,” he says. “Here our clan is our insurance policy.”
Ryan Lenora Brown/The Christian Science Monitor View caption Hide caption Yousef Hussein, chair of the Somaliland NGO Garoodi, waves to a worker building a road between the capital, Hargeisa, and Salahley, 50 miles south. Garoodi organized and paid for parts of this road using money raised from the diaspora, a common funding model here.
Like many communities, Salahley was leveled by the war. When residents returned in the 1990s, its primary school was crumpled tin roofs and piles of rubble. There was no functioning hospital. The roads in and out of the village were gashes of dirt, which turned to muddy sinkholes whenever it rained.
And so the community turned to relatives in London and Boston and Abu Dhabi, asking for help rebuilding what they had lost.
In 2000, a group of Salahley residents and their relatives abroad formed a small organization, which they called Garoodi for the name of a livestock-grazing area near the village.
Garoodi rebuilt the L-shaped concrete school, and installed a dormitory so that children of nomadic families could stop missing half the year. And then, for the next 18 years, they also paid the salaries of the teachers who worked there.
After the school came the hospital, and after the hospital, the road to town. In each case, Garoodi organized funds from its members abroad – first via a Yahoo group, and later, on the chat messaging platform WhatsApp.
The set-up is intentionally simple, says Abdiasis Geddi, Garoodi’s secretary and an accountant who lives near Boston. Donors abroad can see what’s happening in Somaliland in real time – from cellphone photos of flooded roads, collapsed roofs, or shriveled crops – and send money directly to the organization’s bank account.
This means that unlike larger aid groups, Garoodi can respond to a disaster within days, or sometimes hours.
“A lot of international aid is wasted on things we don’t need,” says Mr. Ali, the minister of planning and national development. “The diaspora knows the country much better than aid organizations.”
Garoodi charges its members in the diaspora a small annual fee, and does occasional funding drives for specific projects.
“In Somaliland, after people start a project with their own initiative, then sometimes government comes in to assist further on,” Mr. Hussein says. In the case of the school, for instance, government now pays teachers’ salaries. It sends a doctor from Hargeisa to see hospital patients three times a week. The road construction project is now being assisted by government as well.
But there are also major limitations to relying on personal charity for development.
For one, it depends on strong ties to the diaspora, something that Mr. Geddi says becomes more difficult with each passing year, as emigrants die and their children, who have spent their lives abroad, take over as breadwinners.
And perhaps most importantly, much like foreign aid funders, Somaliland’s diaspora has things it likes to fund – and things it doesn’t.
“Most diaspora aid goes to very non-controversial projects, orphanages, schools, and wells,” says Ms. Gaheir, of the Center for Policy Analysis. “It’s much harder if you want money to end something like domestic violence, or support human rights.”
And that, she says, puts real limitations on how far Somaliland can develop on its own.
“Of course when money comes from the outside, it complicates things. But it’s naive to say we’d rather be poor and independent,” says Jama Musse Jama, a commentator and organizer of the Hargeisa International Book Fair. “We are touching the ceiling of what we can do with our current funding. And you can’t run a country on national pride.”
To get beyond its current impasse, he says, Somaliland needs international recognition. That would unlock World Bank and IMF funding, as well as much larger donations from other countries – and a place in the global community of nations.
The nation, he says, has reached a pivot point. More than 70% of Somalilanders are under age 30, according to World Health Organization estimates. That means they don’t remember a time before the nation’s independence, or the horrific violence its older residents endured.
“My brother was killed in front of me during the war, so I know the price of peace,” Mr. Jama says. “But for young people, peace is all they know, and what they’re saying now is that it’s not enough. We also need jobs. We also need development.”
Nusmila Lohani contributed reporting from Boston, and Asma Dhamac contributed reporting from Hargeisa.


csmonitor--2020-05-27--Bird-watching while black: What will end racist 911 calls?

The verbal dispute between a white woman with an unleashed dog and a black man bird-watching in Central Park might normally have gone unnoticed in a city preoccupied by the coronavirus pandemic .
That changed when birdwatcher Christian Cooper pulled out his phone and captured Amy Cooper calling police to report she was being threatened by `` an African American man . ''
The widely watched video – posted on Facebook by Christian Cooper and on Twitter by his sister – sparked accusations of racism and led to Amy Cooper getting fired .
`` Unfortunately we live in an era @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black men are seen as targets , '' Christian Cooper told CNN .
`` This woman thought she could exploit that to her advantage , and I was n't having it . ''
As Vox reported , this incident is a part of a long history of white people calling the police on black Americans resulting in arrests and violence .
This dangerous pattern received greater national attention in 2018 when two black men , Rashon Nelson and Donte Robinson , were arrested at a Philadelphia Starbucks while doing nothing more than waiting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Soon after , a white Oakland woman became the subject of countless “ BBQ Becky ” memes after she called the police on a black family who were barbecuing in a park — the family were detained and questioned for an hour ... .
As P.R .
Lockhart wrote at Vox in 2018 , “ if ‘ shopping while black ’ and ‘ driving while black ’ have been long used to describe a tendency for people and police to treat black people with suspicion , recent incidents have provided an increasing number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” For his part , Christian Cooper told the Washington Post , “ I don ’ t think there ’ s an African American person in America who hasn ’ t experienced something like this at some point.
” The confrontation began early Monday morning when Christian Cooper said he noticed Amy Cooper had let her cocker spaniel off its leash against the rules in the Ramble , a secluded section of Central Park popular with bird-watchers .
In a Facebook post , he claimed the dog was `` tearing through the plantings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to another part of the park .
When she refused , he pulled out dog treats , causing her to scream at him to not come near her dog .
Amy Cooper also warned him she would summon police unless he stopped recording .
`` I 'm going to tell them there 's an African American man threatening my life , '' Amy Cooper is heard saying in the video as she pulls down her face mask and struggles to control her dog .
`` Please call the cops , '' Christian Cooper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American man , I 'm in Central Park , he is recording me and threatening myself and my dog .
… Please send the cops immediately ! ''
she says during the call before he stops recording .
Police say by the time they responded , they were both gone .
In the fallout , investment firm Franklin Templeton announced Tuesday afternoon it had fired Amy Cooper , saying , `` We do not tolerate racism of any kind . ''
A group called Abandoned Angels Cocker Spaniel Rescue said it had custody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The pet could be heard coughing in the video after she clenched it by the collar with its front legs off the ground .
Amy Cooper released an apology through a public relations service Tuesday night , saying she `` reacted emotionally and made false assumptions about his intentions . ''
`` He had every right to request that I leash my dog in an area where it was required , '' she said in the written statement .
`` I am well aware of the pain that misassumptions and insensitive statements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ imagined that I would be involved in the type of incident that occurred with Chris . ''
She told CNN earlier Tuesday , `` I am not a racist . ''
`` I think I was just scared , '' she said .
`` When you 're alone in the Ramble , you do n't know what 's happening .
It 's not excusable , it 's not defensible . ''
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said the video exemplified hatred that has `` no place in our city . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is racism , plain and simple , '' Mr. de Blasio tweeted .
`` She called the police BECAUSE he was a Black man .
Even though she was the one breaking the rules .
She decided he was the criminal and we know why . ''
In an interview with The New York Times , Christian Cooper showed empathy for the stranger with whom he shares a last name .
`` It 's a little bit of a frenzy , and I am uncomfortable with that , '' he said .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ underlying factors , I am not sure that this young woman having her life completely torn apart serves that goal . ''
This story was reported by The Associated Press .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage .
It ’ s free .

The verbal dispute between a white woman with an unleashed dog and a black man bird-watching in Central Park might normally have gone unnoticed in a city preoccupied by the coronavirus pandemic.
That changed when birdwatcher Christian Cooper pulled out his phone and captured Amy Cooper calling police to report she was being threatened by "an African American man." The widely watched video – posted on Facebook by Christian Cooper and on Twitter by his sister – sparked accusations of racism and led to Amy Cooper getting fired.
"Unfortunately we live in an era with things like Ahmaud Arbery, where black men are seen as targets," Christian Cooper told CNN. "This woman thought she could exploit that to her advantage, and I wasn't having it."
As Vox reported, this incident is a part of a long history of white people calling the police on black Americans resulting in arrests and violence.
This dangerous pattern received greater national attention in 2018 when two black men, Rashon Nelson and Donte Robinson, were arrested at a Philadelphia Starbucks while doing nothing more than waiting for a business partner to arrive. Soon after, a white Oakland woman became the subject of countless “BBQ Becky” memes after she called the police on a black family who were barbecuing in a park — the family were detained and questioned for an hour.... As P.R. Lockhart wrote at Vox in 2018, “if ‘shopping while black’ and ‘driving while black’ have been long used to describe a tendency for people and police to treat black people with suspicion, recent incidents have provided an increasing number of scenarios to add to the list.” For his part, Christian Cooper told the Washington Post, “I don’t think there’s an African American person in America who hasn’t experienced something like this at some point.”
The confrontation began early Monday morning when Christian Cooper said he noticed Amy Cooper had let her cocker spaniel off its leash against the rules in the Ramble, a secluded section of Central Park popular with bird-watchers.
In a Facebook post, he claimed the dog was "tearing through the plantings" and told her she should go to another part of the park. When she refused, he pulled out dog treats, causing her to scream at him to not come near her dog.
Amy Cooper also warned him she would summon police unless he stopped recording.
"I'm going to tell them there's an African American man threatening my life," Amy Cooper is heard saying in the video as she pulls down her face mask and struggles to control her dog.
"Please call the cops," Christian Cooper says.
"There's an African American man, I'm in Central Park, he is recording me and threatening myself and my dog. … Please send the cops immediately!" she says during the call before he stops recording.
Police say by the time they responded, they were both gone.
In the fallout, investment firm Franklin Templeton announced Tuesday afternoon it had fired Amy Cooper, saying, "We do not tolerate racism of any kind."
A group called Abandoned Angels Cocker Spaniel Rescue said it had custody of her dog for the time being. The pet could be heard coughing in the video after she clenched it by the collar with its front legs off the ground.
Amy Cooper released an apology through a public relations service Tuesday night, saying she "reacted emotionally and made false assumptions about his intentions."
"He had every right to request that I leash my dog in an area where it was required," she said in the written statement. "I am well aware of the pain that misassumptions and insensitive statements about race cause and would never have imagined that I would be involved in the type of incident that occurred with Chris."
She told CNN earlier Tuesday, "I am not a racist."
"I think I was just scared," she said. "When you're alone in the Ramble, you don't know what's happening. It's not excusable, it's not defensible."
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said the video exemplified hatred that has "no place in our city."
"The video out of Central Park is racism, plain and simple," Mr. de Blasio tweeted. "She called the police BECAUSE he was a Black man. Even though she was the one breaking the rules. She decided he was the criminal and we know why."
In an interview with The New York Times, Christian Cooper showed empathy for the stranger with whom he shares a last name.
"It's a little bit of a frenzy, and I am uncomfortable with that," he said. "If our goal is to change the underlying factors, I am not sure that this young woman having her life completely torn apart serves that goal."
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
This story was reported by The Associated Press.
Editor’s note: As a public service, the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage. It’s free.


csmonitor--2020-05-28--An opening for softer diplomacy?

An opening for softer diplomacy?

In early May , five tanker ships carrying refined petroleum embarked from Iran for Venezuela .
Their journey sparked speculation about Iran ’ s motives and strategic concerns as well as how Washington would respond .
In its tenure the Trump administration has imposed ever-tighter sanctions against both Tehran and Caracas to compel regime change .
By violating the sanctions , was Iran attempting to provoke President Donald Trump as he campaigns for reelection ?
Possibly .
Would the U.S. president respond ?
He had the means in place , having recently deployed U.S. warships off Venezuelan waters to , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , disruption , and seizures of drug shipments.
” Notably , however , the first of those Iranian ships docked this week without incident , delivering precious fuel to a country that is literally starving after two decades of failed authoritarianism and now the coronavirus pandemic .
The tanker loads , enough supply for two months if stretched prudently , may bring temporary relief to Venezuela ’ s humanitarian crisis .
The ships ’ safe passage is the latest sign of an unacknowledged , informal détente unfolding between Tehran and Washington that provides @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iran and Venezuela .
Tehran backed Washington ’ s favored candidate for prime minister in Iraq in March and released a captive U.S. naval veteran into the hands of the Swiss Embassy in Tehran .
In recent months , attacks against U.S. troops in Afghanistan by Iranian-backed forces have eased off .
So have confrontations against ships and tankers in the Persian Gulf .
The Trump administration credits its “ maximum pressure ” campaign – withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal , comprehensive economic sanctions , the January assassination of the elite Qods @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for reining in Tehran .
It has applied similar pressure in Venezuela in an attempt to force President Nicolás Maduro from power .
Last year the administration recognized opposition leader Juan Guaidó as interim president , prompting roughly 50 other countries to do the same .
In addition to a comprehensive oil embargo and a raft of targeted economic sanctions , in March the U.S. Justice Department charged Mr. Maduro and other officials of colluding with Colombian guerrillas to traffic drugs .
Conditions in both countries may be ripe for a shift to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent trip to Iran , journalist Dexter Filkins from The New Yorker captured a society weary of decades of repression and sanctions and yearning for change .
The supreme leader , Ayatollah Ali Khamenei , is considered to be frail and withdrawn .
The regime ’ s attempt to conceal early cases of COVID-19 resulted in a rapid and devastating outbreak .
For the first time since the Islamic Revolution 41 years ago , Tehran appealed to the International Monetary Fund for help .
“ Public confidence in the theocratic system , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” In Venezuela , meanwhile , the combined toll of sanctions and the pandemic “ has pushed many Venezuelans eager for change to close ranks with the government and blame the U.S. for their troubles , ” according to an assessment by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity .
The group of former U.S. spy practitioners noted that Mr. Guaidó ’ s support “ for ever-tightening sanctions – at a time when his countrymen lack food , water , and most basic supplies – is destroying his credibility.
” The Iranian shipment of fuel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not tap its own vast oil reserves reflects defiant measures of self-preservation by two isolated and desperate regimes .
That presents an opportunity to cultivate good will .
If the purpose of sanctions is to create conditions for a people to effect change from within , the power of sanctions lies in knowing when to exchange them for the softer tools of diplomacy .

In early May, five tanker ships carrying refined petroleum embarked from Iran for Venezuela. Their journey sparked speculation about Iran’s motives and strategic concerns as well as how Washington would respond. In its tenure the Trump administration has imposed ever-tighter sanctions against both Tehran and Caracas to compel regime change.
By violating the sanctions, was Iran attempting to provoke President Donald Trump as he campaigns for reelection? Possibly. Would the U.S. president respond? He had the means in place, having recently deployed U.S. warships off Venezuelan waters to, as he said, “increase surveillance, disruption, and seizures of drug shipments.”
Notably, however, the first of those Iranian ships docked this week without incident, delivering precious fuel to a country that is literally starving after two decades of failed authoritarianism and now the coronavirus pandemic. The tanker loads, enough supply for two months if stretched prudently, may bring temporary relief to Venezuela’s humanitarian crisis. The ships’ safe passage is the latest sign of an unacknowledged, informal détente unfolding between Tehran and Washington that provides an important opening for progress in both Iran and Venezuela.
Tehran backed Washington’s favored candidate for prime minister in Iraq in March and released a captive U.S. naval veteran into the hands of the Swiss Embassy in Tehran. In recent months, attacks against U.S. troops in Afghanistan by Iranian-backed forces have eased off. So have confrontations against ships and tankers in the Persian Gulf.
The Trump administration credits its “maximum pressure” campaign – withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal, comprehensive economic sanctions, the January assassination of the elite Qods Force commander Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani – for reining in Tehran.
It has applied similar pressure in Venezuela in an attempt to force President Nicolás Maduro from power. Last year the administration recognized opposition leader Juan Guaidó as interim president, prompting roughly 50 other countries to do the same. In addition to a comprehensive oil embargo and a raft of targeted economic sanctions, in March the U.S. Justice Department charged Mr. Maduro and other officials of colluding with Colombian guerrillas to traffic drugs.
Conditions in both countries may be ripe for a shift to American restraint and compassion. On a recent trip to Iran, journalist Dexter Filkins from The New Yorker captured a society weary of decades of repression and sanctions and yearning for change. The supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is considered to be frail and withdrawn. The regime’s attempt to conceal early cases of COVID-19 resulted in a rapid and devastating outbreak. For the first time since the Islamic Revolution 41 years ago, Tehran appealed to the International Monetary Fund for help. “Public confidence in the theocratic system,” Mr. Filkins wrote, “has collapsed.”
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
In Venezuela, meanwhile, the combined toll of sanctions and the pandemic “has pushed many Venezuelans eager for change to close ranks with the government and blame the U.S. for their troubles,” according to an assessment by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. The group of former U.S. spy practitioners noted that Mr. Guaidó’s support “for ever-tightening sanctions – at a time when his countrymen lack food, water, and most basic supplies – is destroying his credibility.”
The Iranian shipment of fuel to a country so broken it cannot tap its own vast oil reserves reflects defiant measures of self-preservation by two isolated and desperate regimes. That presents an opportunity to cultivate good will. If the purpose of sanctions is to create conditions for a people to effect change from within, the power of sanctions lies in knowing when to exchange them for the softer tools of diplomacy.


csmonitor--2020-04-09--Home quarantines boost DIY renaissance

Home quarantines boost DIY renaissance

A generation or two ago , household skills like these were common , learned at home and at school .
Then it became easier to toss things out rather than fix them , quicker to call the professionals .
Now , in an unsettling era of staying at home and not knowing what will be available tomorrow , the old ways are being dusted off and relearned .
Since the coronavirus has shuttered many small businesses that do our work and supply our things , millions of people trying to stay home are driven by necessity – or boredom – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fixing , grooming , and other practical skills themselves .
`` It 's during uncertain times like these when we take stock of all the basic life skills we 've forgotten , or never learned in the first place , because they sure could come in handy right about now , '' says Erin Bried , a magazine editor in Brooklyn and author of `` How to Sew a Button : And Other Nifty Things Your Grandmother Knew . ''
In a dark and difficult time , it can be an emotional lift @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the house than you thought .
`` I accomplished something real today ! ''
Maria Kernahan , a real estate agent and children 's book author , said after installing a new thermostat herself in her Castle Park , Michigan , house .
She followed online advice to figure out the wiring in the old house .
Her husband , meanwhile , has begun chopping wood .
`` We 're making this up as we go along , '' she said .
Bill Hughes , a business consultant in University Place , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and did n't want to put them away wrinkled .
`` When I was a graduate student , I would iron my own shirts to save some money .
It was tedious and I looked forward to the day when I could afford to drop off my shirts to be cleaned , '' says Mr. Hughes .
`` Since my dry cleaner is closed , I dusted off the iron and ironing board , turned on some Huey Lewis and the News , and went at it . ''
Janice Simonsen , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helped sew masks for medical personnel , following instructions on a YouTube video .
`` I have n't pulled my sewing machine out for many years .
I never really had the time , '' she says .
She plans to keep the machine out and try some projects , like pillow covers , that she 's put off for years .
`` It felt good to create something useful again , '' says Ms. Simonsen .
Yes , you can still order takeout in most places and call the plumber or electrician @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do that only when absolutely needed .
Hardware stores have seen high demand for home-repair and lawn tools .
Social media feeds everywhere are full of posts from newbies planting vegetable gardens , giving themselves haircuts , and baking bread .
YouTube has seen a spike of more than 100 % in average daily views of videos with `` Cook with Me '' in the title since March 15 compared to the rest of the year , said spokeswoman Veronica Navarrete .
`` We 're seeing this trend across several verticals , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her book , Ms. Bried interviewed women who had lived through the Great Depression and imparted lessons on how to make do and get by .
`` I feel a new , closer connection to all of their stories now , '' she says .
`` It was a difficult time , and it left its mark on all of them .
I think this pandemic , too , will leave its mark on us much in the same way .
It 's caused us all to halt our lives and reevaluate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is truly important and what we 're equipped to handle . ''
Jeanne Huntley , who taught high school home economics for 35 years in Sault Ste .
Marie , Ontario , thinks society lost something important when schools phased out home economics and shop classes in favor of computer science , robotics , and STEM .
`` A lot of younger people have been brought up in a consumer society – 'You do n't fix things , you replace things , ' '' she says .
`` Parents are busy too , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time to pass on those skills .
But knowing you can make things and fix things gives us a sense of confidence in ourselves . ''
This is not new for everyone .
There 's always been a counter-current of people yearning to get back to basics .
The DIY movement has blossomed in recent years , and long before the coronavirus `` urban homesteaders '' experimented with backyard chickens , homemade dyes , wooden toys , and organic food .
Concerns over climate change have kickstarted a strong movement toward buying fewer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the environment : `` Reduce , reuse , recycle . ''
Now , in a time of feared shortages and limited mobility , this emphasis on self-sufficiency is going wider .
Sharon Bowers , co-author with her husband , David , of a book about life skills called `` The Useful Book '' , embraces the trend .
But she cautions people to be smart – and check out books and YouTube videos before plunging in .
`` I 'm urging you to boldly go and try something new , but not something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ability .
... You could probably wire a lamp , but do n't mess around with the circuit board in your house , '' she says .
`` If you make a mess – assuming you do n't break something you really need – you can always call the professionals when we 're out the other side . ''
Even the Bowerses , fix-it pros who live outside Dublin , Ireland , with their two teenage sons , `` have a plumbing problem that 's complicated '' to deal with .
`` And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 're just going to have to wait . ''
This story was reported by The Associated Press .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage .
It ’ s free .

Mending clothes. Cutting hair. Fixing a squeaky door or a dripping faucet. Baking bread.
A generation or two ago, household skills like these were common, learned at home and at school. Then it became easier to toss things out rather than fix them, quicker to call the professionals.
Now, in an unsettling era of staying at home and not knowing what will be available tomorrow, the old ways are being dusted off and relearned.
Since the coronavirus has shuttered many small businesses that do our work and supply our things, millions of people trying to stay home are driven by necessity – or boredom – to do more cooking, cleaning, fixing, grooming, and other practical skills themselves.
"It's during uncertain times like these when we take stock of all the basic life skills we've forgotten, or never learned in the first place, because they sure could come in handy right about now,'' says Erin Bried, a magazine editor in Brooklyn and author of "How to Sew a Button: And Other Nifty Things Your Grandmother Knew."
In a dark and difficult time, it can be an emotional lift to find that you're more capable around the house than you thought.
"I accomplished something real today!" Maria Kernahan, a real estate agent and children's book author, said after installing a new thermostat herself in her Castle Park, Michigan, house. She followed online advice to figure out the wiring in the old house. Her husband, meanwhile, has begun chopping wood.
"We're making this up as we go along,'' she said.
Bill Hughes, a business consultant in University Place, Washington, had to wash some shirts and didn't want to put them away wrinkled.
"When I was a graduate student, I would iron my own shirts to save some money. It was tedious and I looked forward to the day when I could afford to drop off my shirts to be cleaned," says Mr. Hughes. "Since my dry cleaner is closed, I dusted off the iron and ironing board, turned on some Huey Lewis and the News, and went at it."
Janice Simonsen, who works in corporate communications in Philadelphia, helped sew masks for medical personnel, following instructions on a YouTube video. "I haven't pulled my sewing machine out for many years. I never really had the time,'' she says.
"Those junior high sewing classes kicked back in."
She plans to keep the machine out and try some projects, like pillow covers, that she's put off for years. "It felt good to create something useful again,'' says Ms. Simonsen.
Yes, you can still order takeout in most places and call the plumber or electrician. But more people are trying to do that only when absolutely needed. Hardware stores have seen high demand for home-repair and lawn tools. Social media feeds everywhere are full of posts from newbies planting vegetable gardens, giving themselves haircuts, and baking bread.
Especially sourdough. Lots of sourdough.
YouTube has seen a spike of more than 100% in average daily views of videos with "Cook with Me'' in the title since March 15 compared to the rest of the year, said spokeswoman Veronica Navarrete. "We're seeing this trend across several verticals,'' including cleaning, she said.
For her book, Ms. Bried interviewed women who had lived through the Great Depression and imparted lessons on how to make do and get by.
"I feel a new, closer connection to all of their stories now,'' she says. "It was a difficult time, and it left its mark on all of them. I think this pandemic, too, will leave its mark on us much in the same way. It's caused us all to halt our lives and reevaluate, maybe for the first time, what is truly important and what we're equipped to handle."
Jeanne Huntley, who taught high school home economics for 35 years in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, thinks society lost something important when schools phased out home economics and shop classes in favor of computer science, robotics, and STEM.
"A lot of younger people have been brought up in a consumer society – 'You don't fix things, you replace things,''' she says. "Parents are busy too, and there's not a lot of time to pass on those skills. But knowing you can make things and fix things gives us a sense of confidence in ourselves.''
This is not new for everyone. There's always been a counter-current of people yearning to get back to basics.
The DIY movement has blossomed in recent years, and long before the coronavirus "urban homesteaders'' experimented with backyard chickens, homemade dyes, wooden toys, and organic food. Concerns over climate change have kickstarted a strong movement toward buying fewer things and leaving a lighter footprint on the environment: "Reduce, reuse, recycle.''
Now, in a time of feared shortages and limited mobility, this emphasis on self-sufficiency is going wider.
Sharon Bowers, co-author with her husband, David, of a book about life skills called "The Useful Book", embraces the trend. But she cautions people to be smart – and check out books and YouTube videos before plunging in.
"I'm urging you to boldly go and try something new, but not something that you know is way outside your ability. ... You could probably wire a lamp, but don't mess around with the circuit board in your house," she says. "If you make a mess – assuming you don't break something you really need – you can always call the professionals when we're out the other side."
Even the Bowerses, fix-it pros who live outside Dublin, Ireland, with their two teenage sons, "have a plumbing problem that's complicated" to deal with. "And," she says, "we're just going to have to wait."
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
This story was reported by The Associated Press.
Editor’s note: As a public service, the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage. It’s free.


csmonitor--2020-04-09--Dr. Seuss meet Dr. Dre: Online reading gets a new rhythm

The coronavirus quarantine has brought about many creative pursuits over the past few weeks .
One of the most loved , online storytime for children , has a new beat : book rapping .
Last week , actor and film director Wes Tank took to YouTube to rap some of Dr. Seuss ' most lovable picture stories .
It has been a big hit in the online community with educators posting in the comments section that they could use it for their online classes .
One self-proclaimed teacher commented all of his second grade students loved it .
Online book @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many teachers amid the coronavirus quarantine to stay connected with their students and help them engage with content and continue learning .
`` I just think about my kiddos a lot , and I do miss them a lot more than I anticipated I would already , '' first-grade teacher Sarah Lathers in Santee , California , told KGTV .
`` I care so much about their education and them as people .
And I just want to know that they 're somewhere feeling comfortable and safe during all the chaos . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ relatively modern form of rapping blends well with Dr. Seuss ' rhyming couplets .
And it 's proving to have a wide appeal .
In its first week of being posted , Mr .
Tank 's `` Fox in Sox '' video has reached more than 630,000 views .
Some people are even saying Dr. Seuss ' stories were meant to be read as raps .
`` I am now convinced Dr. Seuss was some rapper 's ghost writer , '' wrote one anonymous viewer .
Another mused , `` Imagine if this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be read from the start . ''
Mr .
Tank continues to post more entertaining videos of himself rapping other Dr. Seuss books like `` Green Eggs and Ham '' and `` The Lorax , '' which both carry meaningful messages about trying new experiences and environmental sustainability .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage .
It ’ s free .

The coronavirus quarantine has brought about many creative pursuits over the past few weeks. One of the most loved, online storytime for children, has a new beat: book rapping.
Last week, actor and film director Wes Tank took to YouTube to rap some of Dr. Seuss' most lovable picture stories. It has been a big hit in the online community with educators posting in the comments section that they could use it for their online classes. One self-proclaimed teacher commented all of his second grade students loved it.
Online book reading has become a vital tool for many teachers amid the coronavirus quarantine to stay connected with their students and help them engage with content and continue learning.
"I just think about my kiddos a lot, and I do miss them a lot more than I anticipated I would already," first-grade teacher Sarah Lathers in Santee, California, told KGTV. "I care so much about their education and them as people. And I just want to know that they're somewhere feeling comfortable and safe during all the chaos."
It comes as no surprise that the relatively modern form of rapping blends well with Dr. Seuss' rhyming couplets. And it's proving to have a wide appeal. In its first week of being posted, Mr. Tank's "Fox in Sox" video has reached more than 630,000 views.
Some people are even saying Dr. Seuss' stories were meant to be read as raps.
"I am now convinced Dr. Seuss was some rapper's ghost writer," wrote one anonymous viewer.
Another mused, "Imagine if this is how Dr. Seuss wanted his books to be read from the start."
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Mr. Tank continues to post more entertaining videos of himself rapping other Dr. Seuss books like "Green Eggs and Ham" and "The Lorax," which both carry meaningful messages about trying new experiences and environmental sustainability.
Editor’s note: As a public service, the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage. It’s free.


csmonitor--2020-04-07--What is government for? Coronavirus stirs old question anew.

But other adjustments are more difficult .
Democratically elected leaders championing “ small government ” face new demands for the opposite – underscored , for example , by high ratings for many U.S. state governors .
Authoritarian regimes , favoring central control , face a different challenge .
In China , there has been extraordinary public criticism of early failings .
In Russia and Egypt , the full impact of having to answer to the changing public mood is only starting .
Leaders ’ worries may be evident in recent moves to rein in or punish independent reporting of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on leaders are felt with particular urgency because of who ’ s making them : nurses and emergency workers , ship captains or passengers , men and women wanting assurances their needs will be met amid shortages and soaring unemployment .
That ’ s forcing a rethink in many places .
Tight-pursed fiscal prudence in Britain and Germany , for example , has given way to huge aid and stimulus packages .
At a time when trust in established institutions had been eroding , there seems to be a renewed sense that there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And , in crises like the coronavirus pandemic , that they must do .
It ’ s the most basic of political questions , but COVID-19 is now moving it from the philosophy classroom into nearly every corner of every country on Earth : What is government for ?
And the answer where it most matters – among citizens , among the governed – seems to be changing dramatically , at least in places feeling the worst effects of the virus .
There , the immediate task of government has become acutely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ones , and give us the information , policies , tools , and care for that to happen .
That ’ s also part of a more fundamental change , at a time when trust in all established institutions had been eroding .
Suddenly , there seems to be a renewed sense that government actually matters – that there are some things only governments can do .
And , in crisis , things that governments must do .
There ’ s another , related change : Despite the reach of the internet in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events , we ’ re seeing a rekindled respect , and a need , for expertise and trustworthy research .
For facts .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , all our coronavirus coverage is free .
No paywall .
Whether , of course , such changes will prove enduring , once the worst of the crisis has finally passed , will take many months to answer .
But the unfamiliar demands on governments and leaders are immediate .
They ’ re being felt with particular urgency because they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think tanks .
They ’ re from nurses and emergency workers , imploring those in charge to get them protective gear .
From captains or passengers on ships where the virus has struck , pleading for a place to dock .
From men and women , old and young , wanting assurances they ’ ll have the food , supplies , and care they need , often suddenly finding themselves without the week-to-week funds to afford them .
Even in some developed countries – where most of the cases , or at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ occurring – that ’ s forcing a rethink .
For Britain ’ s ruling Conservatives , and Chancellor Angela Merkel ’ s coalition government in Germany , tight-pursed fiscal prudence has long been a political article of faith .
Yet within days of the first , stark economic impact of the COVID-19 crisis , both countries announced huge aid and stimulus packages , with the promise of more to come .
Similar fiscal responses are now in place or on the way in nearly all countries where citizens are feeling the impact of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ costly , in political terms , that ’ s often proving the easiest adjustment for the people in power .
Elected leaders championing “ small government , ” for instance , are facing a crisis that is prompting demands for the opposite .
U.S. President Donald Trump , in recent days , has been visibly struggling to square that circle .
On the one hand , he has repeatedly portrayed the crisis as ultimately the responsibility of state and local leaders .
But sky-high poll ratings for many state governors on the front @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Washington or Ohio , have left no doubt of the grassroots hunger for assertive , effective , honest , and straightforward government action .
The president ’ s overall take on who is responsible is showing little sign of changing .
Yet he did announce on Friday a federal government arrangement that he said would guarantee that no American , even the millions of uninsured , will have to pay if hospitalized with COVID-19 .
As not just a small-government leader , but a populist who has been sometimes almost flamboyantly dismissive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made another adjustment : deferring , on at least some major calls , to the scientific experts in his coronavirus task force .
Authoritarian regimes are faced with a different challenge .
They do believe in strong central government , with pretty much everything ultimately subject to central control .
But the impact of COVID-19 – an adversary they can not defeat by force , much less by decree – is being felt no less by their citizens than those in democratic countries .
The human response , the instinctive list of things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been much the same : Protect us ; give us the information and tools and care we need .
Even in China – which , after initially hiding the outbreak , took draconian measures to bring it under control – there has been extraordinary public criticism of the early failings on the country ’ s tightly controlled social media .
In other authoritarian countries like Russia and Egypt , and even in India , a democracy , but one led by strongman populist Narendra Modi , the full impact of having to answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now beginning to hit .
All three of those countries seem likely to struggle with an inexorably widening number of cases – India and Egypt , in particular , both with huge populations , many areas of economic deprivation , and a patchy healthcare system .
All three have recently imposed restraints on movement and economic activity .
But in a measure of their nervousness about what may be coming , and whether they ’ ll be able to meet ordinary citizens ’ needs and expectations , all of these nation ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In recent days , they have moved to rein in or even punish independent reporting or comment on the scale of the outbreak .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , all our coronavirus coverage is free .
No paywall .

The answer to one of the most basic of political concerns seems to be changing dramatically – and putting new pressures on both democratic and more autocratic governments.
But other adjustments are more difficult. Democratically elected leaders championing “small government” face new demands for the opposite – underscored, for example, by high ratings for many U.S. state governors. Authoritarian regimes, favoring central control, face a different challenge. In China, there has been extraordinary public criticism of early failings. In Russia and Egypt, the full impact of having to answer to the changing public mood is only starting. Leaders’ worries may be evident in recent moves to rein in or punish independent reporting of the scale of the outbreak.
Unfamiliar demands on leaders are felt with particular urgency because of who’s making them: nurses and emergency workers, ship captains or passengers, men and women wanting assurances their needs will be met amid shortages and soaring unemployment. That’s forcing a rethink in many places. Tight-pursed fiscal prudence in Britain and Germany, for example, has given way to huge aid and stimulus packages.
At a time when trust in established institutions had been eroding, there seems to be a renewed sense that there are some things only governments can do. And, in crises like the coronavirus pandemic, that they must do.
It’s the most basic of political questions, but COVID-19 is now moving it from the philosophy classroom into nearly every corner of every country on Earth: What is government for?
And the answer where it most matters – among citizens, among the governed – seems to be changing dramatically, at least in places feeling the worst effects of the virus. There, the immediate task of government has become acutely clear: Protect us and our loved ones, and give us the information, policies, tools, and care for that to happen.
That’s also part of a more fundamental change, at a time when trust in all established institutions had been eroding. Suddenly, there seems to be a renewed sense that government actually matters – that there are some things only governments can do. And, in crisis, things that governments must do.
Why We Wrote This The answer to one of the most basic of political concerns seems to be changing dramatically – and putting new pressures on both democratic and more autocratic governments.
There’s another, related change: Despite the reach of the internet in amplifying conspiracy theories and competing versions of events, we’re seeing a rekindled respect, and a need, for expertise and trustworthy research. For facts.
Editor’s note: As a public service, all our coronavirus coverage is free. No paywall.
Whether, of course, such changes will prove enduring, once the worst of the crisis has finally passed, will take many months to answer. But the unfamiliar demands on governments and leaders are immediate.
They’re being felt with particular urgency because they’re not coming only from lobbyists or think tanks. They’re from nurses and emergency workers, imploring those in charge to get them protective gear. From captains or passengers on ships where the virus has struck, pleading for a place to dock. From men and women, old and young, wanting assurances they’ll have the food, supplies, and care they need, often suddenly finding themselves without the week-to-week funds to afford them.
Even in some developed countries – where most of the cases, or at least those publicly acknowledged, are so far occurring – that’s forcing a rethink. For Britain’s ruling Conservatives, and Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition government in Germany, tight-pursed fiscal prudence has long been a political article of faith. Yet within days of the first, stark economic impact of the COVID-19 crisis, both countries announced huge aid and stimulus packages, with the promise of more to come.
Markus Schreiber/Reuters View caption Hide caption German Chancellor Angela Merkel talks about measures taken by the government to stop further spread of COVID-19 during a briefing at the chancellery in Berlin, April 6, 2020.
Similar fiscal responses are now in place or on the way in nearly all countries where citizens are feeling the impact of shutdowns of economic activity.
But however costly, in political terms, that’s often proving the easiest adjustment for the people in power.
A cry for ‘going big’
Elected leaders championing “small government,” for instance, are facing a crisis that is prompting demands for the opposite. U.S. President Donald Trump, in recent days, has been visibly struggling to square that circle. On the one hand, he has repeatedly portrayed the crisis as ultimately the responsibility of state and local leaders. But sky-high poll ratings for many state governors on the front line, in New York or Michigan, Washington or Ohio, have left no doubt of the grassroots hunger for assertive, effective, honest, and straightforward government action.
The president’s overall take on who is responsible is showing little sign of changing. Yet he did announce on Friday a federal government arrangement that he said would guarantee that no American, even the millions of uninsured, will have to pay if hospitalized with COVID-19.
As not just a small-government leader, but a populist who has been sometimes almost flamboyantly dismissive of science, President Trump has also made another adjustment: deferring, on at least some major calls, to the scientific experts in his coronavirus task force.
Authoritarian regimes are faced with a different challenge. They do believe in strong central government, with pretty much everything ultimately subject to central control. But the impact of COVID-19 – an adversary they cannot defeat by force, much less by decree – is being felt no less by their citizens than those in democratic countries. The human response, the instinctive list of things they want from their rulers, has been much the same: Protect us; give us the information and tools and care we need.
Even in China – which, after initially hiding the outbreak, took draconian measures to bring it under control – there has been extraordinary public criticism of the early failings on the country’s tightly controlled social media.
In other authoritarian countries like Russia and Egypt, and even in India, a democracy, but one led by strongman populist Narendra Modi, the full impact of having to answer to the changing public mood is only now beginning to hit.
All three of those countries seem likely to struggle with an inexorably widening number of cases – India and Egypt, in particular, both with huge populations, many areas of economic deprivation, and a patchy healthcare system. All three have recently imposed restraints on movement and economic activity.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
But in a measure of their nervousness about what may be coming, and whether they’ll be able to meet ordinary citizens’ needs and expectations, all of these nation’s rulers have something else in common. In recent days, they have moved to rein in or even punish independent reporting or comment on the scale of the outbreak.
Editor’s note: As a public service, all our coronavirus coverage is free. No paywall.