therealnews--2020-01-07--Will Soleimani’s Assassination Set Back Iraq’s October Revolution?

All donations in the US and Canada are tax deductible .
To make a secure donation by credit or debit @ @ @ @ @ location , or select PayPal .

Soleimani’s killing could open a path for peace if cooler heads prevail, argues professor of Middle East politics Sabah Alnasseri.
Story Transcript
JAISAL NOOR: Welcome to The Real News. I’m Jaisal Noor in Baltimore.
On Tuesday, dozens of mourners were killed in a stampede during the funeral of slain top Iranian General, Qasem Soleimani. The Middle East is still feeling the shockwaves from the U.S. assassination of Soleimani last week, and critics warn the strike brought the world to the brink of war. On Monday, the Pentagon disavowed Trump’s threats to bomb 52 targets in Iran, including cultural sites, which top Pentagon officials acknowledged would be a war crime.
Meanwhile, the U.S. threatened Iraq with new sanctions this weekend after the country’s Parliament demanded the withdrawal of U.S. troops. In the 1990s, U.S. killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, including children, and critics say only solidified the rule of Saddam Hussein. On Monday, the Pentagon also mistakenly released a letter announcing US troops were withdrawing from Iraq, something officials blamed on a poorly-worded draft.
Britain’s Prime Minister Dominic Raab warned on Tuesday only Isis would benefit from a war between Iran and the U.S. Here’s that clip.
DOMINIC RAAB: We want to deescalate the tensions. We are concerned that if we see a full-blown war, it would be very damaging, and actually the terrorists, in particular Daesh, would be the only winners.
JAISAL NOOR: A historic protest movement had arisen in Iraq in recent months, uniting people across class and sectarian lines against Iranian influence. But even opponents of Soleimani have expressed anger at Washington for killing him on Iraqi soil and potentially dragging their beleaguered country into another conflict. Here’s a clip.
SPEAKER: It is a horrific atmosphere they want us to live in. Chaos worse than what we live in now. There will be more killings, and the fight between U.S. and Iran will move to Iraq. They don’t care that we are protesting for our rights. What is coming will be worse and the Iraqi Parliament will not vote for expelling the foreign forces from Iraq.
JAISAL NOOR: Now joining us to discuss this is Professor Sabah Alnasseri of York University. Thank you so much for joining us again. You always provide invaluable insight into what’s happening in Iraq and the region.
Something that I feel that’s been overlooked is the impact this is all having on Iraqis. It’s this country caught in the middle of this growing conflict. They had the Iran-Iraq War in the ’80s, the longest conventional war in modern history. You had the sanctions in the ’90s, which we’ll talk about. And then of course you had the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which was in the name of bringing freedom to Iraqis. But now that they’ve exercised that democracy and the Parliament voted for U.S. troops to leave, now the U.S. is threatening to punish them once again. Give us your thoughts.
SABAH ALNASSERI: Right. Good to be with you, Jaisal. Three things. The first one is, we need to be a bit precise. The Iraq Parliament, they didn’t ask, actually, for the U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq, but for the foreign troops to withdraw from Iraq. Meaning that the International Coalition and it’s a fight against Daesh, that is what it meant by it. Beside this one, there are two other agreements Iraq had with the United States. One of them is the withdrawal of troops in 2008, and the establishment of military bases in Iraq. And the second one, also in 2008, was the strategic agreement between the U.S. and Iraq.
These two were not actually mentioned or criticized during the last session of the Parliament. The last session of the Parliament refers only to the International Coalition, and there are two problems here. The first one is constitutional and legal. This Parliament and this government, they are in a constitutional and a legal crisis since November. The government resigned already, actually, by the 29th of November. So this government is not in a position to withdraw or reform or change anything on international agreement.
So the whole show by mostly the Shia political parties and militias for Iran in the Parliament, actually voted for the withdrawal of the international troops. The Kurds and the so-called Sunnis parties and the forces block off the decision. This is actually just a show. Let’s say it’s a rhetorical show of solidarity with Iran, but it doesn’t have really legal or political implication. The U.S. troops will not withdraw from Iraq. That’s for sure. That’s the first thing.
The second thing is, the major threat to the regime in Iran was actually not the U.S. or the U.S. troops, but the October Revolution in Iraq since October 1, 2019, since three months. As you said, it’s a massive democratic revolution; cross-class, cross-gender, cross-sect and religions, and so on. It actually instigated some of the protest movement in Iran on November 20, and I believe more than 1000 people were killed in one day in Iran.
So the Iranian regime feared that this revolution in Iraq could spill over to Iran and threaten the regime itself. So it has to oppress or put down the revolution in Iraq, and they tried. And especially Qasem Soleimani, was in charge of this file. They used snipers, and kidnappers, and killers, and intimidation and so on. It didn’t work. They wanted to militarize the revolution, just like in Syria and Yemen and so on. It didn’t work, too, because people were peaceful.
Then what they tried is, they tried to impose–after the resignation of the government of Adil Abdul-Mahdi–they tried to impose a new prime minister, which is a block with the four Iran Shiite political parties and their armed militias. They wanted to impose their candidate, with the help of Soleimani, on the president and prologue by all means and contra to people’s demands to ensure they adopt the influence in Iran who’d stay, and then through this new government, with a new minister present, they could put down the revolution. But it didn’t work too.
So they moved to the third steps, which is to escalate the conflict with the U.S. by attacking some military bases in the U.S., or by attacking the U.S. Embassy to drop the United States into actually a military confrontation. And through that they can first put down the revolution because the whole attention will be paid to the war and then they can easily attack the revolutionaries.
And the second is, because Iran is going through a massive crisis, especially economic crisis due to the sanction, it was a mean for Iran to mix up the cards through the military confrontation with the U.S. and Iraq, and try to manage its own crisis by shifting their attention on the internal conflict within Iran to Iraq and the United States. And, I think we are at this stage. But if you ask me, and I don’t know if you’re going to ask me, but my argument runs contra to the common sense of what does this cause in the meantime in the main, but also in the critical stream above the fear mongering, and war mongering, and the thought of more war, et cetera. I have a completely different argument.
JAISAL NOOR: Yeah, please enlighten us.
SABAH ALNASSERI: Sorry, I didn’t want to… okay. So my argument: Iran’s at fault. Qasem Soleimani became so powerful in Iran. He’s the second powerful man in Iran after Khamenei. And he became so powerful that many even, in Iraq or Syria political forces or militias that pro Iran and pro Soleimani, they became very fearful of Qasem Soleimani, and they felt sometimes threatened. And political forces within Iran, especially those who are interested in deescalating the conflict with the U.S., and probably tried to negotiate a new deal with the U.S., felt also threatened by Qasem Soleimani.
And Qasem Soleimani, recently, his approach was to–as I said–to influence the decision making in Iraq through Shiite political forces and the militias. As such that, a conflict with the U.S. in Iran would be probable if he would have managed actually to impose a new minister president in Iraq, who would [inaudible 00:09:45] block. So you have people in Iran and Iraq and in Syria feared Qasem Soleimani. Not only the U.S. So the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, and that’s my argument, make the war between the U.S. and Iran not more, but less, probable. Because I think this will open up the possibility of forces in Iran, but also in Iraq or Syria and so on, to look for a diplomatic or a political solution of the conflict.
Provided, and this is very important point, provided that the U.S. offers Iran some sort of an exit option by accepting a limited uranium attack on some U.S. material targets and creating some damage, not to American soldiers and so on, but just physical or material damage. And in this way, the Iranian government can tell its people that they avenged Qasem Soleimani’s death, and they can save as they’ve saved their face. And then this could open up a new space for negotiation between Iran and the United States.
And I think this is more probable because that will be beneficial for both Iran and the U.S. For Iran because then it would halt for renegotiation with the United States, with the Trump administration, the sanction would be lifted or eased. And, for the Trump administration, it can sell this during the election year as a success by trying to get the Iranians to renegotiate the nuclear deal according to Trump’s terms. That would be the political diplomatic exit option. And that would make the war less probable.
Now there’s one–
JAISAL NOOR: That is, if cooler heads prevail, of course.
SABAH ALNASSERI: That’s my gut, what it’s telling me; that will prevail. And there’s only one variable. And I think this variable, which create a major problem to Iran rather than to the U.S., which is the October Revolution. But also this variable that threatens the regime in Iran could be also resolved through this exit option because the Iranian regime reality is not to make war with the U.S., but to sustain the regime.
So war with the U.S. would be political suicide. I don’t think they will go into war with the U.S. So their priority is to sustain the regime, but there’s a problem. There’s a growing crisis due to the sanction. And that created a lot of issues and conflict and problems in Iraq. That’s part of the regime. So the exit option and renegotiation and easing the economic sanction will give the regime a breath to A: tell the people things will get better and make protest and maybe conflict less probable. And, this way, the fear of spilling over of the October Revolution of Iraq would be less likely. And I think the major threat as I said, to Iran, is the October Revolution in Iraq, and not so much the United States.
JAISAL NOOR: All right, Professor Sabah Alnasseri of York University. Thanks so much for providing us with your insight and we’ll definitely come back to you as the story continues to unfold. Thanks so much for joining us.
SABAH ALNASSERI: Thanks for having me, Jaisal.
JAISAL NOOR: And thank you for joining us at The Real News Network.
Studio: Cameron Granadino, Bababtunde Ogunfolaju
Production: Genevieve Montinar, Bababtunde Ogunfolaju, Andrew Corkery
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-01-07--25 People and 1 Billion Animals Are Dead from Australia’s Bushfires

The new decade has opened with a sobering and scary climate change reality .
The state of New South Wales is in a designated state of emergency because of fires .
At least 25 people have died as a result of those fires .
Thousands of people have been displaced .
Wildfires have destroyed more than 12 million acres of land across the Australian continent—an area almost seven times the size of the 2018 California wildfires ( the worst in state history ) .
And in the time it took to write this article , the estimated number of animals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million to a full 1 billion .
Climate change , scientists say , is the driving force behind the historically horrific wildfire season .
“ Australians need only wake up in the morning , turn on the television , read the newspaper or look out the window to see what is increasingly obvious to many – for Australia , dangerous climate change is already here , ” wrote Michael Mann , a climate scientist who teaches at Penn State University , in an article published by The Guardian .
“ It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ re willing to allow it to get .
Australia is experiencing a climate emergency .
It is literally burning.
” In New South Wales alone , home of the country ’ s largest city of Sydney , 136 fires are still burning and 69 are still uncontained .
The year 2019 was also the hottest and driest on record in Australian history .
“ When the vegetation is just dry , it will burn , ” Crystal Kolden , a wildfire researcher at the University of Idaho , told The New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ add this extreme heat , it magnifies the effect allowing it to burn that much more intensely.
” The situation is so dire that Prime Minister Scott Morrison , a climate change denier , has ordered 3,000 military reservists to help battle fires and evacuate stranded individuals along the New South Wales coast .
Yet Morrison , who brought a lump of coal to Parliament in 2017 while defending that industry ’ s greenhouse gas footprint , has denied that the country ’ s greenhouse gas emissions have ( metaphorically ) provided a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world ’ s top exporter of coal , the most intensive carbon emitting fossil fuel on the planet , and the third largest exporter of fossil fuels behind Russia and Saudi Arabia .
“ The suggestion that in any way shape or form that Australia—accounting for 1.3 percent of the world ’ s emissions—are impacting directly on specific fire events , whether it is here or anywhere else in the world , that doesn ’ t bear up to credible scientific evidence , ” Morrison recently told Australian Broadcasting Corporation radio .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ deployed an emissions accounting loophole regarding the United National global climate agreement .
Instead of abiding by the Paris agreement from 2015 , the country has chosen to use a carbon accounting loophole from the 1997 Kyoto protocol .
The loophole , according to an article published by The Guardian , offers carbon credits to Australia that are eight times the current greenhouse emissions numbers for smaller Pacific island countries .
It is the only country in the world to still use that accounting trick .
Mann , the Penn State climate scientist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate change .
“ … [ Prime Minister ] Scott Morrison appears remarkably indifferent to the climate emergency Australia is suffering through , having chosen to vacation in Hawaii as Australians are left to contend with unprecedented heat and bushfires , ” he wrote .
“ Morrison has shown himself to be beholden to coal interests and his administration is considered to have conspired with a small number of petrostates to sabotage the recent UN climate conference in Madrid.
” Scientists say Australia ’ s fires could still burn for months to come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to begin .
“ The fires over the last three months are unprecedented in their timing and severity , started earlier in spring and covered a wider area across many parts of Australia , ” David Karoly , an Australian government climate scientist , told The Washington Post .
“ The normal peak fire season is later in summer and we are yet to have that .
”

Visual Credit: Anthony Hearsey
Australia is on fire.
The new decade has opened with a sobering and scary climate change reality. The state of New South Wales is in a designated state of emergency because of fires. At least 25 people have died as a result of those fires. Thousands of people have been displaced. Wildfires have destroyed more than 12 million acres of land across the Australian continent—an area almost seven times the size of the 2018 California wildfires (the worst in state history). And in the time it took to write this article, the estimated number of animals killed has jumped from a conservative 480 million to a full 1 billion.
Diagram comparing surface area burned in Australia to other 2019 fire catastrophes.
Climate change, scientists say, is the driving force behind the historically horrific wildfire season.
“Australians need only wake up in the morning, turn on the television, read the newspaper or look out the window to see what is increasingly obvious to many – for Australia, dangerous climate change is already here,” wrote Michael Mann, a climate scientist who teaches at Penn State University, in an article published by The Guardian. “It’s simply a matter of how much worse we’re willing to allow it to get. Australia is experiencing a climate emergency. It is literally burning.”
In New South Wales alone, home of the country’s largest city of Sydney, 136 fires are still burning and 69 are still uncontained. The year 2019 was also the hottest and driest on record in Australian history.
“When the vegetation is just dry, it will burn,” Crystal Kolden, a wildfire researcher at the University of Idaho, told The New York Times. “But when you add this extreme heat, it magnifies the effect allowing it to burn that much more intensely.”
The situation is so dire that Prime Minister Scott Morrison, a climate change denier, has ordered 3,000 military reservists to help battle fires and evacuate stranded individuals along the New South Wales coast.
Yet Morrison, who brought a lump of coal to Parliament in 2017 while defending that industry’s greenhouse gas footprint, has denied that the country’s greenhouse gas emissions have (metaphorically) provided a spark for the fires. Australia is the world’s top exporter of coal, the most intensive carbon emitting fossil fuel on the planet, and the third largest exporter of fossil fuels behind Russia and Saudi Arabia.
“The suggestion that in any way shape or form that Australia—accounting for 1.3 percent of the world’s emissions—are impacting directly on specific fire events, whether it is here or anywhere else in the world, that doesn’t bear up to credible scientific evidence,” Morrison recently told Australian Broadcasting Corporation radio.
In the past year, Australian diplomats deployed an emissions accounting loophole regarding the United National global climate agreement. Instead of abiding by the Paris agreement from 2015, the country has chosen to use a carbon accounting loophole from the 1997 Kyoto protocol. The loophole, according to an article published by The Guardian, offers carbon credits to Australia that are eight times the current greenhouse emissions numbers for smaller Pacific island countries. It is the only country in the world to still use that accounting trick.
Mann, the Penn State climate scientist, criticized Morrison’s leadership on climate change.
“…[Prime Minister] Scott Morrison appears remarkably indifferent to the climate emergency Australia is suffering through, having chosen to vacation in Hawaii as Australians are left to contend with unprecedented heat and bushfires,” he wrote. “Morrison has shown himself to be beholden to coal interests and his administration is considered to have conspired with a small number of petrostates to sabotage the recent UN climate conference in Madrid.”
Scientists say Australia’s fires could still burn for months to come, and peak fire season has yet to begin.
“The fires over the last three months are unprecedented in their timing and severity, started earlier in spring and covered a wider area across many parts of Australia,” David Karoly, an Australian government climate scientist, told The Washington Post. “The normal peak fire season is later in summer and we are yet to have that.”
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-01-07--Iranian Americans Harassed and Detained at US Border

Dozens of people, including American citizens, faced hours of questioning at the Washington entry point. Jamal Abdi of the National Iranian American Council says the reports could indicate a directive for heightened screening of people born in Iran.
Story Transcript
MARC STEINER: Welcome to The Real News. I’m Marc Steiner. Great to have you all with us.
Iranian American citizens have felt the brunt of discrimination at our borders since Trump ordered the assassination of Qasem Soleimani. It has been reported that dozens or hundreds of Iranians–most of whom are United States or Canadian citizens–have been held at the border for five, six, seven, eight hours, a whole day asking the same questions over and over. For many, it conjured up memories of the Japanese internment camps and reinforces resentment many Iranian Americans feel that’s directed towards them here. We’ll explore this and how the Iranian community and Americans in general can respond to the unraveling events the last several days. We also just found out breaking news that the United States has agreed, it seems, to move troops out of Iraq.
We’re about to have a conversation with Jamal Abdi, who is President of the National Iranian American Council. And Jamal, welcome. Good to have you with us here on The Real News.
JAMAL ABDI: My pleasure.
MARC STEINER: So let’s begin with this: This tweet came out and this letter came out from what seems like an official American document. It says that “the United States military sent us letters that there’s going to be movement to move troops out. They’ll see helicopters flying around the green zone and are doing this in deference the sovereignty of Iraq as requested by the Iraqi parliament.’ And this just came over the wire minutes before we began this conversation. So what are your thoughts on that?
JAMAL ABDI: I think that this was the inevitable path that we were on. I don’t know that I expected it to happen quite like this. And I would be curious if this is a bluff, what this actually really means, where are these troops being relocated? But you can’t rule anything out. I mean, this is a impulsive administration to say the least. And this comes a day after the President tweeted that he would sanction Iraq and they’d force troops to leave. I wouldn’t rule out that today, the President decided this is a good move for the part of his base that doesn’t want a war. And this looks like the US is actually doing what he claimed the strike on Soleimani would do, which is prevent a war. At a minimum, he would be extricating the US from a war.
It is very interesting though because Trump himself had referred to the US presence in Iraq sort of post the height of the struggle against ISIS, he kind of had a slip of the tongue and send that the US was in Iraq to watching Iran. And so for now, the US to kill the commander who arguably did more to defeat ISIS than any other single person, and then for the US to leave Iraq, it does potentially take away a one trip wire for any Iranian response. And even potentially, if your game is up, this potentially opens up opportunities for face saving for the Iranians if this can be spun as a reaction to threats from Iran.
MARC STEINER: Interesting. For them to stand down a bit as well, this might give them an excuse to do that. It also could increase the demonstrations that have been taking place in Iraq over the last several weeks. We’ll be talking about this week as well, with some of the leaders of those demonstrations, there were saying, “Iran out, US out, government step down, and let’s reform the government.” But this could also lead to a greater influence by Iran inside of Iraq, especially if it means that ISIS is emboldened, and they’d take the fight to ISIS.
JAMAL ABDI: Right. And the reason we’re in Iraq in these numbers to begin with is because of the supposed vacuum when the US left in 2011 and needed to come back to fight ISIS. So it poses a lot of questions. And that’s the only reason I would think about a bluff, because the prospect of the United States not being there and Iran gaining even more attraction; maybe this actually puts pressure on Iraqi politicians to do something about too much Iranian influence. But Iran is Iraq’s neighbor. It’s not going to necessarily go anywhere, so this puts some of the onus on Iran to0. What are you going to do now inside of Iraq with your presence inside of Iraq to deal with some of those issues?
MARC STEINER: So let me bring the discussion to home for a moment here and the National Iranian American council and what we’ve been seeing about what’s being taken place at the border where huge numbers of Iranians coming back from Canada to the United States have been stopped and really questioned for hours and hours and hours. Tell us more about what you know about this and what the response of you and your organization has been to this.
JAMAL ABDI: We began hearing reports of Iranian Americans traveling back to the United States through the border, the Vancouver, British Columbia and the Washington border. We started hearing those on Saturday night. Those reports then became a sort of a greater frequency and increasingly, it was clear these are credible reports on Sunday. And what we know is that at least at that particular entry point, there were as many as 60 people, all Iranian, most Iranian American, in some cases families that included both Iranian Americans and non-Iranians who were brought in. And in some cases, they were held for questioning and held for as long as 11, 12 hours.
What we’ve heard from some sources in the Border Patrol has been that it was a resource issue, and so people were not being quote unquote detained. So they were not taken to a detention facility, although they were held in this room for the secondary screening process, and they didn’t have their passport so they could leave, but they didn’t actually have passports to be able to go back into Canada or to try to come into the United States. So for all intents and purposes, they were detained, just not officially.
But what the Border Patrol says is, “This is not part of a national directive to detain or to deny entry for Iranian American or Iranian nationals or Iranian visa green card holders.” And I think that’s very technical language because we don’t have anybody who actually was denied entry. Everybody who went through this process eventually was able to get in. It’s just this long arduous process. And then, you take that and then we have been hearing reports of people at airports being brought in a secondary question. So I think what the fact pattern at least demonstrates is that there is some heightened threat level that has led to some directive for extra screening for persons who were born inside of Iran.
MARC STEINER: Yeah. And also, I mean, the fact that the federal government and the folks who control the border have said, “No, we’re not doing this. We’re not doing this on purpose to just Iranians.” Clearly, it isn’t true. So are there legal actions being taken by you or any other groups that you know of or any investigations taking place around this?
JAMAL ABDI: So there are a number of organizations working on this: Iranian American organizations, civil rights organizations, we’re all kind of in coordination. We’re also working with lawmakers like Pramila Jayapal and some others to try to get to the bottom of what is happening with CDP and to ask questions of them and put pressure on them to at least reveal some of this information to lawmakers. And the thing that we need to gauge is if this… I think there’s one suspicion that this was maybe a choke point issue at this one entry point and there haven’t been any actual civil rights violations per se. And we need to kind of see how this actually plays out before there is potential legal action or anything along those lines.
But this really echoes what our community went through in January of 2017, Trump’s first week in office with the Muslim ban, when you had CDP officials and officers and White House officials all saying different things and actually kind of looking to the President and the DHS Chief’s Twitter account to figure out what was the actual directive because nobody knew. And was even outright denying and pulling off of planes legal permanent residents of the United States. And that sort of opaque process continues today. And so, this isn’t unexpected, but it’s a scary development because this is where we feared this might end up going.
MARC STEINER: Well, it’s interesting. There was an interesting story this morning on the National Public Radio’s Morning Edition about the largest community of Iranians outside of Iran is around LA. And the divide in the community around what just happened with Soleimani. We have a brief clip from this just to talk about it for a moment.
MIKE DOLATI: The death of the murderers are the beginning of the freedom of Iran.
ROBERT GARROVA: Dolati says when he heard about Soleimani’s death, he immediately began handing out treats to his household in celebration. And in this crowd, Dolati wasn’t alone in his rejoicing.
MITRA SAMANI: To me, he was worse than Osama bin Laden. So that’s why we are very happy.
ROBERT GARROVA: Around the Persian bookstores and hookah lounges of this area, several younger Iranian Americans I spoke with were worried. That includes Nader Shoaibi.
NADER SHOAIBI: I’m just very surprised at how people are happy and might be celebrating this. I would think that this is just a clear sign that there’s going to be escalation in the conflicts. We had some guests over. And these were people in their, like, 60s and 70s. Frankly, people from that generation seem to think that there’s no other way than to do it but by force.
MARC STEINER: So I’m curious how you talk about this inside the Iranian community here in the United States, what this represents, and if it also might just represent a larger split in the entire United States between people in general no matter what our ethnic origin is. But what are your thoughts on that?
JAMAL ABDI: The Iranian American community, it’s complex and there are these divisions. I think the scientific data demonstrates that Iranian Americans, they don’t want war. They don’t support sanctions that punish ordinary people. The vast majority of the Iranian Americans who don’t support the Iranian government and want change there, want to be able to… I would love to be able to travel to Iran freely and not worry about being detained by that government. But I think one of the speakers is right that there is a bit of a generational issue and the generational issue is killing Soleimani isn’t necessarily a blow to Iranian regime who has used this to actually unify and project strength at a time when just a couple of weeks ago, there were massive protests inside of the country.
I’ll say this: and this is not to discredit the serious feelings people have about the Islamic Republic, but there has been over the past several years a pretty concerted effort to, through the opening of new TV channels–TV stations that are funded by Saudi Arabia, and in some cases are tied to Israel–that have tried to relay, propagandize to the Iranian diaspora to convince them really to support Donald Trump’s policies and to support outside regime change effort. And I think for a lot of people, especially the older generation, they’re sort of at a point where they’re fed up. They see this government that they hate having been in place for four decades now and it’s almost like, “Throw caution to the wind. We have nothing to lose, just topple them.”
But there’s a real disconnect between that and the reality on the ground inside of Iran and the way people are suffering and really the fact that another revolution or especially an outside force like the United States working to topple that government is not going to produce a democracy. If anything, these types of actions that we see now empower the most hard line interests inside of Iran. And really over the past 40 years, the way that the United States has dealt with Iran has really put its thumb on the scale where I believe Iran would have had a natural organic democracy movement and the ability to have real civil society to really push Iran into the direction of democracy and things along those natures. And these actions really undermine that and short circuit that.
MARC STEINER: Yeah. To close out here, I think that the demonstrations that are taking place in Iran, hundreds of thousands of Iranians in the streets demanding democracy and pushing against the theocracy. And then, you have the similar demonstrations taking place throughout Iraq that were Shia, Sunni Christians altogether in that. So making this push and the assassination of Soleimani kind of damped down both of those things for different reasons. So now, people in Iran are standing up for their country because somebody was assassinated. On the other hand, the demonstrations in the streets of Iraq have also changed because of this. So talk a bit about, as we close here, what you and the national Iranian American Council, what your positions will be and what are you going to do around all of this?
JAMAL ABDI: Yeah. Well, I do really think that most… our membership is as engaged as ever. I think most of Iranian Americans are really scared right now. I mean, it’s one thing to say “I hate the regime. And so, I support Donald Trump being tough on them.” It’s even one thing to say, “Okay. I support Donald Trump assassinating people.” And not really looking at the consequences. But then, you have Donald Trump talking about bombing Iranian cultural sites. And this to me is beyond the pale. I mean, it doesn’t matter what your political adherences are or it doesn’t matter where you come down on the debate about, “Is it better to engage Iran? Is that getting any better longterm? Or is it better to sanction and punish the ordinary citizens?” We should all be able to agree, bombing cultural sites is not okay and actually, it’s an attack on not just Iranians, but anybody who has Iranian heritage. I mean, that’s part of my identity as well. That’s unacceptable.
At this point, with the way that our government is functioning right now, there are unfortunately not a lot of hard institutional checks we can put on the President. Over the years, presidencies have accrued these massive powers to engage in these foreign policy and these wars that are devastating. We are looking to pass legislation though out of the House and really force the issue in the Senate and force a vote so that we can at least send a sign and sort of win the political battle that the President needs to take a step back. He needs to follow regular processes and we can’t allow for this escalatory cycle to happen without checks and balances functioning.
And then in the Senate where, because of the partisan balance and the Republican majority there, I think it’s pretty unlikely, though not out of the question that the Senate would pass legislation that states that the President doesn’t have the authority for war with Iran. But if it doesn’t, at a minimum, we can make sure people are held accountable because as this moves forward, there’s going to have to need to be accountability so that these mistakes can’t keep on repeating. And so to that end, people around the country are being mobilized. We’re working with groups like Move On and Win Without War and there’s a national day of action coming up this week. And then, in the following weeks to really make sure that the public is telling lawmakers and showing the President that we don’t want a war and they need to deescalate.
MARC STEINER: When is that national day of action–before we close?
JAMAL ABDI: So national day of action is this Thursday.
MARC STEINER: I want to make sure we cover that as well. Well, Jamal Abdi, thank you so much for taking the time to join us. Pleasure to talk with you. Look forward to doing it again really, really soon.
JAMAL ABDI: Any time. My pleasure.
MARC STEINER: Thank you very much. Jamal Abdi is President of the National Iranian American Council. And I’m Marc Steiner here on The Real News Network. Let us know what you think. Take care.
Studio: Adam Coley, Bababtunde Ogunfolaju
Production: Genevieve Montinar, Bababtunde Ogunfolaju, Andrew Corkery
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-01-08--Trump Announces Additional ‘Punishing’ Sanctions on Iran

U.S. President Donald Trump made a statement Wednesday morning at 11:30 AM EST and announced that Iran “ appears to be standing down ” following strikes on U.S. air bases in Iraq .
He said there were no American or Iraqi casualties resulting from the attacks .
Trump said that while the U.S. was evaluating its options , it would “ immediately impose additional punishing sanctions ” against Iran until it “ changes its behavior.
” He called Iran the “ leading sponsor of terrorism ” and repeatedly said that he would not allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ imposed unprecedented sanctions on Iran , which have devastated the country ’ s economy .
The president also announced his intention to call on NATO allies for assistance in the Middle East , saying that the UK , Germany , France , and China needed to “ break away from the remnants of the Iran deal or JCPOA , ” calling the original agreement “ very defective.
” In his statement , Trump said that the assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani came at his direction , describing Soleimani as the “ world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Soleimani , who was credited with helping lead the fight against ISIS , have evolved .
Journalist Lee Fang noted that Gen. Stanley McChrystal told BBC last year : “ I don ’ t think we should view him as an evil person .
I think we should view him just like , ‘ I believe in my country.
’ I think Qassem Suleimani believes in his country.
” Iran launched more than 20 missiles against U.S. bases at Al-Assad and Erbil overnight Wednesday in retaliation for the assassination of Iranian commander @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reportedly did not result in any U.S. or Iraqi casualties , according to Iraqi officials .
Reuters is reporting buildings in the northern Iraqi town of Duhok were damaged in the strike .
The attacks are reportedly the first time Iran has directly carried out missile strikes on U.S. forces .
University of Michigan History Professor Juan Cole told Democracy Now !
the strikes were “ unprecedented ” and the situation threatened to spiral out of control .
The United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq tweeted : “ Recent missile attacks in Erbil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and again violate Iraqi sovereignty .
Senseless violence has predictable effects .
Iraq should not pay the price for external rivalries.
” U.S. President Donald Trump is scheduled to make a televised address at 11:00 AM ET Wednesday morning .
Trump previously threatened via Twitter to strike 52 Iranian targets , including cultural sites , if Iran retaliated for the killing of Soleimani .
The Pentagon ruled out striking civilian or cultural targets .
The U.S. has not presented the evidence it says justifies Soleimani ’ s assassination .
“ Iran took & @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 51 of UN Charter targeting base from which cowardly armed attack against our citizens & senior officials were launched , ” Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif tweeted .
“ We do not seek escalation or war , but will defend ourselves against any aggression.
” Iran ’ s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called the strikes “ a slap on the face ” of the U.S. U.S. Defense Secretary Mike Esper tweeted : “ The United States does not seek conflict , but will respond forcefully if necessary.
” Since 2017 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Iran , which has devastated the country ’ s economy .
Iraq ’ s outgoing Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi was reportedly warned by Iran about the impending attacks .
He had previously called on U.S. troops to leave .
Iraq is experiencing renewed anti-government protests , and organizers there have called for a day of action on Jan. 10 to end U.S. and Iranian influence in the country .
Meanwhile , on Wednesday night in Tehran , a Ukraine International Airlines Boeing 737 jet crashed shortly after takeoff , killing all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Canadian , Ukrainian , Swedish , Afghan , German , and British nationals .
The crash was initially blamed on engine or technical failure .
Investigations are ongoing .
Activists with groups like Indivisible , MoveOn , About Face : Veterans Against the War have organized nationwide protests at over 200 locations against a possible war on Iran on Jan. 9 .

Updated 1:15 PM ET
U.S. President Donald Trump made a statement Wednesday morning at 11:30 AM EST and announced that Iran “appears to be standing down” following strikes on U.S. air bases in Iraq. He said there were no American or Iraqi casualties resulting from the attacks.
Trump said that while the U.S. was evaluating its options, it would “immediately impose additional punishing sanctions” against Iran until it “changes its behavior.” He called Iran the “leading sponsor of terrorism” and repeatedly said that he would not allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons. Since 2017, the Trump administration has imposed unprecedented sanctions on Iran, which have devastated the country’s economy.
The president also announced his intention to call on NATO allies for assistance in the Middle East, saying that the UK, Germany, France, and China needed to “break away from the remnants of the Iran deal or JCPOA,” calling the original agreement “very defective.”
In his statement, Trump said that the assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani came at his direction, describing Soleimani as the “world’s top terrorist.” U.S. statements on Soleimani, who was credited with helping lead the fight against ISIS, have evolved. Journalist Lee Fang noted that Gen. Stanley McChrystal told BBC last year: “I don’t think we should view him as an evil person. I think we should view him just like, ‘I believe in my country.’ I think Qassem Suleimani believes in his country.”
11:05 AM EST
Iran launched more than 20 missiles against U.S. bases at Al-Assad and Erbil overnight Wednesday in retaliation for the assassination of Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani last week. The attacks reportedly did not result in any U.S. or Iraqi casualties, according to Iraqi officials. Reuters is reporting buildings in the northern Iraqi town of Duhok were damaged in the strike.
The attacks are reportedly the first time Iran has directly carried out missile strikes on U.S. forces. University of Michigan History Professor Juan Cole told Democracy Now! the strikes were “unprecedented” and the situation threatened to spiral out of control.
The United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq tweeted: “Recent missile attacks in Erbil and Anbar governorates only escalate conflict, and again violate Iraqi sovereignty. Senseless violence has predictable effects. Iraq should not pay the price for external rivalries.”
U.S. President Donald Trump is scheduled to make a televised address at 11:00 AM ET Wednesday morning. Trump previously threatened via Twitter to strike 52 Iranian targets, including cultural sites, if Iran retaliated for the killing of Soleimani. The Pentagon ruled out striking civilian or cultural targets. The U.S. has not presented the evidence it says justifies Soleimani’s assassination.
“Iran took & concluded proportionate measures in self-defense under Article 51 of UN Charter targeting base from which cowardly armed attack against our citizens & senior officials were launched,” Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif tweeted. “We do not seek escalation or war, but will defend ourselves against any aggression.” Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called the strikes “a slap on the face” of the U.S.
U.S. Defense Secretary Mike Esper tweeted: “The United States does not seek conflict, but will respond forcefully if necessary.” Since 2017, the Trump administration has imposed crippling sanctions on Iran, which has devastated the country’s economy.
Iraq’s outgoing Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi was reportedly warned by Iran about the impending attacks. He had previously called on U.S. troops to leave. Iraq is experiencing renewed anti-government protests, and organizers there have called for a day of action on Jan. 10 to end U.S. and Iranian influence in the country.
Meanwhile, on Wednesday night in Tehran, a Ukraine International Airlines Boeing 737 jet crashed shortly after takeoff, killing all 176 passengers. Passengers included Iranian, Canadian, Ukrainian, Swedish, Afghan, German, and British nationals. The crash was initially blamed on engine or technical failure. Investigations are ongoing.
Activists with groups like Indivisible, MoveOn, About Face: Veterans Against the War have organized nationwide protests at over 200 locations against a possible war on Iran on Jan. 9.
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-01-08--The Trump Administration Is Repeating Iraq War Talking Points

Close window X
We encourage republication of our original content. Please copy the HTML code in the textbox below, preserving the attribution and link to the article's original location, and only make minor cosmetic edits to the content on your site.


therealnews--2020-01-08--$71 Million for More Cops; Not A Dime for Jobs and Healthcare

JACQUELINE LUQMAN : This is Jacqueline Luqman with The Real News Network .
In December last year , Attorney General William P. Barr announced the launch of Operation Relentless Pursuit , an initiative aimed at quote , combating violent crime and seven of America ’ s most violent cities through a surge in federal resources .
While the seven cities targeted by this new law enforcement initiative are near or at the bottom of the Bureau of labor statistics unemployment rate from major cities , indicating that unemployment is at the higher end of the scale .
What Barr calls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to combat crime , including tens of millions of dollars for hiring more police officers , doesn ’ t seem to be available to get anyone a job who isn ’ t willing to be a cop .
What do the residents of these cities do in the face of this new effort to allegedly combat crime that doesn ’ t actually address the roots of crime , nor does it meet the needs of the people most effected by the crime ?
And when we peel back the layers of what ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of resources to these cities , what will they really expect to get in this surge here ?
To talk with me about this and how this operation is really expected to affect the targeted cities is Brandon Walker .
Brandon is the outreach coordinator for the Ujima People ’ s Progress Party in Baltimore , Maryland .
Brandon , thanks so much for joining me .
BRANDON WALKER : Thank you for having me .
JACQUELINE LUQMAN : So Brandon , Baltimore is one of the seven cities targeted by this program @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Detroit , Kansas City , Memphis , and Milwaukee .
They ’ re all said to be seven cities with violent crime levels , several times higher than the national average .
And in addition to providing an infusion of federal agents and resources immediately , Operation Relentless Pursuit claims it will provide $ 71 million in federal grant funding among the seven targeted cities that can be used to “ hire new officers , pay overtime and benefits , finance federally deputized task force officers , and provide mission critical equipment and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the statement from the U.S. Department of Justice .
Brandon , phrases like “ mission critical ” are uniquely military in nature , right ?
BRANDON WALKER : Yes .
So when I hear “ mission critical , ” I ’ m thinking that there ’ s a percentage or an overall objective to be obtained , specifically when they ’ re aiming with such active words or key words such as critical and marrying them with mission , as well .
Specifically when we ’ re talking about U.S. populations , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demographics who can be the mission or the objective to up to be obtained .
JACQUELINE LUQMAN : So in fact , “ mission critical ” actually does come from wartime .
It ’ s combat jargon .
And the name of this operation sounds like a military operation .
So is there a reason that the DOJ is using military terminology to describe an effort to combat what they say is civilian crime ?
BRANDON WALKER : Well , I ’ d say in order for them to use that language , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ source of data gathering or resource to be collected .
And I like to henceforth or segue into the consent decree that is here in Baltimore City .
So far , we ’ re speaking about the populations or the guises of public safety being in question .
We have to also question about the institutions and the infrastructure of local government and the police department specifically and their relationship to the community , as well as being under a federal consent decree since 2017 .
Now , the reason why I thought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it up with that language and exactly seeing how that jargon or that term is being used towards a crime fighting initiative is to say that the department of justice is making one huge contradiction along with saying they want to combat crime on one end but also they want to police the police on the other end , which is very confusing .
Because if you ’ re looking to sue the same police department or withdraw funding because of their unconstitutional or policing practice and tactics that violates the rights of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you turn around and say , “ Well , hey , we have to give them more money to police their way .
We have to over police and also militarize them with updated weapons , but at the same time undermine the federal consent decree which says that these same officers and police department are in question because they have done some very questionable practices , if not violated civil rights and human rights of those who are living in Baltimore City.
” JACQUELINE LUQMAN : Now you mentioned militarized equipment going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serious problems that not just Baltimore Police Department has had under this consent decree , which is why they ’ re under a federal consent decree , but also the other cities .
Some of the other cities have the same issues with police abuse , as well as having problems with not just crime but also higher unemployment in the cities .
So it ’ s interesting , Brandon , that the Baltimore PD seems to be welcoming of this assistance and the money for sure , but how does the affected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with not just a police force but also a government that seems more open to investment in policing and especially as you said , military policing , than they are in things that we know reduce crime , like more jobs , access to healthcare , access to quality education .
Even as because the crime is such an issue , there ’ s also some community support for these kinds of issues .
So how do you balance educating the community members about the adversarial relationship that the police and law enforcement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have in historically black communities and neighborhoods with also dealing with the fears about crime that community members do legitimately have ?
BRANDON WALKER : That is a very well loaded and multifaceted question , so I ’ ll do my best to address it in a timely fashion .
So I think with the educating the community part , I think it comes as a tactic of really looking at ourselves as individuals , as taxpayers , but most of all as working class folks who live in the community to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s our tax dollars going exactly , and how do we address it in a way that does not disturb anyone ’ s psyche or political consciousness in a way that we do not win them over with the idea of saying , ‘ Well , hey , for every dollar that we ’ re getting inside the general fund , do you know that at least 50 % or 40 or a substantial amount and percentage is going towards policing communities where we ’ re speaking in the educating sense about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about it , and now get into community support . '
” We have to look at those who are in the lower bracket of below the poverty line and at the poverty line to be specific where they ’ re always sought that is these bad neighborhoods , high and crime riddled infested communities that need policing .
But the contradiction that spills over that is , well , if that is true , then why is it that in some of the most affluent neighborhoods there are no crime , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So how do we get to dispel and demystify or should I say debunk , for a lack of a better term , the put more police , put more police equipment , put drones in the sky , put cameras in the areas where people are struggling to make it out of dire straits and economic challenges .
But yet , crime still exist at all times higher while the police are present versus being able to address the polarities or the contradictions of it being in a fluent arrogance where no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , household ring dash cameras exist , but yet no polices are there .
No crime at all .
So that ’ s one .
Being able to close those disparities with a compelling argument and as well as a political form that can aim to educate and agitate a little bit of the people .
The second will also go with the community .
We ’ ll be talking about community support where specifically we have to speak about which community is in support of it .
Because last time I checked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who does not have a car or a job will support more policing patrol in their neighborhood regardless if it makes them feel better if they know those funds can go towards a bike bag program , if those funds can go towards economic development , if they can go towards a land trust , a housing trust , anything that can put back to the community that can make it more feasible or economically feasible for those who live there to grab themselves by the opportunities that is presented between the funds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ militarizing that area to actually providing economic resources or giving the community the choice to control those resources .
I personally believe that the community that does welcome these ideas tend to be those who maybe are radio stations , news , those who have a soundbite or some sort of attachment to it that if they promote it , they can also get good PR from the police department and as well as have more access interviews with the local government .
So I guess to answer that question , how do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ educate the people and where does the community support come from ?
It ’ s sort of a mixed bag in how we view it and our perception , but I think the reality of it all is that we are all responsible for being able to address the core of the scenario of which we see crime happen and in which we see public safety being a question and that is the economic , the social economic challenges , that is being faced in areas like Baltimore City and other urban cities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let me pivot really quickly and ask you about an issue that I think is connected to this .
And I think it ’ s happening at a very interesting time , both the announcement of this surge and this national push now for an idea that I think that its time has really come , which is community control over the police .
Now , a few years ago , a few weeks ago actually , we talk with Frank Chapman of the National Association Against Racist and Political Repression about their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the police .
We also discussed Baltimore ’ s secret aerial surveillance planes now being made a pilot program that the Baltimore PD is supporting .
You were a panelist or at a conference that discussed all the ways law enforcement has historically surveilled and repressed black and other marginalized communities throughout the years .
Is it a coincidence that all of these efforts seem to be converging ?
We ’ ve got a major organization that historically fought against police repression , relaunching and spreading the national support network , creating a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community control over the police .
Just as it seems , this new era in police repression is about to be unleashed in the seven cities including Baltimore .
What are your thoughts on that ?
Is it just too convenient that all of these things are happening at once ?
BRANDON WALKER : I think it ’ s more than just a convenience .
I think it ’ s the harsh reality that what we ’ re dealing with is it ’ s easier to put more patrolmen on the streets than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ streets and be able to provide opportunities for those who are squeegee boys , for those who are on the corner , and also men and women who are struggling to deal with low wages and low end jobs to be able to work themselves out of an economic challenge that they ’ re in and also to be able to address that .
We ’ re talking about spy planes specifically and we ’ re dealing with the idea that the origin or its inceptions of how do we get to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strategies for public initiatives but yet we haven ’ t addressed the first epidemic of having cameras being invited to the area of Baltimore City where once before we were told that if bright city lights or those blue or red flashing lights with cameras on the top of the street polls and traffic polls is able to watch what ’ s going on every corner inside of every dwelling if not every community where “ crime ” is supposed to take place who voted for that and there is no vote call @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any kind of initiative that says , “ This was supported by this Councilman .
This was something that was rolled out on the backs of the people to say that it ’ s supposed to make you much safer .
It ’ s supposed to provide transparency .
It ’ s supposed to help the police department and also bring communities together.
” Well , again , five , 10 , 15 years has passed , and we still have more and more of the same issues that we wish to address @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposing to rule out drones or spy planes that was out once upon a time , maybe two or three years ago , give or take .
That was supposed to be addressing the issues from afar by using data surveillance to hand over it to be able to record and watch crimes .
Well , what good does it ?
What good does it does for anyone in those areas to be victims , suspects , or any of cop or any kind of sort of entity that intertwined with the public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the hard reality that no one can see where the funding is coming from , which is one to question .
No one has to have opportunity to vote on it , which is two .
Third , no one has ever had a serious conversation between the local government , state government , to be able to put a petition , referendum , or any kind of resolution down as to say , “ Well , how much of our tax dollars is going to fund this opportunity and whose payroll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dollars to be able to say you ’ re keeping us safe despite the realities that crime is going to exist , whether it ’ s blue or white collar crime ?
” We just have to have a question of whose crime are we going to be addressing and who ’ s going to go to jail for it .
JACQUELINE LUQMAN : That ’ s a great point that you raise , when you raise the issue of white collar crime .
Now Brandon , where ’ s the search for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 71 million in federal funding for mission critical support and material to combat rampant white collar crime ?
And we know that white collar crime is rampant because the rich keep getting richer off of the backs of the working class and the poor , so where ’ s the Department of Justice rollout for combating white collar crime ?
BRANDON WALKER : Well , I would say there is no political will to challenge those who grease the palms , which puts the dollar in your pocket .
And we have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What I see as the $ 71 million is not necessarily addressed to white collar crime because there is no political will to actually address white collar crimes or those whose arms are being greased , for dollars has been put in pocket , and coffers that are being bought and filled .
And specifically saying that anytime we live in an era or a part of our society where it ’ s okay to be able to say , “ Well , crime must exist or be pushed to the farer sides @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transit stops and police stations exist.
” But yet we have to keep it separated from sub tourists .
Then I think that those $ 71 million is not going to be focused on exactly corruption , public scandal , exactly how contractors are being swayed and worked under the table with public officials to be able to have people pass certain legislation that are favorable to those who are in an upper ruling class versus those who are poor and working class just asking for control of the resources so they can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to their community without any interference and using that model of self-determination to bring about results without having to use much of these undisclosed or large amounts of millions of dollars and be specific about the white collar crimes , as well .
There ’ s never going to be an answer or a question as to how much of these dollars is being shelled out ?
Where does it come from exactly , and which amount of taxpayers or sector of the tax paying class is going to be footing this bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gets shifted over to other parts of the world to be able to oppress and use imperialists tactics in poor countries , as well .
What we ’ re seeing is just a parallel of what ’ s happening here at home being used by our own government to oppress people in poor and working class neighborhoods while not at the same time addressing the crimes that happen in the office , in the streets .
In other words , you would use the dollars to go out to those in the streets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to address the symptoms and the core and root causes that happens in the streets while cleaning out the back doors and these sweet crimes that happens in white collar areas , in institutions all across this country , including here in Baltimore City in the state of Maryland .
JACQUELINE LUQMAN : I mean , it seems like working class people , poor people who live in neighborhoods who do experience a crime problem , but that crime problem is because of high unemployment , lack of job opportunities , poor public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to being privatized , poor services for people .
All of the things that we know contribute to higher crime , but the money that is spent by state and local and now federal government goes into combating the symptom rather than actually curing the disease , so to speak .
And then there is the other issue that people have to deal with in relation to corruption in their local and state government and the corruption at the federal level .
So Brandon , people are dealing with a lot and maybe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to parse all of this out .
So tell us how the Ujima People ’ s Party can help people in Baltimore do that .
BRANDON WALKER : Yes , I ’ m glad you asked and excited to be able to speak on this .
So when we speak about specifically those white collar crimes versus blue collar crimes , we ’ re talking about people who lose their homes for $ 1,300 water bills , $ 500 water bills , $ 2,200 water bills for that matter .
2,000 .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of housing in a land trust or a housing trust will be a start , but also launching a petition to be able to address that as an independent black worker-led political party , Ujima People ’ s Progress Party , we would be able to say , “ Hey , with a petition we could be able to make the risk calls and pay up to $ 2 million that they ’ re getting in free water , ” versus the people uptown who are losing their homes who ’ ve been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the slow calls of first responding to come to their community with any issues of emergency , be that a fire or an overdose .
Something that is rarely talked about when we factor in crime .
As well , where the Ujima People ’ s Progress Party , community control of housing will be the first step towards being able to say a unit , a community , a neighborhood itself that can represent itself , do sustainable practice and as well as being able to end disproportionate wealth .
Second @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of education .
Now we talk about housing and education .
There ’ s always the one two scenario or making the both mutually compatible where that number of people that live in your neighborhood provides a number of property taxes that people can move in and better schools .
However , there ’ s never the question of what we ’ re going to do about the water crisis , what we ’ re going to do about the lead in the water .
Again , people losing their homes behind short @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paid off with a grant funding or with a little bit of time from a loan and other measures .
But yet we ’ re still dealing with other kleptocrats in series of the city that is richer in Baltimore by not paying their water bills and skimming on the tax bill .
And with that , if we ’ re able to address that the water crisis and the housing , we ’ ll be able to now speak more candidly about the education and having community control of education .
Well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community run for those local school boards while at the same time being a block captain and a housing representative if not a community association for those who are in control of the community housing and education resource , which brings me to being able to have community control of healthcare and as well as those food nutrition ’ s to be able to end food sovereignty .
And as an independent black worker-led political party , and just so I can slow myself down and make this point , we have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who have the responsibility of working every day , paying the taxes , going to school , dealing with transportation , dealing with the housing , dealing with education and being able to communicate an answer that says , “ Yes , I will be responsible for my black and my community can do as a committee that addresses education .
I ’ ll do the same for housing .
I ’ ll do the same for transportation , healthcare , and also even unemployment.
” We are now removing the responsibilities from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be able to give people a chance to have some dignity and not be reduced to political mascots and at the same time get beat over their head by the same tax dollars that we ’ re paying the police department to get more and more new equipment while corruption and festering scandals happens from the police department headquarters down to city hall .
JACQUELINE LUQMAN : Well , there ’ s definitely a lot of work that needs to be done , not just in Baltimore , to bring the community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ address these longstanding issues , but also to face down this Operation Relentless Surge that we are about to see in the coming year .
So Brandon , I ’ m sure this will not be the last conversation we will have with you .
We will definitely continue to watch not only your work , but what will happen with the Baltimore PD in the coming months with this operation .
But thank you so much for joining me .
BRANDON WALKER : All right .
Thank you for having me .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ watching .
I am Jacqueline Luqman with The Real News Network in Washington , DC .

Operation Relentless Pursuit is a Department of Justice initiative to combat crime through a “surge in federal resources.” We talked with Brandon Walker of the Ujima People’s Progress Party about what’s really needed to combat crime and empower neighborhoods in places like Baltimore, one of the seven cities targeted by the plan.
Story Transcript
JACQUELINE LUQMAN: This is Jacqueline Luqman with The Real News Network.
In December last year, Attorney General William P. Barr announced the launch of Operation Relentless Pursuit, an initiative aimed at quote, combating violent crime and seven of America’s most violent cities through a surge in federal resources. While the seven cities targeted by this new law enforcement initiative are near or at the bottom of the Bureau of labor statistics unemployment rate from major cities, indicating that unemployment is at the higher end of the scale. What Barr calls the surge in federal law enforcement resources to combat crime, including tens of millions of dollars for hiring more police officers, doesn’t seem to be available to get anyone a job who isn’t willing to be a cop.
What do the residents of these cities do in the face of this new effort to allegedly combat crime that doesn’t actually address the roots of crime, nor does it meet the needs of the people most effected by the crime? And when we peel back the layers of what’s really being provided in the way of resources to these cities, what will they really expect to get in this surge here?
To talk with me about this and how this operation is really expected to affect the targeted cities is Brandon Walker. Brandon is the outreach coordinator for the Ujima People’s Progress Party in Baltimore, Maryland. Brandon, thanks so much for joining me.
BRANDON WALKER: Thank you for having me.
JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So Brandon, Baltimore is one of the seven cities targeted by this program; along with Albuquerque, Cleveland, Detroit, Kansas City, Memphis, and Milwaukee. They’re all said to be seven cities with violent crime levels, several times higher than the national average.
And in addition to providing an infusion of federal agents and resources immediately, Operation Relentless Pursuit claims it will provide $71 million in federal grant funding among the seven targeted cities that can be used to “hire new officers, pay overtime and benefits, finance federally deputized task force officers, and provide mission critical equipment and technology.” That’s according to the statement from the U.S. Department of Justice. Brandon, phrases like “mission critical” are uniquely military in nature, right?
BRANDON WALKER: Yes. So when I hear “mission critical,” I’m thinking that there’s a percentage or an overall objective to be obtained, specifically when they’re aiming with such active words or key words such as critical and marrying them with mission, as well. Specifically when we’re talking about U.S. populations, we’re also mean exactly targeting specific demographics who can be the mission or the objective to up to be obtained.
JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So in fact, “mission critical” actually does come from wartime. It’s combat jargon. And the name of this operation sounds like a military operation. So is there a reason that the DOJ is using military terminology to describe an effort to combat what they say is civilian crime?
BRANDON WALKER: Well, I’d say in order for them to use that language, they’d have to have a source of data gathering or resource to be collected. And I like to henceforth or segue into the consent decree that is here in Baltimore City. So far, we’re speaking about the populations or the guises of public safety being in question. We have to also question about the institutions and the infrastructure of local government and the police department specifically and their relationship to the community, as well as being under a federal consent decree since 2017.
Now, the reason why I thought that this would be necessary to bring it up with that language and exactly seeing how that jargon or that term is being used towards a crime fighting initiative is to say that the department of justice is making one huge contradiction along with saying they want to combat crime on one end but also they want to police the police on the other end, which is very confusing.
Because if you’re looking to sue the same police department or withdraw funding because of their unconstitutional or policing practice and tactics that violates the rights of the city of Baltimore, how did you turn around and say, “Well, hey, we have to give them more money to police their way. We have to over police and also militarize them with updated weapons, but at the same time undermine the federal consent decree which says that these same officers and police department are in question because they have done some very questionable practices, if not violated civil rights and human rights of those who are living in Baltimore City.”
JACQUELINE LUQMAN: Now you mentioned militarized equipment going to the police department along with the serious problems that not just Baltimore Police Department has had under this consent decree, which is why they’re under a federal consent decree, but also the other cities. Some of the other cities have the same issues with police abuse, as well as having problems with not just crime but also higher unemployment in the cities.
So it’s interesting, Brandon, that the Baltimore PD seems to be welcoming of this assistance and the money for sure, but how does the affected community members, how did they react with not just a police force but also a government that seems more open to investment in policing and especially as you said, military policing, than they are in things that we know reduce crime, like more jobs, access to healthcare, access to quality education.
Even as because the crime is such an issue, there’s also some community support for these kinds of issues. So how do you balance educating the community members about the adversarial relationship that the police and law enforcement in general, especially law enforcement, have in historically black communities and neighborhoods with also dealing with the fears about crime that community members do legitimately have?
BRANDON WALKER: That is a very well loaded and multifaceted question, so I’ll do my best to address it in a timely fashion. So I think with the educating the community part, I think it comes as a tactic of really looking at ourselves as individuals, as taxpayers, but most of all as working class folks who live in the community to be able to ask, “Where’s our tax dollars going exactly, and how do we address it in a way that does not disturb anyone’s psyche or political consciousness in a way that we do not win them over with the idea of saying, ‘Well, hey, for every dollar that we’re getting inside the general fund, do you know that at least 50% or 40 or a substantial amount and percentage is going towards policing communities where we’re speaking in the educating sense about the community that does or does not know about it, and now get into community support.’”
We have to look at those who are in the lower bracket of below the poverty line and at the poverty line to be specific where they’re always sought that is these bad neighborhoods, high and crime riddled infested communities that need policing. But the contradiction that spills over that is, well, if that is true, then why is it that in some of the most affluent neighborhoods there are no crime, but yet there are no cops around. So how do we get to dispel and demystify or should I say debunk, for a lack of a better term, the put more police, put more police equipment, put drones in the sky, put cameras in the areas where people are struggling to make it out of dire straits and economic challenges.
But yet, crime still exist at all times higher while the police are present versus being able to address the polarities or the contradictions of it being in a fluent arrogance where no polices are and still a few cameras, household ring dash cameras exist, but yet no polices are there. No crime at all. So that’s one. Being able to close those disparities with a compelling argument and as well as a political form that can aim to educate and agitate a little bit of the people. The second will also go with the community. We’ll be talking about community support where specifically we have to speak about which community is in support of it.
Because last time I checked, I don’t think anyone who does not have a car or a job will support more policing patrol in their neighborhood regardless if it makes them feel better if they know those funds can go towards a bike bag program, if those funds can go towards economic development, if they can go towards a land trust, a housing trust, anything that can put back to the community that can make it more feasible or economically feasible for those who live there to grab themselves by the opportunities that is presented between the funds that’s going towards policing and militarizing that area to actually providing economic resources or giving the community the choice to control those resources.
I personally believe that the community that does welcome these ideas tend to be those who maybe are radio stations, news, those who have a soundbite or some sort of attachment to it that if they promote it, they can also get good PR from the police department and as well as have more access interviews with the local government. So I guess to answer that question, how do we get engaged and how do we educate the people and where does the community support come from? It’s sort of a mixed bag in how we view it and our perception, but I think the reality of it all is that we are all responsible for being able to address the core of the scenario of which we see crime happen and in which we see public safety being a question and that is the economic, the social economic challenges, that is being faced in areas like Baltimore City and other urban cities across America.
JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So let me pivot really quickly and ask you about an issue that I think is connected to this. And I think it’s happening at a very interesting time, both the announcement of this surge and this national push now for an idea that I think that its time has really come, which is community control over the police. Now, a few years ago, a few weeks ago actually, we talk with Frank Chapman of the National Association Against Racist and Political Repression about their national effort to demand community control over the police. We also discussed Baltimore’s secret aerial surveillance planes now being made a pilot program that the Baltimore PD is supporting.
You were a panelist or at a conference that discussed all the ways law enforcement has historically surveilled and repressed black and other marginalized communities throughout the years. Is it a coincidence that all of these efforts seem to be converging? We’ve got a major organization that historically fought against police repression, relaunching and spreading the national support network, creating a national support network to educate people on community control over the police. Just as it seems, this new era in police repression is about to be unleashed in the seven cities including Baltimore. What are your thoughts on that? Is it just too convenient that all of these things are happening at once?
BRANDON WALKER: I think it’s more than just a convenience. I think it’s the harsh reality that what we’re dealing with is it’s easier to put more patrolmen on the streets than it is actually the patch up the streets and be able to provide opportunities for those who are squeegee boys, for those who are on the corner, and also men and women who are struggling to deal with low wages and low end jobs to be able to work themselves out of an economic challenge that they’re in and also to be able to address that.
We’re talking about spy planes specifically and we’re dealing with the idea that the origin or its inceptions of how do we get to the point where we’re inviting private strategies for public initiatives but yet we haven’t addressed the first epidemic of having cameras being invited to the area of Baltimore City where once before we were told that if bright city lights or those blue or red flashing lights with cameras on the top of the street polls and traffic polls is able to watch what’s going on every corner inside of every dwelling if not every community where “crime” is supposed to take place who voted for that and there is no vote call. There is no roll call or any kind of initiative that says, “This was supported by this Councilman. This was something that was rolled out on the backs of the people to say that it’s supposed to make you much safer. It’s supposed to provide transparency. It’s supposed to help the police department and also bring communities together.”
Well, again, five, 10, 15 years has passed, and we still have more and more of the same issues that we wish to address from cameras. Now we’re proposing to rule out drones or spy planes that was out once upon a time, maybe two or three years ago, give or take. That was supposed to be addressing the issues from afar by using data surveillance to hand over it to be able to record and watch crimes. Well, what good does it? What good does it does for anyone in those areas to be victims, suspects, or any of cop or any kind of sort of entity that intertwined with the public safety initiative when we’re dealing with the hard reality that no one can see where the funding is coming from, which is one to question. No one has to have opportunity to vote on it, which is two.
Third, no one has ever had a serious conversation between the local government, state government, to be able to put a petition, referendum, or any kind of resolution down as to say, “Well, how much of our tax dollars is going to fund this opportunity and whose payroll is going to be funded by our dollars to be able to say you’re keeping us safe despite the realities that crime is going to exist, whether it’s blue or white collar crime?” We just have to have a question of whose crime are we going to be addressing and who’s going to go to jail for it.
JACQUELINE LUQMAN: That’s a great point that you raise, when you raise the issue of white collar crime. Now Brandon, where’s the search for white collar criminals? Where is the $71 million in federal funding for mission critical support and material to combat rampant white collar crime? And we know that white collar crime is rampant because the rich keep getting richer off of the backs of the working class and the poor, so where’s the Department of Justice rollout for combating white collar crime?
BRANDON WALKER: Well, I would say there is no political will to challenge those who grease the palms, which puts the dollar in your pocket. And we have to be honest with that here. What I see as the $71 million is not necessarily addressed to white collar crime because there is no political will to actually address white collar crimes or those whose arms are being greased, for dollars has been put in pocket, and coffers that are being bought and filled. And specifically saying that anytime we live in an era or a part of our society where it’s okay to be able to say, “Well, crime must exist or be pushed to the farer sides of uptown and the near areas where transit stops and police stations exist.” But yet we have to keep it separated from sub tourists.
Then I think that those $71 million is not going to be focused on exactly corruption, public scandal, exactly how contractors are being swayed and worked under the table with public officials to be able to have people pass certain legislation that are favorable to those who are in an upper ruling class versus those who are poor and working class just asking for control of the resources so they can be able to bring the grassroots approach to their community without any interference and using that model of self-determination to bring about results without having to use much of these undisclosed or large amounts of millions of dollars and be specific about the white collar crimes, as well.
There’s never going to be an answer or a question as to how much of these dollars is being shelled out? Where does it come from exactly, and which amount of taxpayers or sector of the tax paying class is going to be footing this bill? Same goes for the dollars that gets shifted over to other parts of the world to be able to oppress and use imperialists tactics in poor countries, as well.
What we’re seeing is just a parallel of what’s happening here at home being used by our own government to oppress people in poor and working class neighborhoods while not at the same time addressing the crimes that happen in the office, in the streets. In other words, you would use the dollars to go out to those in the streets before we use some of those dollars to address the symptoms and the core and root causes that happens in the streets while cleaning out the back doors and these sweet crimes that happens in white collar areas, in institutions all across this country, including here in Baltimore City in the state of Maryland.
JACQUELINE LUQMAN: I mean, it seems like working class people, poor people who live in neighborhoods who do experience a crime problem, but that crime problem is because of high unemployment, lack of job opportunities, poor public school education that’s being pushed to being privatized, poor services for people. All of the things that we know contribute to higher crime, but the money that is spent by state and local and now federal government goes into combating the symptom rather than actually curing the disease, so to speak.
And then there is the other issue that people have to deal with in relation to corruption in their local and state government and the corruption at the federal level. So Brandon, people are dealing with a lot and maybe they just don’t know how to parse all of this out. So tell us how the Ujima People’s Party can help people in Baltimore do that.
BRANDON WALKER: Yes, I’m glad you asked and excited to be able to speak on this. So when we speak about specifically those white collar crimes versus blue collar crimes, we’re talking about people who lose their homes for $1,300 water bills, $500 water bills, $2,200 water bills for that matter. 2,000. And with that we believe that community control of housing in a land trust or a housing trust will be a start, but also launching a petition to be able to address that as an independent black worker-led political party, Ujima People’s Progress Party, we would be able to say, “Hey, with a petition we could be able to make the risk calls and pay up to $2 million that they’re getting in free water,” versus the people uptown who are losing their homes who’ve been living there their whole life, dealing with the slow calls of first responding to come to their community with any issues of emergency, be that a fire or an overdose.
Something that is rarely talked about when we factor in crime. As well, where the Ujima People’s Progress Party, community control of housing will be the first step towards being able to say a unit, a community, a neighborhood itself that can represent itself, do sustainable practice and as well as being able to end disproportionate wealth. Second would be another is coming into control of education. Now we talk about housing and education.
There’s always the one two scenario or making the both mutually compatible where that number of people that live in your neighborhood provides a number of property taxes that people can move in and better schools. However, there’s never the question of what we’re going to do about the water crisis, what we’re going to do about the lead in the water. Again, people losing their homes behind short term water bills that can easily be paid off with a grant funding or with a little bit of time from a loan and other measures.
But yet we’re still dealing with other kleptocrats in series of the city that is richer in Baltimore by not paying their water bills and skimming on the tax bill. And with that, if we’re able to address that the water crisis and the housing, we’ll be able to now speak more candidly about the education and having community control of education. Well, we can have people in the community run for those local school boards while at the same time being a block captain and a housing representative if not a community association for those who are in control of the community housing and education resource, which brings me to being able to have community control of healthcare and as well as those food nutrition’s to be able to end food sovereignty.
And as an independent black worker-led political party, and just so I can slow myself down and make this point, we have to understand that with a group of people who have the responsibility of working every day, paying the taxes, going to school, dealing with transportation, dealing with the housing, dealing with education and being able to communicate an answer that says, “Yes, I will be responsible for my black and my community can do as a committee that addresses education. I’ll do the same for housing. I’ll do the same for transportation, healthcare, and also even unemployment.”
We are now removing the responsibilities from the government as an independent political party to be able to give people a chance to have some dignity and not be reduced to political mascots and at the same time get beat over their head by the same tax dollars that we’re paying the police department to get more and more new equipment while corruption and festering scandals happens from the police department headquarters down to city hall.
JACQUELINE LUQMAN: Well, there’s definitely a lot of work that needs to be done, not just in Baltimore, to bring the community together to educate the community and to address these longstanding issues, but also to face down this Operation Relentless Surge that we are about to see in the coming year. So Brandon, I’m sure this will not be the last conversation we will have with you. We will definitely continue to watch not only your work, but what will happen with the Baltimore PD in the coming months with this operation. But thank you so much for joining me.
BRANDON WALKER: All right. Thank you for having me.
JACQUELINE LUQMAN: And thank you for watching. I am Jacqueline Luqman with The Real News Network in Washington, DC.
Studio: Will Arenas, Cameron Granadino
Production: Genevieve Montinar, Cameron Granadino
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.