foreignpolicy--2020-05-30--Trump Scapegoats China and WHO—and Americans Will Suffer

On Friday , President Donald Trump declared that the United States would be terminating its relationship with the World Health Organization ( WHO ) .
It was a decision both immoral and likely illegal .
It also encapsulates the most questionable aspects of the president ’ s leadership style : his penchant to blame others for his mistakes , his refusal to share the global stage politely with other actors , his indulgence of blind self-interest , and his utter contempt of science .
Trump cited issues he formally raised on April 15 in a White House statement , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agency with “ mismanagement of the coronavirus pandemic ” and claimed that “ WHO repeatedly parroted the Chinese government ’ s claims that the coronavirus was not spreading between humans … [ and ] praised the Chinese government ’ s response throughout January.
” Two weeks later , Trump ordered the U.S. intelligence community to formally investigate WHO and its relationship with China , amid allegations from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that what he called “ Wuhan virus ” was either manufactured in or leaked from the Chinese city ’ s biosafety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most dangerous pathogens .
This claim , which Pompeo has repeated many times , had been largely rejected by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence , which said it “ concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified.
” Like a petulant child , Trump has repeatedly claimed that the deaths of more than 100,000 Americans to COVID-19 were somebody else ’ s fault : China or WHO .
“ We ’ re doing very serious investigations .
… We are not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during an April 27 White House news conference .
“ There are a lot of ways you can hold them accountable .
… We believe it could have been stopped at the source .
It could have been stopped quickly , and it wouldn ’ t have spread all over the world.
” Three days later , Trump went deeper : “ It ’ s a terrible thing that happened .
Whether they made a mistake or whether it started off as a mistake and then they made another one , or did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China started the pandemic .
Top Republican leaders have told me that party polling consistently reveals that China-bashing is immensely popular among Trump supporters and that the “ blame China ” theme can help reelect the president in November , offsetting some of the disdain many Americans have for his handling of the country ’ s COVID-19 crisis .
Recently published polls show party divides on these issues .
For example , in a CBS News poll , 67 percent of Republicans said the new coronavirus was manmade , while only 30 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Center poll found that most Americans held negative views of the Chinese government and President Xi Jinping but Republican views were consistently more unfavorable .
Another survey found 73 percent of Americans , from both parties , saying the Chinese government bears some responsibility for COVID-19 deaths in the United States .
Public opinion about WHO is more complicated .
A Politico/Morning Consult poll in late May found 43 percent of Americans surveyed rating the agency ’ s performance poor or “ just fair ” versus 48 percent rating it good or excellent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic , 35 percent judged it insufficient , 40 percent thought it adequate , and 9 percent said WHO was doing “ too much ” to fight the virus .
That ambiguity hasn ’ t deterred the administration from targeting WHO .
On May 18 , at a virtual gathering of WHO ’ s World Health Assembly , U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar told representatives of 194 nations : “ We must be frank about one of the primary reasons this outbreak spun out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by this organization to obtain the information that the world needed , and that failure cost many lives.
” Azar called for an independent review of WHO ’ s performance in the pandemic .
Azar was followed by Chinese Health Minister Ma Xiaowei , who announced that China would give an additional $ 2 billion , above its annual dues , to WHO .
Chinese authorities most certainly did downplay the Wuhan epidemic in December and January , grossly understating case numbers in daily reports to WHO ; insisting the virus was only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which they closed ; and denying that human-to-human transmission of COVID-19 was possible .
Physicians in Wuhan who tried to warn the medical world about the emergence of a SARS-like pneumonia virus were severely penalized , as were independent Chinese journalists .
One key doctor sounding the alarm , Li Wenliang , died of COVID-19 in early February , and his colleague Ai Fen disappeared in April .
Beijing authorities turned down January requests from WHO to send an independent scientific team to Wuhan , and nothing resembling accurate case numbers was officially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ later , Wuhan was locked down .
That lockdown ultimately prevented a catastrophic epidemic that , according to a multinational team of independent researchers , would have likely infected more than 7.7 million Chinese , rather than the 114,325 estimated as of the end of February .
On the other hand , if China had locked Wuhan down a week earlier , on Jan. 16 , some 75,000 fewer people could have been infected .
According to two epidemiologists , the United States , which started social distancing under White House guidelines on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of the nation ’ s deaths had it gone on lockdown two weeks earlier , on March 2 .
That ’ s a decidedly uncomfortable finding for the White House .
The central White House allegation , therefore , is that China ’ s coverup led to an underestimate in Washington of the scale of the COVID-19 outbreak and an inability to recognize the need to prepare the United States .
Moreover , because WHO didn ’ t publicly contradict Beijing ’ s claims , and twice declined to declare an official @ @ @ @ @ @ @ PHEIC ) before finally doing so on Jan. 30 , the Trump administration accuses the agency of colluding with Beijing—in essence , of being a co-conspirator .
But the president ’ s accusations come despite ample evidence that the U.S. intelligence community provided the White House with detailed , urgent assessments of the Chinese outbreak in December and January and that U.S. personnel assigned to WHO continually fed detailed reports from Geneva .
Implicit in Trump ’ s charges against WHO is that he acted decisively as soon as the organization provided information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The president has repeatedly insisted that his administration took swift action in late January , when he ordered the cessation of travel from Wuhan and other parts of China .
In March , Trump claimed that travel restrictions “ saved a lot of lives ” and that by late March the numbers saved grew to “ probably tens of thousands.
” And at a White House briefing on April 7 , Trump said : “ I was called all sorts of names when I closed it down to China .
… If I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would ’ ve had hundreds of thousands more people dying.
” But a recent stunning study executed by the evolutionary biologist Michael Worobey of the University of Arizona has thrown serious doubt on the travel restrictions hypothesis .
By analyzing the genetic details of thousands of SARS-CoV-2 viruses , Worobey and his team discovered that the earliest case in the Seattle area , considered patient zero for the United States , did not actually spawn the American epidemic .
That individual who arrived from Wuhan to Seattle on Jan. 15 did pass his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people , but then , the spread stopped .
Though travel restrictions were in place in February , some 40,000 people—including U.S. citizens—entered the country afterward , and one of them arrived in the Seattle area between Feb. 13 and 19 , spreading the virus and starting the West Coast epidemic .
Similarly , Worobey ’ s group showed that the earliest Wuhan-to-Europe cases identified in early February never sparked outbreaks , but a traveler from Hubei to Italy arriving sometime between Feb. 7 and 14 started the huge Lombardy epidemic .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ genetic descendants of that Italian outbreak , which arrived sometime around Feb. 20 , weeks after travel restrictions went into place .
In other words , if the Worobey analysis holds up—and he is a scientist who has built his career on similar genetic mapping of HIV and influenza outbreaks—most hard-hit nations got slammed with the coronavirus after travel restrictions were instituted and after WHO issued its PHEIC .
And that includes the United States .
Nevertheless , tensions and blame have only escalated between the Trump and Xi governments , exacerbated by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this week to revoke crucial aspects of Hong Kong ’ s freedoms and democracy .
Both Democratic and Republican leaders in Washington have strongly condemned Beijing ’ s effective revocation of the 1997 U.K.-China pact guaranteeing the territory of Hong Kong relative independence until the middle of this century .
And Chinese leaders have counterattacked in a war of COVID-19 words .
On May 28 , the Chinese state media outlet People ’ s Daily labeled Trump ’ s domestic response to COVID-19 “ incompetent ” and the American death toll “ one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Mincing no words , the editorial denounced Trump personally : “ While there are many factors at play , a key factor behind the high numbers was the Trump administration ’ s mishandling of the coronavirus crisis .
… America , the most powerful country on the planet with the most sophisticated medical technologies , did not have to lose so many lives to coronavirus .
The Trump administration squandered vital time as the coronavirus spread across the country .
… [ T ] he grim milestone is a failure of epic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration.
” The next day , Trump announced the U.S. withdrawal from WHO .
If Trump can get over the congressional and financial hurdles , he still faces significant moral hazards .
Most of the agency ’ s spending is on health programs for the world ’ s poorest and most vulnerable .
In addition to the loss of U.S. funds , WHO is facing a $ 1.3 billion shortfall in funds from other sources and cost overruns due to emergencies , including the Congolese Ebola epidemic and the COVID-19 pandemic .
Immunization @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effort , have suffered thanks to lockdowns and diversion of public health and medical personnel to the COVID-19 fight .
On May 22 , a host of international organizations , including WHO , warned that 80 million children under the age of 1 were at risk of acquiring measles , diphtheria , polio , and other vaccine-preventable diseases .
With the United States withdrawing its financial support from WHO , those vaccination efforts will likely suffer further setbacks .
The U.N. estimates that 130 million people could sink backward into extreme poverty due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the global economy , creating further health needs .
Malaria programs worldwide have been disrupted by supply chain issues and lockdowns , which have interrupted the delivery of mosquito nets , drugs , and testing equipment .
In addition to imperiling the lives of the poorest of the world ’ s poor , the United States is , by quitting WHO , sending more signals to the world that the Trump administration intends to go its own “ America First ” way in the coronavirus fight .
But the rest of the world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , committing to working together to find treatments and vaccines for COVID-19 .
Some of these collective deals have been forced inside WHO ; others are regional pacts—the Trump administration has joined none .
While it is certainly possible the first effective vaccine is invented and developed by a U.S. company , it is at least equally likely the innovation will come out of China , Europe , Asia , or perhaps Latin America—and the American people might find themselves at the bottom of the list for access to the life-saving supplies because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and cooperation .
“ We need to be engaged with other countries for the benefit of people who spend their time in places like Detroit , ” former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers said this week .
“ This is not primarily a moral issue .
This is a forward defense of our national security interests.
” Trump screwed up his tariff fight with China in 2019 , forcing enormous subsidies for American farmers facing bankruptcy due to the loss of grain and livestock exports .
When COVID-19 first appeared , Trump was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , so he confidently told a gathering of financial elites at the World Economic Forum in Davos , Switzerland , that China had the epidemic under control and that there was nothing to worry about .
When it turned out that the epidemic was a pandemic , Trump issued the travel restrictions and assured Americans that there was nothing to worry about .
As it became obvious that there most definitely was a great deal for Americans to worry about , amid national spread of the coronavirus and a wildly chaotic federal response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t take long for the U.S.-China blame game to grow toxic .
Then the president added WHO onto his list of scapegoats .
The pain for this childish abhorrent behavior will now be felt on the COVID-19 battlefields and in every poor community that relies on U.N. agencies for emergency food , child immunizations , essential medicines , and guidance .
Trump ’ s decision to punish others for his own failings is no surprise at this point in his presidency—and still completely reprehensible .

On Friday, President Donald Trump declared that the United States would be terminating its relationship with the World Health Organization (WHO). It was a decision both immoral and likely illegal. It also encapsulates the most questionable aspects of the president’s leadership style: his penchant to blame others for his mistakes, his refusal to share the global stage politely with other actors, his indulgence of blind self-interest, and his utter contempt of science.
On Friday, President Donald Trump declared that the United States would be terminating its relationship with the World Health Organization (WHO). It was a decision both immoral and likely illegal. It also encapsulates the most questionable aspects of the president’s leadership style: his penchant to blame others for his mistakes, his refusal to share the global stage politely with other actors, his indulgence of blind self-interest, and his utter contempt of science.
Trump cited issues he formally raised on April 15 in a White House statement, in which he charged the Geneva-based United Nations agency with “mismanagement of the coronavirus pandemic” and claimed that “WHO repeatedly parroted the Chinese government’s claims that the coronavirus was not spreading between humans … [and] praised the Chinese government’s response throughout January.” Two weeks later, Trump ordered the U.S. intelligence community to formally investigate WHO and its relationship with China, amid allegations from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that what he called “Wuhan virus” was either manufactured in or leaked from the Chinese city’s biosafety level 4 laboratory, equipped to handle the most dangerous pathogens. This claim, which Pompeo has repeated many times, had been largely rejected by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which said it “concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified.”
Like a petulant child, Trump has repeatedly claimed that the deaths of more than 100,000 Americans to COVID-19 were somebody else’s fault: China or WHO. “We’re doing very serious investigations. … We are not happy with China,” Trump said during an April 27 White House news conference. “There are a lot of ways you can hold them accountable. … We believe it could have been stopped at the source. It could have been stopped quickly, and it wouldn’t have spread all over the world.” Three days later, Trump went deeper: “It’s a terrible thing that happened. Whether they made a mistake or whether it started off as a mistake and then they made another one, or did somebody do something on purpose,” China started the pandemic.
Top Republican leaders have told me that party polling consistently reveals that China-bashing is immensely popular among Trump supporters and that the “blame China” theme can help reelect the president in November, offsetting some of the disdain many Americans have for his handling of the country’s COVID-19 crisis. Recently published polls show party divides on these issues. For example, in a CBS News poll, 67 percent of Republicans said the new coronavirus was manmade, while only 30 percent of Democrats agreed. A Pew Research Center poll found that most Americans held negative views of the Chinese government and President Xi Jinping but Republican views were consistently more unfavorable. Another survey found 73 percent of Americans, from both parties, saying the Chinese government bears some responsibility for COVID-19 deaths in the United States.
Public opinion about WHO is more complicated. A Politico/Morning Consult poll in late May found 43 percent of Americans surveyed rating the agency’s performance poor or “just fair” versus 48 percent rating it good or excellent. Asked to assess the U.N. agency’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, 35 percent judged it insufficient, 40 percent thought it adequate, and 9 percent said WHO was doing “too much” to fight the virus.
That ambiguity hasn’t deterred the administration from targeting WHO. On May 18, at a virtual gathering of WHO’s World Health Assembly, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar told representatives of 194 nations: “We must be frank about one of the primary reasons this outbreak spun out of control. There was a failure by this organization to obtain the information that the world needed, and that failure cost many lives.” Azar called for an independent review of WHO’s performance in the pandemic. Azar was followed by Chinese Health Minister Ma Xiaowei, who announced that China would give an additional $2 billion, above its annual dues, to WHO.
Xi told the same May gathering of the World Health Assembly that he would support an investigation of the early days of the Wuhan outbreak but not until the global crisis had calmed down worldwide. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and his staff, for their part, have already delivered detailed accountings of the agency’s activities and statements in December and January. But some crucial context is needed to understand both the organization’s successes and failures. Under its 1948 constitution, WHO serves and deals with nation-states—not civil society, NGOs, private industry, or groups of physicians. Just as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention rarely contradicts statements or data issued by any state, WHO cannot typically contradict a nation.
Chinese authorities most certainly did downplay the Wuhan epidemic in December and January, grossly understating case numbers in daily reports to WHO; insisting the virus was only spread from animals in a market, which they closed; and denying that human-to-human transmission of COVID-19 was possible. Physicians in Wuhan who tried to warn the medical world about the emergence of a SARS-like pneumonia virus were severely penalized, as were independent Chinese journalists. One key doctor sounding the alarm, Li Wenliang, died of COVID-19 in early February, and his colleague Ai Fen disappeared in April. Beijing authorities turned down January requests from WHO to send an independent scientific team to Wuhan, and nothing resembling accurate case numbers was officially reported until Jan. 19. Four days later, Wuhan was locked down.
That lockdown ultimately prevented a catastrophic epidemic that, according to a multinational team of independent researchers, would have likely infected more than 7.7 million Chinese, rather than the 114,325 estimated as of the end of February. On the other hand, if China had locked Wuhan down a week earlier, on Jan. 16, some 75,000 fewer people could have been infected. According to two epidemiologists, the United States, which started social distancing under White House guidelines on March 16, might have spared 90 percent of the nation’s deaths had it gone on lockdown two weeks earlier, on March 2. That’s a decidedly uncomfortable finding for the White House.
The central White House allegation, therefore, is that China’s coverup led to an underestimate in Washington of the scale of the COVID-19 outbreak and an inability to recognize the need to prepare the United States. Moreover, because WHO didn’t publicly contradict Beijing’s claims, and twice declined to declare an official public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) before finally doing so on Jan. 30, the Trump administration accuses the agency of colluding with Beijing—in essence, of being a co-conspirator.
But the president’s accusations come despite ample evidence that the U.S. intelligence community provided the White House with detailed, urgent assessments of the Chinese outbreak in December and January and that U.S. personnel assigned to WHO continually fed detailed reports from Geneva.
Implicit in Trump’s charges against WHO is that he acted decisively as soon as the organization provided information about the urgency of the situation. The president has repeatedly insisted that his administration took swift action in late January, when he ordered the cessation of travel from Wuhan and other parts of China. In March, Trump claimed that travel restrictions “saved a lot of lives” and that by late March the numbers saved grew to “probably tens of thousands.” And at a White House briefing on April 7, Trump said: “I was called all sorts of names when I closed it down to China. … If I didn’t do that, we would’ve had hundreds of thousands more people dying.”
But a recent stunning study executed by the evolutionary biologist Michael Worobey of the University of Arizona has thrown serious doubt on the travel restrictions hypothesis. By analyzing the genetic details of thousands of SARS-CoV-2 viruses, Worobey and his team discovered that the earliest case in the Seattle area, considered patient zero for the United States, did not actually spawn the American epidemic. That individual who arrived from Wuhan to Seattle on Jan. 15 did pass his virus on to a handful of other people, but then, the spread stopped. Though travel restrictions were in place in February, some 40,000 people—including U.S. citizens—entered the country afterward, and one of them arrived in the Seattle area between Feb. 13 and 19, spreading the virus and starting the West Coast epidemic.
Similarly, Worobey’s group showed that the earliest Wuhan-to-Europe cases identified in early February never sparked outbreaks, but a traveler from Hubei to Italy arriving sometime between Feb. 7 and 14 started the huge Lombardy epidemic. And viruses found in New York City are genetic descendants of that Italian outbreak, which arrived sometime around Feb. 20, weeks after travel restrictions went into place.
In other words, if the Worobey analysis holds up—and he is a scientist who has built his career on similar genetic mapping of HIV and influenza outbreaks—most hard-hit nations got slammed with the coronavirus after travel restrictions were instituted and after WHO issued its PHEIC. And that includes the United States.
Nevertheless, tensions and blame have only escalated between the Trump and Xi governments, exacerbated by the National People’s Congress vote this week to revoke crucial aspects of Hong Kong’s freedoms and democracy. Both Democratic and Republican leaders in Washington have strongly condemned Beijing’s effective revocation of the 1997 U.K.-China pact guaranteeing the territory of Hong Kong relative independence until the middle of this century. And Chinese leaders have counterattacked in a war of COVID-19 words.
On May 28, the Chinese state media outlet People’s Daily labeled Trump’s domestic response to COVID-19 “incompetent” and the American death toll “one of the darkest moments in U.S. history.” Mincing no words, the editorial denounced Trump personally: “While there are many factors at play, a key factor behind the high numbers was the Trump administration’s mishandling of the coronavirus crisis. … America, the most powerful country on the planet with the most sophisticated medical technologies, did not have to lose so many lives to coronavirus. The Trump administration squandered vital time as the coronavirus spread across the country. … [T]he grim milestone is a failure of epic proportions on the part of the Trump administration.” The next day, Trump announced the U.S. withdrawal from WHO.
In all likelihood, Trump can’t legally pull the United States out of WHO without giving the agency a large amount of money and can’t unilaterally do so without a vote of approval from Congress, according to the global health legal expert Alexandra Phelan of Georgetown University. Though the WHO constitution does spell out how a nation may withdraw, Phelan says, it is clear that a departing country must settle all its debts with the agency. And joining WHO required U.S. Senate ratification. Exiting would require Senate approval, payment of all debts, and a full year’s notice. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, which tracks such things, U.S. dues, which are assessed based on national GDPs, have ranged year by year between $107 million and $119 million over the last decade. In addition, the United States commits up to $400 million annually in voluntary support, making it the single largest donor to WHO. The 2020-2021 budget for WHO is $4.8 billion. The Trump administration has been a scofflaw, having never paid $81 million of its dues in 2019 and none of its $118 million for 2020. And $900 million in Obama administration commitments made for 2018-2019 have not been honored by the Trump White House.
If Trump can get over the congressional and financial hurdles, he still faces significant moral hazards. Most of the agency’s spending is on health programs for the world’s poorest and most vulnerable. In addition to the loss of U.S. funds, WHO is facing a $1.3 billion shortfall in funds from other sources and cost overruns due to emergencies, including the Congolese Ebola epidemic and the COVID-19 pandemic.
Immunization programs worldwide, including the polio eradication effort, have suffered thanks to lockdowns and diversion of public health and medical personnel to the COVID-19 fight. On May 22, a host of international organizations, including WHO, warned that 80 million children under the age of 1 were at risk of acquiring measles, diphtheria, polio, and other vaccine-preventable diseases. With the United States withdrawing its financial support from WHO, those vaccination efforts will likely suffer further setbacks.
The U.N. estimates that 130 million people could sink backward into extreme poverty due to the pandemic’s impact on the global economy, creating further health needs. Malaria programs worldwide have been disrupted by supply chain issues and lockdowns, which have interrupted the delivery of mosquito nets, drugs, and testing equipment.
In addition to imperiling the lives of the poorest of the world’s poor, the United States is, by quitting WHO, sending more signals to the world that the Trump administration intends to go its own “America First” way in the coronavirus fight. But the rest of the world is hurriedly forming trade and research alliances, committing to working together to find treatments and vaccines for COVID-19. Some of these collective deals have been forced inside WHO; others are regional pacts—the Trump administration has joined none. While it is certainly possible the first effective vaccine is invented and developed by a U.S. company, it is at least equally likely the innovation will come out of China, Europe, Asia, or perhaps Latin America—and the American people might find themselves at the bottom of the list for access to the life-saving supplies because Trump opted out of all international agreements and cooperation.
“We need to be engaged with other countries for the benefit of people who spend their time in places like Detroit,” former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers said this week. “This is not primarily a moral issue. This is a forward defense of our national security interests.”
Trump screwed up his tariff fight with China in 2019, forcing enormous subsidies for American farmers facing bankruptcy due to the loss of grain and livestock exports. When COVID-19 first appeared, Trump was trying to realign trade deals with China, so he confidently told a gathering of financial elites at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, that China had the epidemic under control and that there was nothing to worry about. When it turned out that the epidemic was a pandemic, Trump issued the travel restrictions and assured Americans that there was nothing to worry about. As it became obvious that there most definitely was a great deal for Americans to worry about, amid national spread of the coronavirus and a wildly chaotic federal response, Trump blamed China. It didn’t take long for the U.S.-China blame game to grow toxic. Then the president added WHO onto his list of scapegoats.
The pain for this childish abhorrent behavior will now be felt on the COVID-19 battlefields and in every poor community that relies on U.N. agencies for emergency food, child immunizations, essential medicines, and guidance. Trump’s decision to punish others for his own failings is no surprise at this point in his presidency—and still completely reprehensible.


foreignpolicy--2020-05-30--America’s Race Problem Erupts Anew, Layered With Coronavirus Tensions

MINNEAPOLIS—I woke up to the smell of smoke coming through the window .
Black clouds billowed into the sky just a few blocks north as the arson that had been concentrated on Lake Street spread throughout the community overnight .
Teenagers were looting the corner gas station , and on what was previously forecast to be a sunny spring day , the weather prediction on my phone turned to “ smoke.
” That was Friday .
By the weekend , things were worse .
In defiance of an 8 p.m. curfew , rioters continued to set fires across the city @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Tim Walz , who held a news conference in the middle of the night calling for calm , authorities were deploying three times the force they did during the 1960s race riots .
The Target store where so many of us shopped for essentials during the coronavirus lockdown had been vandalized , looted , and set on fire .
So , too , many small businesses in the community that were already struggling with virus-induced shutdowns .
Neighborhood shops were boarded up , and the violence began extending to formerly quiet residential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Minneapolis , in one of the country ’ s most stable and prosperous cities .
But by early Saturday morning , rioting and protests had erupted from New York City to Los Angeles , with Atlanta placed under a state of emergency .
All this because a problem that too many Americans thought had eased or decided to ignore—police abuse of minority communities—returned in the most shocking way , with criminals and vandals exploiting what began as legitimate protests .
Yet in truth the killing of George Floyd has inflamed tensions that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to not only the city ’ s history with the killing of its black residents by Minneapolis police officers but growing economic inequality , gaps in education and access , and most recently the disproportionate impacts on black and brown communities from the coronavirus , both in terms of infections and deaths but also layoffs .
The damage will be long-lasting as many of these small businesses likely won ’ t recover ; much-needed housing development is now also smoldering , some of it in ruins .
Some civil rights experts say they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was only a matter of time before such rage exploded given the rise of social tensions and racially connected arrests in recent weeks .
Black men wearing face masks have been especially confronted and arrested during the COVID-19 lockdown—including a black doctor in Miami who , it turned out , had volunteered to test homeless people for the virus .
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey sought to assuage angry protesters by quickly firing and urging criminal charges against the officer , Derek Chauvin , who was videotaped kneeling on Floyd ’ s neck for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ I can ’ t breathe , ” an incident that hauntingly echoed the infamous death of Eric Garner in New York City in 2014 .
On Friday , Chauvin was charged with third-degree murder—a striking contrast to the fate of Daniel Pantaleo , the NYPD officer allegedly responsible for Garner ’ s death who wasn ’ t dismissed until five years later and who was never indicted .
Along with the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson , Missouri , in August 2014 , the Garner killing inspired nationwide protests and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some experts and civil rights activists have acknowledged there has been more responsiveness since Ferguson and a spate of citizen videos first began revealing police abuses in the 2010s .
In the past , there was “ a tendency in law enforcement for police to circle the wagons and defend one another from criticism , even where their positions seemed indefensible , ” said Edward McGuire , a professor of criminology and criminal justice at Arizona State University .
“ We are not seeing that in this case .
My Twitter feed is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaders from around the world condemning the actions of these officers.
” Others are far more skeptical .
“ If the incident wasn ’ t recorded and if the city wasn ’ t burning , he [ Chauvin ] wouldn ’ t have been arrested , ” said Michael Bell , a retired Air Force officer who began a nationwide campaign for police accountability after his 21-year-old son was shot to death in Kenosha , Wisconsin , in 2004 .
“ That shouldn ’ t be what it requires to get justice .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ bad the system really is.
” Indeed , the outrage in one of America ’ s most hitherto stable cities in the heartland exposed the ugly reality that little has changed in terms of holding police accountable for violent treatment of citizens , experts say .
Because of inbred collaboration between local police departments and their unions , the district attorneys who depend on those police unions for electoral support , and the court system—all of whom also tend to benefit financially from arrest fees and ticket fines—few police are ever convicted of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ It is business as usual when it comes to accountability in the courts for police crime , ” said Philip Stinson , the author of Police Integrity Lost : A Study of Law Enforcement Officers Arrested .
Stinson , a scholar at Bowling Green University in Ohio who keeps a database of the arrests and convictions of police officers in every U.S. state , said in an email that by his count , since the beginning of 2005 , only 110 nonfederal sworn law enforcement officers have been arrested for murder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ throughout the United States .
Of those officers arrested , to date only 42 have been convicted in the entire nation in the last 15 years .
Very often these abuses fall on minority communities .
In the ensuing years since Ferguson , private or police videos have revealed police practices that went unchecked in the pre-cell phone era , such as the notorious incident in which South Carolina police officer Michael Slager shot at a fleeing Walter Scott eight times and then was filmed planting his Taser next to the victim ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been subjected to consent decrees from the U.S. Justice Department calling for reforms , but they ’ ve been slow to respond .
“ While Minneapolis allows this kind of neck pressure that killed Mr. Floyd as a form of non-lethal force , others have backed away from these sorts of potentially deadly holds or at least put limits on when they can be used , ” David Harris , a criminal law professor at the University of Pittsburgh and a leading authority on racial profiling , wrote in an email .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ limits on sitting , standing or kneeling on a suspect ’ s chest , after gaining control of the suspect , because of potential breathing problems .
NYPD made the use of chokeholds against policy ( though the officer who killed Eric Garner with one stayed on the job for five years and was not charged ) .
” In the case of Chauvin , according to the criminal complaint filed against the veteran Minneapolis police officer : “ Defendant had his knee on Mr. Floyd ’ s neck for 8 minutes and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 53 seconds of this was after Mr. Floyd was non-responsive .
Police are trained that this type of restraint with a subject in a prone position is inherently dangerous.
” Four other Minneapolis officers were fired , and Mayor Frey later said the restraining technique used by Chauvin was against regulations .
The issue of race and police violence is almost certain to enter the 2020 presidential race .
President Donald Trump , who at first lamented Floyd ’ s death , appeared to only inflame tensions when he quoted civil rights-era @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the looting starts , the shooting starts.
” Strikingly , Trump , in a Rose Garden news conference on Friday , then declined to talk about Minneapolis at all , saying , “ I am here to talk about China.
” ( He was announcing the U.S. withdrawal from the World Health Organization , which has allegedly fallen under the influence of Beijing . )
Meanwhile Democratic presumptive nominee Joe Biden said Trump was “ calling for violence against American citizens.
” Biden declared that Floyd ’ s death exposed an “ open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history stemming from the racism that “ still stains ” the United States .
Trump , on the other hand , appeared eager to play to his largely white conservative base , as he often has in crises .
After CNN ’ s headquarters in Atlanta was vandalized early Saturday morning , Trump retweeted a conservative supporter who said the network was “ being attacked by the very riots they promoted as noble & just.
” In an echo of what happened five years ago , the protests spread nationwide as other cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protesters demanded justice for Ahmaud Arbery , a black jogger killed in February by two white male vigilantes , including a retired police officer .
In Louisville , Kentucky , demonstrators demanded the same for Breonna Taylor , a black EMT who was fatally shot by police at her home in March .
“ There ’ s been no meaningful progress on the issue of structural police violence , ” said Alec Karakatsanis , the co-founder of Equal Justice Under Law , a nonprofit civil rights law firm , in a phone interview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white son was killed by police , said : “ I feel the black man ’ s frustration .
What else is left for them ?
It is either burn things down or be gunned down by cops .
They are not left any other choice.
” Still , some experts such as Harris of the University of Pittsburgh see a “ sea change ” in the response of authorities in Minnesota .
“ In times past ( pre-Ferguson ) the normal procedure was a slow walk—please be patient , we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week becomes one month , becomes one year .
And then sometime , a year or more after the incident , once everyone has stopped paying attention—the [ district attorney ] announces ( late on a Friday ) that they have decided they will not file charges .
See the reverse now : as soon as they have enough evidence , and certainly where they have strong evidence , they announce they will go forward.
” Despite Chauvin ’ s arrest , however , Minnesota officials are warning of deteriorating conditions over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to grow .
Authorities say resistance is exponentially greater than anticipated , and while there have been many peaceful protesters , there are growing numbers of armed and entrenched rioters , and officers have been fired on .
Rioters are stopping semitrailers and UPS trucks and raiding them .
A Minnesota National Guard spokesperson , Jon Jensen , said the guard is escorting three fire department teams to fires across the city , and the governor authorized the National Guard to increase strength by an additional 1,000 soldiers—the largest deployment in Minnesota history @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provided intelligence that there are critical threats to National Guard soldiers , authorities said .

MINNEAPOLIS—I woke up to the smell of smoke coming through the window. Black clouds billowed into the sky just a few blocks north as the arson that had been concentrated on Lake Street spread throughout the community overnight. Teenagers were looting the corner gas station, and on what was previously forecast to be a sunny spring day, the weather prediction on my phone turned to “smoke.”
MINNEAPOLIS—I woke up to the smell of smoke coming through the window. Black clouds billowed into the sky just a few blocks north as the arson that had been concentrated on Lake Street spread throughout the community overnight. Teenagers were looting the corner gas station, and on what was previously forecast to be a sunny spring day, the weather prediction on my phone turned to “smoke.”
That was Friday. By the weekend, things were worse. In defiance of an 8 p.m. curfew, rioters continued to set fires across the city, and, according to Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who held a news conference in the middle of the night calling for calm, authorities were deploying three times the force they did during the 1960s race riots. The Target store where so many of us shopped for essentials during the coronavirus lockdown had been vandalized, looted, and set on fire. So, too, many small businesses in the community that were already struggling with virus-induced shutdowns. Neighborhood shops were boarded up, and the violence began extending to formerly quiet residential areas.
It all started here, in Minneapolis, in one of the country’s most stable and prosperous cities. But by Saturday and Sunday, rioting and protests had erupted from New York City to Los Angeles, with Atlanta placed under a state of emergency. Violent confrontations with police continued through the weekend in many cities, including Washington, D.C., where President Donald Trump was taken by Secret Service agents to an underground bunker as protests raged across the street from the White House in Lafayette Park.
All this because a problem that too many Americans thought had eased or decided to ignore—police abuse of minority communities—returned in the most shocking way, with criminals and vandals exploiting what began as legitimate protests. Yet in truth the killing of George Floyd has inflamed tensions that have been mounting for years in Minneapolis—due to not only the city’s history with the killing of its black residents by Minneapolis police officers but growing economic inequality, gaps in education and access, and most recently the disproportionate impacts on black and brown communities from the coronavirus, both in terms of infections and deaths but also layoffs.
The damage will be long-lasting as many of these small businesses likely won’t recover; much-needed housing development is now also smoldering, some of it in ruins. Some civil rights experts say they had been expecting this, that it was only a matter of time before such rage exploded given the rise of social tensions and racially connected arrests in recent weeks. Black men wearing face masks have been especially confronted and arrested during the COVID-19 lockdown—including a black doctor in Miami who, it turned out, had volunteered to test homeless people for the virus.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey sought to assuage angry protesters by quickly firing and urging criminal charges against the officer, Derek Chauvin, who was videotaped kneeling on Floyd’s neck for nearly nine minutes as the victim cried, “I can’t breathe,” an incident that hauntingly echoed the infamous death of Eric Garner in New York City in 2014. On Friday, Chauvin was charged with third-degree murder—a striking contrast to the fate of Daniel Pantaleo, the NYPD officer allegedly responsible for Garner’s death who wasn’t dismissed until five years later and who was never indicted.
Along with the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, in August 2014, the Garner killing inspired nationwide protests and the Black Lives Matter movement. And some experts and civil rights activists have acknowledged there has been more responsiveness since Ferguson and a spate of citizen videos first began revealing police abuses in the 2010s.
In the past, there was “a tendency in law enforcement for police to circle the wagons and defend one another from criticism, even where their positions seemed indefensible,” said Edward McGuire, a professor of criminology and criminal justice at Arizona State University. “We are not seeing that in this case. My Twitter feed is overwhelmed right now with statements from police leaders from around the world condemning the actions of these officers.”
Others are far more skeptical. “If the incident wasn’t recorded and if the city wasn’t burning, he [Chauvin] wouldn’t have been arrested,” said Michael Bell, a retired Air Force officer who began a nationwide campaign for police accountability after his 21-year-old son was shot to death in Kenosha, Wisconsin, in 2004. “That shouldn’t be what it requires to get justice. This is just a measurement about how bad the system really is.”
Indeed, the outrage in one of America’s most hitherto stable cities in the heartland exposed the ugly reality that little has changed in terms of holding police accountable for violent treatment of citizens, experts say. Because of inbred collaboration between local police departments and their unions, the district attorneys who depend on those police unions for electoral support, and the court system—all of whom also tend to benefit financially from arrest fees and ticket fines—few police are ever convicted of wrongly killing anyone or other chronic abuses.
“It is business as usual when it comes to accountability in the courts for police crime,” said Philip Stinson, the author of Police Integrity Lost: A Study of Law Enforcement Officers Arrested. Stinson, a scholar at Bowling Green University in Ohio who keeps a database of the arrests and convictions of police officers in every U.S. state, said in an email that by his count, since the beginning of 2005, only 110 nonfederal sworn law enforcement officers have been arrested for murder or manslaughter resulting from an on-duty shooting throughout the United States. Of those officers arrested, to date only 42 have been convicted in the entire nation in the last 15 years.
Very often these abuses fall on minority communities. In the ensuing years since Ferguson, private or police videos have revealed police practices that went unchecked in the pre-cell phone era, such as the notorious incident in which South Carolina police officer Michael Slager shot at a fleeing Walter Scott eight times and then was filmed planting his Taser next to the victim’s body. One city after another has been subjected to consent decrees from the U.S. Justice Department calling for reforms, but they’ve been slow to respond.
“While Minneapolis allows this kind of neck pressure that killed Mr. Floyd as a form of non-lethal force, others have backed away from these sorts of potentially deadly holds or at least put limits on when they can be used,” David Harris, a criminal law professor at the University of Pittsburgh and a leading authority on racial profiling, wrote in an email. “Chicago, for example, puts limits on sitting, standing or kneeling on a suspect’s chest, after gaining control of the suspect, because of potential breathing problems. NYPD made the use of chokeholds against policy (though the officer who killed Eric Garner with one stayed on the job for five years and was not charged).”
U.S. President Donald Trump shakes hands with Minneapolis Police Union head Bob Kroll on stage during a campaign rally at the Target Center in Minneapolis on Oct. 10, 2019.
In the case of Chauvin, according to the criminal complaint filed against the veteran Minneapolis police officer: “Defendant had his knee on Mr. Floyd’s neck for 8 minutes and 46 seconds in total. Two minutes and 53 seconds of this was after Mr. Floyd was non-responsive. Police are trained that this type of restraint with a subject in a prone position is inherently dangerous.” Four other Minneapolis officers were fired, and Mayor Frey later said the restraining technique used by Chauvin was against regulations.
The issue of race and police violence is almost certain to enter the 2020 presidential race. Trump, who at first lamented Floyd’s death, appeared to only inflame tensions when he quoted civil rights-era white segregationists, tweeting: “When the looting starts, the shooting starts.” Strikingly, Trump, in a Rose Garden news conference on Friday, then declined to talk about Minneapolis at all, saying, “I am here to talk about China.” (He was announcing the U.S. withdrawal from the World Health Organization, which has allegedly fallen under the influence of Beijing.) Meanwhile Democratic presumptive nominee Joe Biden said Trump was “calling for violence against American citizens.” Biden declared that Floyd’s death exposed an “open wound” in the nation’s history stemming from the racism that “still stains” the United States.
Trump, on the other hand, appeared eager to play to his largely white conservative base, as he often has in crises. After CNN’s headquarters in Atlanta was vandalized early Saturday morning, Trump retweeted a conservative supporter who said the network was “being attacked by the very riots they promoted as noble & just.”
In an echo of what happened five years ago, the protests spread nationwide as other cases came to light. In Georgia, protesters demanded justice for Ahmaud Arbery, a black jogger killed in February by two white male vigilantes, including a retired police officer. In Louisville, Kentucky, demonstrators demanded the same for Breonna Taylor, a black EMT who was fatally shot by police at her home in March.
A memorial to George Floyd in Minneapolis on March 30.
“There’s been no meaningful progress on the issue of structural police violence,” said Alec Karakatsanis, founder of Civil Rights Corps, a nonprofit civil rights group, in a phone interview. Bell, the Wisconsin man whose white son was killed by police, said: “I feel the black man’s frustration. What else is left for them? It is either burn things down or be gunned down by cops. They are not left any other choice.”
Still, some experts such as Harris of the University of Pittsburgh see a “sea change” in the response of authorities in Minnesota. “In times past (pre-Ferguson) the normal procedure was a slow walk—please be patient, we’re doing an investigation, etc. One week becomes one month, becomes one year. And then sometime, a year or more after the incident, once everyone has stopped paying attention—the [district attorney] announces (late on a Friday) that they have decided they will not file charges. See the reverse now: as soon as they have enough evidence, and certainly where they have strong evidence, they announce they will go forward.”
Despite Chauvin’s arrest, however, Minnesota officials are warning of deteriorating conditions over the weekend with the numbers of protesters expected to grow. Authorities say resistance is exponentially greater than anticipated, and while there have been many peaceful protesters, there are growing numbers of armed and entrenched rioters, and officers have been fired on. Rioters are stopping semitrailers and UPS trucks and raiding them. A Minnesota National Guard spokesperson, Jon Jensen, said the guard is escorting three fire department teams to fires across the city, and the governor authorized the National Guard to increase strength by an additional 1,000 soldiers—the largest deployment in Minnesota history.
The FBI, meanwhile, has provided intelligence that there are critical threats to National Guard soldiers, authorities said.
May 31: This story has been updated with continuing protests.


foreignpolicy--2020-05-31--Leaders Can’t Lift Lockdowns Without Public Trust

May 10 was Mother ’ s Day .
Children enjoyed the glorious weather in the newly opened playgrounds in Baden-Württemberg in southern Germany , where I live now .
Families played soccer , and young couples walked hand in hand .
On one corner , a group ostentatiously hugged and kissed as they said goodbye .
There wasn ’ t a mask in sight .
The grumblings of a considerable minority apart— “ Have they not heard of the second wave ?
Are these people complete idiots ?
” —Germany as a whole had come together to shake off the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Chancellor Angela Merkel ’ s remarks of the previous week in a press conference had been well received .
“ The first phase of the pandemic was over , ” she declared .
The spread of the illness had been “ slowed , ” and the health system had “ not been overwhelmed.
” In an extremely rare TV address almost two months earlier on March 18 , Merkel had outlined the gravity of the task , the advice she was taking on board , and the road ahead .
She chose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stay home when a threat looms is relatively easy .
Agreeing on when it ’ s OK to go outside again is harder .
Germany hadn ’ t faced a challenge of the pandemic ’ s magnitude since “ German reunification , no , since the Second World War.
” Any response to it demanded “ action in a spirit of solidarity.
” All action was being taken in consultation with experts .
The Robert Koch Institute ( RKI ) , Germany ’ s federal health organization , was explicitly name-checked .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treat the coronavirus , nor is there a vaccine , ” Merkel said .
As long as that remained true , all that mattered was to slow the virus down , “ flatten the curve over the course of several months , and buy time ” so more people wouldn ’ t die in a health system that couldn ’ t cope .
Merkel laid out what would be closed .
She underlined how difficult all this would be to people used to their freedoms , harking back to her own history as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ East Germany .
But if all Germans pulled together , she said firmly , there was hope , even though “ the situation is serious and the outcome uncertain.
” My experience of three separate countries—Germany , India , and China—illustrates how the sharing of information between states and citizens is central to the level of trust between the two .
That trust , or the lack thereof , informs every part of the response to the coronavirus situation both individually and on the part of the government .
In Germany , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It shared information with a population used to being told the truth .
There was no attempt made to sugar-coat the pill .
Expert advice was cited and adhered to—until recently , RKI was conducting daily briefings—and a road map laid out over the following weeks stating which milestones would have to be achieved for certain freedoms to be reinstated .
The government did indeed take away some control from ordinary citizens but told them why , on what basis , and outlined when that control would be returned .
In other words @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a contract that had been forged over years was invoked .
Trust the experts , Merkel was saying .
Trust the government .
Move forward together .
And Germany did .
As a result , I ’ m looking forward to sitting in my favorite beer garden , which reopened on May 18 .
Even as RKI warns that there is a spike in infections and the R number is rising again since the easing of restrictions ; even as the rumblings about the “ second wave ” gain momentum , an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and various state governments diverge from the advice being handed down by the federal government on the scale and speed of the opening up : There is , if not widespread optimism , at least a grimly determined sunniness among my peers .
“ We did it before .
We can do it again.
” In a world where COVID-19 is part of the new normal , the Germans , at least for now , are just getting on with it .
A sea of migrant laborers , the invisible engine of India @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for their homes in the hinterland , hundreds of miles away .
They did so on foot because interstate transport was suspended as well .
With no long-term housing arrangements , no guaranteed access to food , and no employment for the foreseeable future , what else were they to do ?
They certainly didn ’ t trust the government to protect their interests .
If Germany illustrates one extreme of the trust spectrum , India—putatively also a liberal democracy—arguably lies at the other .
This human flood brought to mind images of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of India from the British in 1947 .
Millions of India ’ s Muslims moved to newly created Pakistan , and Hindus and Sikhs fled the other way .
Partition is India ’ s own fracture , a wound to rival Germany ’ s memory of World War II .
More than a million people may have died as a direct result of the cleaving of India , though a number has never been agreed on .
People were butchered in cold blood and died on the road and of illness and hunger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violence , hushed up then , continues to come to light .
The resultant ill feeling poisons India-Pakistan relations to this day .
In Germany , Merkel invoked the memory of World War II—the country ’ s role before and during the war ; the pain of rebuilding after ; and , crucially , its oft-stated resolve to never let it happen again—specifically as a spur to collective resolve and action .
What was the Indian government ’ s excuse to not share information ?
Why didn ’ t it plan for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their livelihoods were taken away ?
Two months later , infection rates are spiking in India .
But the country is still locked down .
It is obvious now that rates were artificially low to begin with , primarily due to an inability—or reluctance—to test the population widely .
Now that more testing is happening , a new picture is emerging of the real numbers , which is as unsurprising as it is discouraging .
If more people are being identified as infected , when will India ’ s draconian lockdown end ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the northern state of Punjab marooned for weeks in Nanded , Maharashtra , almost 1,000 miles away .
They had traveled to Hazoor Sahib in late March .
It is where Gobind Singh , the 10th guru of the Sikhs , was killed in the early 18th century , and it ’ s now a major pilgrimage site .
After the intercession of senior leaders at the state and central levels , those pilgrims were tested , found to be coronavirus-free , and sent back to Punjab on specially arranged vehicles .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ they had been allowed to return to their homes .
Inevitably , the other returnees were immediately quarantined in Punjab .
At which point , one pilgrim remarked bitterly to a local TV channel from her cramped quarantine quarters : “ I may not have had the coronavirus when I came back from Maharashtra .
But I ’ m definitely going to catch it here.
” Modi ’ s regular televised hectoring has become background noise—long on encouragement and promise , short on actual facts .
In the absence of a robust testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the different state governments traded barbs and ducked responsibility ( with the honorable exception of the southern state of Kerala , which has led the way in testing , tracing , and free dissemination of information—leading to a much lower infection rate than many other Indian states ) .
The populace is left to its own devices , with Prime Minister Narendra Modi ’ s regular televised hectoring as background noise , long on encouragement and promise , short on actual facts .
People watch his addresses with morbid curiosity , parsing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they have to look forward to the next day .
“ I don ’ t read the news , ” one friend from India said .
“ I don ’ t watch it .
It will just remind me how disempowered I actually am .
It is terrifying.
” This is from an educated member of the urban elite , worlds removed from a migrant hiking home with his family , his belongings on his shoulder .
Even supposedly simple operations , such as establishing whether one is infected , can ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t trust the government and its entities .
Yet Modi ’ s personal approval numbers are still stratospheric , especially among urban Indians .
His accession to power in 2014 was greeted by his loyalists as a metaphor for a new India—a more assertive one that wasn ’ t afraid of ambition .
These days , many of the people still beating their drums about him dream , at best , of being allowed out of their homes in the near future .
It would seem that having India ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Having an invisible enemy to fight against has been a blessing , at least for Modi .
The infantilization of the Indian public is set to continue for the foreseeable future , and the world ’ s largest electoral democracy can continue on its paternalist way , taking its citizenry for granted , just as it always has , regardless of who ’ s in charge .
China , where I lived until last year , is of course a special case when it comes to credible information and the sharing of it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authoritarian regime just doesn ’ t do freedom of information .
What was interesting to me , when I arrived there in 2016 , was that most Chinese are aware of this but don ’ t really care .
They know that their access to information is tightly controlled .
But this is something they ’ ve grown up with .
Their extremely active and potent digital sphere is also a sort of escape valve .
It is where they express dissent .
The Chinese state polices it with its usual assiduity , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and its incredible reach , requires a flexibility of the state that it doesn ’ t really need to exhibit anywhere else .
The furor over the treatment of Li Wenliang is a case in point .
Li was a doctor and an early whistleblower of the situation in Wuhan who was censored by the authorities .
He later caught COVID-19 and died of it , and his death was treated with shock and rage online .
For the most part , though , the Chinese let the government get on with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This includes letting it control practically every part of their lives , as long as they feel they ’ re being looked after and their interests protected—among other things , a high level of personal safety and access to the benefits of China ’ s economic growth .
To a people accustomed to having the state take care of things like this , the way the pandemic has shaken out at home is very much par for the course .
The Chinese are used to trading control for security .
In Hong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things is part of the collective memory , this is legitimate grounds for protest .
But on the mainland , among the mainstream , there is widespread acceptance .
And the contract has worked thus far , in this particular situation .
Did Beijing try to hush it up to begin with ?
Of course .
Are the numbers still fudged ?
Almost definitely .
But it is also true that , once it set itself to it , the regime has done a good job of countering the pandemic .
That ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ friend ’ s imminent return to the U.K. was just made public to my erstwhile circle in Beijing .
Even if it hasn ’ t been stated to his face , I know others around him are all thinking the same thing .

May 10 was Mother’s Day. Children enjoyed the glorious weather in the newly opened playgrounds in Baden-Württemberg in southern Germany, where I live now. Families played soccer, and young couples walked hand in hand. On one corner, a group ostentatiously hugged and kissed as they said goodbye. There wasn’t a mask in sight.
May 10 was Mother’s Day. Children enjoyed the glorious weather in the newly opened playgrounds in Baden-Württemberg in southern Germany, where I live now. Families played soccer, and young couples walked hand in hand. On one corner, a group ostentatiously hugged and kissed as they said goodbye. There wasn’t a mask in sight.
The grumblings of a considerable minority apart—“Have they not heard of the second wave? Are these people complete idiots?”—Germany as a whole had come together to shake off the torpor of the preceding period of restrictions. Chancellor Angela Merkel’s remarks of the previous week in a press conference had been well received. “The first phase of the pandemic was over,” she declared. The spread of the illness had been “slowed,” and the health system had “not been overwhelmed.”
In an extremely rare TV address almost two months earlier on March 18, Merkel had outlined the gravity of the task, the advice she was taking on board, and the road ahead. She chose her words carefully.
Telling everyone to stay home when a threat looms is relatively easy. Agreeing on when it’s OK to go outside again is harder.
Germany hadn’t faced a challenge of the pandemic’s magnitude since “German reunification, no, since the Second World War.” Any response to it demanded “action in a spirit of solidarity.” All action was being taken in consultation with experts. The Robert Koch Institute (RKI), Germany’s federal health organization, was explicitly name-checked. “There is still neither a way to treat the coronavirus, nor is there a vaccine,” Merkel said. As long as that remained true, all that mattered was to slow the virus down, “flatten the curve over the course of several months, and buy time” so more people wouldn’t die in a health system that couldn’t cope.
Merkel laid out what would be closed. She underlined how difficult all this would be to people used to their freedoms, harking back to her own history as someone who had grown up in repressive East Germany. But if all Germans pulled together, she said firmly, there was hope, even though “the situation is serious and the outcome uncertain.”
Around the world, the conversation around COVID-19 is shifting from containment to the more loaded question of when—and how—to open up. Telling everyone to stay home when a threat looms is relatively easy. Agreeing on when it’s OK to go outside again is harder. Who gets to decide the threat is past or that the urgent need to move forward mitigates the threat itself? Who does one trust?
My experience of three separate countries—Germany, India, and China—illustrates how the sharing of information between states and citizens is central to the level of trust between the two. That trust, or the lack thereof, informs every part of the response to the coronavirus situation both individually and on the part of the government.
In Germany, the government treated its citizens as adults. It shared information with a population used to being told the truth. There was no attempt made to sugar-coat the pill. Expert advice was cited and adhered to—until recently, RKI was conducting daily briefings—and a road map laid out over the following weeks stating which milestones would have to be achieved for certain freedoms to be reinstated.
The government did indeed take away some control from ordinary citizens but told them why, on what basis, and outlined when that control would be returned. In other words, adults were speaking to adults, and a contract that had been forged over years was invoked. Trust the experts, Merkel was saying. Trust the government. Move forward together. And Germany did.
As a result, I’m looking forward to sitting in my favorite beer garden, which reopened on May 18. Even as RKI warns that there is a spike in infections and the R number is rising again since the easing of restrictions; even as the rumblings about the “second wave” gain momentum, an odd assortment of protesters wave placards, and various state governments diverge from the advice being handed down by the federal government on the scale and speed of the opening up: There is, if not widespread optimism, at least a grimly determined sunniness among my peers.
“We did it before. We can do it again.” In a world where COVID-19 is part of the new normal, the Germans, at least for now, are just getting on with it.
If Germany illustrates one extreme of the trust spectrum, India—the country of my birth and putatively also a liberal democracy—arguably lies at the other. A week after Merkel’s address, on March 25, India was summarily locked down with less than a day’s notice. Credible information wasn’t shared. (If India has an equivalent of RKI, few are aware of it.) Predictably, chaos followed.
A sea of migrant laborers, the invisible engine of India’s growth, immediately set off for their homes in the hinterland, hundreds of miles away. They did so on foot because interstate transport was suspended as well. With no long-term housing arrangements, no guaranteed access to food, and no employment for the foreseeable future, what else were they to do? They certainly didn’t trust the government to protect their interests.
If Germany illustrates one extreme of the trust spectrum, India—putatively also a liberal democracy—arguably lies at the other.
This human flood brought to mind images of the great partition that clouded the independence of India from the British in 1947. Millions of India’s Muslims moved to newly created Pakistan, and Hindus and Sikhs fled the other way.
Partition is India’s own fracture, a wound to rival Germany’s memory of World War II. More than a million people may have died as a direct result of the cleaving of India, though a number has never been agreed on. People were butchered in cold blood and died on the road and of illness and hunger in the camps afterward. Widespread sexual violence, hushed up then, continues to come to light. The resultant ill feeling poisons India-Pakistan relations to this day.
In Germany, Merkel invoked the memory of World War II—the country’s role before and during the war; the pain of rebuilding after; and, crucially, its oft-stated resolve to never let it happen again—specifically as a spur to collective resolve and action. What was the Indian government’s excuse to not share information? Why didn’t it plan for the inevitable exodus of already marginalized people when their livelihoods were taken away?
Two months later, infection rates are spiking in India. But the country is still locked down. It is obvious now that rates were artificially low to begin with, primarily due to an inability—or reluctance—to test the population widely. Now that more testing is happening, a new picture is emerging of the real numbers, which is as unsurprising as it is discouraging. If more people are being identified as infected, when will India’s draconian lockdown end?
Witness the dark drama of Sikh pilgrims from the northern state of Punjab marooned for weeks in Nanded, Maharashtra, almost 1,000 miles away. They had traveled to Hazoor Sahib in late March. It is where Gobind Singh, the 10th guru of the Sikhs, was killed in the early 18th century, and it’s now a major pilgrimage site. After the intercession of senior leaders at the state and central levels, those pilgrims were tested, found to be coronavirus-free, and sent back to Punjab on specially arranged vehicles.
Some of them then tested positive after they had been allowed to return to their homes. Inevitably, the other returnees were immediately quarantined in Punjab. At which point, one pilgrim remarked bitterly to a local TV channel from her cramped quarantine quarters: “I may not have had the coronavirus when I came back from Maharashtra. But I’m definitely going to catch it here.”
Modi’s regular televised hectoring has become background noise—long on encouragement and promise, short on actual facts.
In the absence of a robust testing regime and a transparent flow of data, the different state governments traded barbs and ducked responsibility (with the honorable exception of the southern state of Kerala, which has led the way in testing, tracing, and free dissemination of information—leading to a much lower infection rate than many other Indian states). The populace is left to its own devices, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s regular televised hectoring as background noise, long on encouragement and promise, short on actual facts. People watch his addresses with morbid curiosity, parsing them for clues to what new restrictions they have to look forward to the next day.
“I don’t read the news,” one friend from India said. “I don’t watch it. It will just remind me how disempowered I actually am. It is terrifying.” This is from an educated member of the urban elite, worlds removed from a migrant hiking home with his family, his belongings on his shoulder. Even supposedly simple operations, such as establishing whether one is infected, can’t be taken for granted. People just don’t trust the government and its entities.
Yet Modi’s personal approval numbers are still stratospheric, especially among urban Indians. His accession to power in 2014 was greeted by his loyalists as a metaphor for a new India—a more assertive one that wasn’t afraid of ambition. These days, many of the people still beating their drums about him dream, at best, of being allowed out of their homes in the near future.
It would seem that having India’s biggest megaphone does count for something. Having an invisible enemy to fight against has been a blessing, at least for Modi. The infantilization of the Indian public is set to continue for the foreseeable future, and the world’s largest electoral democracy can continue on its paternalist way, taking its citizenry for granted, just as it always has, regardless of who’s in charge.
In Beijing, which some people still believe is reeling from the concealed effects of COVID-19—an arts group I used to belong to was, until recently, restricting entries to its meetings, due to a strict limit on how many people could be in a particular space. That upper limit is now history. Even people in the streets aren’t newsworthy, anymore. Traffic jams are commonplace again as children return to school and their parents go back to work.
China, where I lived until last year, is of course a special case when it comes to credible information and the sharing of it with its citizenry. China’s authoritarian regime just doesn’t do freedom of information.
What was interesting to me, when I arrived there in 2016, was that most Chinese are aware of this but don’t really care. They know that their access to information is tightly controlled. But this is something they’ve grown up with. Their extremely active and potent digital sphere is also a sort of escape valve. It is where they express dissent. The Chinese state polices it with its usual assiduity, but the fast-moving nature of digital media, and its incredible reach, requires a flexibility of the state that it doesn’t really need to exhibit anywhere else.
The furor over the treatment of Li Wenliang is a case in point. Li was a doctor and an early whistleblower of the situation in Wuhan who was censored by the authorities. He later caught COVID-19 and died of it, and his death was treated with shock and rage online.
For the most part, though, the Chinese let the government get on with what is seen as being its business. This includes letting it control practically every part of their lives, as long as they feel they’re being looked after and their interests protected—among other things, a high level of personal safety and access to the benefits of China’s economic growth. To a people accustomed to having the state take care of things like this, the way the pandemic has shaken out at home is very much par for the course.
The Chinese are used to trading control for security. In Hong Kong, where another way of doing things is part of the collective memory, this is legitimate grounds for protest. But on the mainland, among the mainstream, there is widespread acceptance. And the contract has worked thus far, in this particular situation.
Did Beijing try to hush it up to begin with? Of course. Are the numbers still fudged? Almost definitely. But it is also true that, once it set itself to it, the regime has done a good job of countering the pandemic. That’s just a fact.
Meanwhile, with a galloping death rate, disputes over which figures are more current and valid, unmet promises over testing, and the unedifying spectacle of uncomfortable ministers lying on TV to protect an advisor who clearly broke the law, the country that gave the world parliamentary democracy has become a global laughingstock. The United Kingdom has also been a source in a recent spike in imported COVID-19 cases; the citizens of China and Hong Kong agree on this, if nothing else.
An expatriate friend’s imminent return to the U.K. was just made public to my erstwhile circle in Beijing. Even if it hasn’t been stated to his face, I know others around him are all thinking the same thing.
“Why?”


foreignpolicy--2020-06-01--Protests Spread Across the United States

Here is today ’ s Foreign Policy brief : The United States erupts in protest over police killings , U.S. President Donald Trump to postpone G-7 meeting , and North Korea to issue bonds to fund ailing economy .
We welcome your feedback at morningbrief @ foreignpolicy.com .
Today , the United States is waking up to a situation that was nearly unthinkable just a week ago .
The pain and social isolation brought about by the U.S. coronavirus epidemic has now taken a back seat to mass demonstrations that have paralyzed the country—including one outside the White House on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump fleeing to an underground bunker .
Protests that originated in Minneapolis after a white police officer killed George Floyd , a 46-year-old black man , quickly spread around the country to at least 140 cities .
Much has been made of the damage to property , both in Minneapolis—where a police station was set on fire—and elsewhere , but what stands out about these protests is the level of violence exhibited by police in attempting to subdue the protesters .
Videos posted on social media and broadcast on television have shown multiple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firing less-lethal weaponry indiscriminately—once at residents standing on their own front porch .
In both New York and Los Angeles , police cars could be seen ramming protesters .
The view from Washington .
Foreign Policy witnessed the protests on Lafayette Square on Saturday night ( about 100 yards from the White House—the closest any non-police officer could get ) .
The vast majority of the approximately 1,000 people in attendance were there peacefully , wearing masks , and chanting slogans .
I saw two fireworks and a few watter bottles hurled at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ personal protective gear from head to toe and carrying riot shields , eventually used tear gas and flash-bang grenades to disperse the crowd .
Where is the president ?
As protesters first gathered at the White House on Friday , U.S. President Donald Trump was moved to a secure bunker—last used on 9/11—by the Secret Service , according to the New York Times .
After spending the weekend criticizing protesters and Democratic party leaders on Twitter , Trump tweeted “ LAW & ORDER !
” and “ FAKE NEWS !
” to finish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Apart from the public anger unleashed by Floyd ’ s killing , there are plenty of other reasons for people to stay out on the streets : schools and universities are closed for the summer , a record number of Americans are unemployed , and all sporting and entertainment distractions are currently on hold .
The world reacts .
Demonstrations held in solidarity with the protests in the United States have so far taken place in the United Kingdom , Germany , and New Zealand .
U.S. adversaries , too , have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knife at a U.S. weak point .
A commentary in the state-backed China Daily alluding to U.S. actions on Hong Kong argued “ U.S .
politicians should do their jobs and help solve problems in the U.S. , instead of trying to create new problems and troubles in other countries.
” Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif posted a marked-up version of a statement from U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo chiding Iran over its 2018 protests , replacing the word “ Iran ” with “ U.S. ” G-7 to become G-11 ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ summit in June to next September , and has suggested the group be expanded to include India , Russia , South Korea , and Australia .
Trump had pushed for a June summit as a signal of “ normalization , ” however the decision to postpone the summit came a day after German Chancellor Angela Merkel declined the invitation , citing the ongoing coronavirus pandemic .
Russia has not been considered a member of the smaller group of leading nations ( then the G-8 ) since its invasion of Crimea in 2014 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Advisor Robert O ’ Brien put the postponement down to timing .
“ The President ’ s thinking was , there are a couple of countries that have handled the COVID crisis incredibly well , and it would be useful to have them participate in the G-7 so we can learn some lessons there , ” O ’ Brien said .
“ Logistically to pull something like that off , I think it will take a little bit more time , so we ’ re probably looking at the September time frame.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man .
Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz has apologized after Israeli security forces shot and killed Iyad Halak , a Palestinian who was autistic , in Jerusalem ’ s Old City on Saturday .
“ We are really sorry about the incident in which Iyad Halak was shot to death and we share in the family ’ s grief , ” Gantz said .
Israeli police said they opened fire after they saw a suspect with a “ suspicious object ” who didn ’ t stop when ordered to .
Police later confirmed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials denounced the killing as a “ war crime ” and an “ execution.
” The killing led to demonstrations over the weekend in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv , with some participants holding signs tying the killing to that of George Floyd in the United States .
More Taliban prisoners released .
The Afghan government released a further 700 Taliban prisoners over the weekend as it comes closer to reaching the release quota mandated by the February U.S.-Taliban peace agreement .
The Taliban said it had released 73 imprisoned members of the Afghan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ total released government prisoners to 420 .
Under the peace deal , the Afghan government is to release 5,000 Taliban prisoners , and the Taliban is to release 1,000 government prisoners as confidence building measures ahead of any further talks .
To date , the Afghan government has released approximately 2,700 captives , and the Taliban has released 420 .
Global coronavirus cases continue to rise .
The number of coronavirus cases recorded globally now stands at roughly 6.2 million , an increase of 700,000 over the week before .
The highest growth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Zimbabwe—according to Our World In Data .
North Korea ’ s economy .
North Korea plans to issue bonds for the first time since 2003 in an effort to bolster its budget amid a global economic downturn .
The news was first reported by Seoul-based news site Daily NK .
The bond issuance is expected to be taken up by North Korea ’ s wealthy elites and is aimed at covering up to 60 percent of the country ’ s budget .
Rising food prices .
U.S. food prices are likely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disrupted supply chain due to the coronavirus pandemic continue to be felt .
The U.S. Labor Department reported that the 4.6 percent rise in food prices in the month of April was the largest single jump in 46 years .
The biggest increase in price was felt in meat , fish , and eggs , as they went up 4.3 percent .
The Labor Department also registered the highest ever monthly rise in prices for cereal and bakery products , likely driven by a surge in home baking .
The final scheduled round @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the European Union will begin this week , with worries mounting that the two sides are no closer to a deal than when they started .
On Friday , June 5 , the U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics released its monthly update on the U.S. employment situation , covering the month of May .
Figures for April showed the United States lost over 20 million jobs that month , as a near global lockdown brought economic activity to a halt .
The European Union will report its unemployment figures for the month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States is quite unique among major democracies in its custom of giving coveted ambassadorships to the highest bidder .
Although it ’ s a bipartisan practice , the Trump administration has set a new record in the proportion of ambassadorial roles going to donors over career diplomats .
Roughly 44 percent of Trump administration ambassadors have come from political appointments , versus the historical average of 30 percent , according to the American Foreign Service Association .
Under U.S. law , career diplomats must outnumber political appointees in ambassadorial roles .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of ambassador nominations this year going to political appointees .
For more from FP , visit foreignpolicy.com , subscribe here , or sign up for our other newsletters .
Send your tips , comments , questions , or corrections to morningbrief @ foreignpolicy.com .

Here is today’s Foreign Policy brief: The United States erupts in protest over police killings, U.S. President Donald Trump will postpone the G-7 meeting , and North Korea will issue bonds to fund its ailing economy.
Here is today’s Foreign Policy brief: The United States erupts in protest over police killings, U.S. President Donald Trump will postpone the G-7 meeting, and North Korea will issue bonds to fund its ailing economy.
If you would like to receive Morning Brief in your inbox every weekday, please sign up here.
Protesters and Police Square Off Across the U.S.
Today, the United States is waking up to a situation that was nearly unthinkable just a week ago. The pain and social isolation brought about by the U.S. coronavirus epidemic has now taken a back seat to mass demonstrations that have paralyzed the country—including one outside the White House on Sunday night that reportedly sent President Donald Trump fleeing to an underground bunker.
Protests that originated in Minneapolis after a white police officer killed George Floyd, a 46-year-old black man, quickly spread around the country to at least 140 cities. Much has been made of the damage to property, both in Minneapolis—where a police station was set on fire—and elsewhere, but what stands out about these protests is the level of violence exhibited by police in attempting to subdue the protesters.
Videos posted on social media and broadcast on television have shown multiple instances of officers attacking unarmed demonstrators and firing less-lethal weaponry indiscriminately—once at residents standing on their own front porch. In both New York and Los Angeles, police cars could be seen ramming protesters.
The view from Washington. Foreign Policy witnessed the protests on Lafayette Square on Saturday night (about 100 yards from the White House—the closest any non-police officer could get). The vast majority of the approximately 1,000 people in attendance were there peacefully, wearing masks, and chanting slogans. I saw two fireworks and a few watter bottles hurled at officers. The police, clad in personal protective gear from head to toe and carrying riot shields, eventually used tear gas and flash-bang grenades to disperse the crowd.
Where is the president? As protesters first gathered at the White House on Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump was moved to a secure bunker—last used on 9/11—by the Secret Service, according to the New York Times. After spending the weekend criticizing protesters and Democratic party leaders on Twitter, Trump tweeted “LAW & ORDER!” and “FAKE NEWS!” to finish out his Sunday night.
What next? Apart from the public anger unleashed by Floyd’s killing, there are plenty of other reasons for people to stay out on the streets: schools and universities are closed for the summer, a record number of Americans are unemployed, and all sporting and entertainment distractions are currently on hold.
The world reacts. Demonstrations held in solidarity with the protests in the United States have so far taken place in the United Kingdom, Germany, and New Zealand.
U.S. adversaries, too, have not missed the opportunity to twist the knife at a U.S. weak point. A commentary in the state-backed China Daily alluding to U.S. actions on Hong Kong argued “U.S. politicians should do their jobs and help solve problems in the U.S., instead of trying to create new problems and troubles in other countries.”
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif posted a marked-up version of a statement from U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo chiding Iran over its 2018 protests, replacing the word “Iran” with “U.S.”
What We’re Following Today
G-7 to become G-11? President Trump is postponing a prospective G-7 summit in June to next September, and has suggested the group be expanded to include India, Russia, South Korea, and Australia. Trump had pushed for a June summit as a signal of “normalization,” however the decision to postpone the summit came a day after German Chancellor Angela Merkel declined the invitation, citing the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. Russia has not been considered a member of the smaller group of leading nations (then the G-8) since its invasion of Crimea in 2014.
Speaking on Sunday, U.S. National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien put the postponement down to timing. “The President’s thinking was, there are a couple of countries that have handled the COVID crisis incredibly well, and it would be useful to have them participate in the G-7 so we can learn some lessons there,” O’Brien said. “Logistically to pull something like that off, I think it will take a little bit more time, so we’re probably looking at the September time frame.”
Gantz apologizes for the killing of Palestinian man. Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz has apologized after Israeli security forces shot and killed Iyad Halak, a Palestinian who was autistic, in Jerusalem’s Old City on Saturday. “We are really sorry about the incident in which Iyad Halak was shot to death and we share in the family’s grief,” Gantz said.
Israeli police said they opened fire after they saw a suspect with a “suspicious object” who didn’t stop when ordered to. Police later confirmed that they found no weapon. Palestinian officials denounced the killing as a “war crime” and an “execution.” The killing led to demonstrations over the weekend in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, with some participants holding signs tying the killing to that of George Floyd in the United States.
More Taliban prisoners released. The Afghan government released a further 700 Taliban prisoners over the weekend as it comes closer to reaching the release quota mandated by the February U.S.-Taliban peace agreement. The Taliban said it had released 73 imprisoned members of the Afghan security forces on Saturday, bringing the total released government prisoners to 420. Under the peace deal, the Afghan government is to release 5,000 Taliban prisoners, and the Taliban is to release 1,000 government prisoners as confidence building measures ahead of any further talks. To date, the Afghan government has released approximately 2,700 captives, and the Taliban has released 420.
Global coronavirus cases continue to rise. The number of coronavirus cases recorded globally now stands at roughly 6.2 million, an increase of 700,000 over the week before. The highest growth rates are currently in low-income countries—including Malawi and Zimbabwe—according to Our World In Data.
Keep an Eye On
North Korea’s economy. North Korea plans to issue bonds for the first time since 2003 in an effort to bolster its budget amid a global economic downturn. The news was first reported by Seoul-based news site Daily NK. The bond issuance is expected to be taken up by North Korea’s wealthy elites and is aimed at covering up to 60 percent of the country’s budget.
Rising food prices. U.S. food prices are likely to remain high as the effects of a disrupted supply chain due to the coronavirus pandemic continue to be felt. The U.S. Labor Department reported that the 4.6 percent rise in food prices in the month of April was the largest single jump in 46 years. The biggest increase in price was felt in meat, fish, and eggs, as they went up 4.3 percent. The Labor Department also registered the highest ever monthly rise in prices for cereal and bakery products, likely driven by a surge in home baking.
The World This Week
The final scheduled round of trade talks between the United Kingdom and the European Union will begin this week, with worries mounting that the two sides are no closer to a deal than when they started.
On Friday, June 5, the U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics released its monthly update on the U.S. employment situation, covering the month of May. Figures for April showed the United States lost over 20 million jobs that month, as a near global lockdown brought economic activity to a halt. The European Union will report its unemployment figures for the month of April on June 3.
Odds and Ends
The United States is quite unique among major democracies in its custom of giving coveted ambassadorships to the highest bidder. Although it’s a bipartisan practice, the Trump administration has set a new record in the proportion of ambassadorial roles going to donors over career diplomats. Roughly 44 percent of Trump administration ambassadors have come from political appointments, versus the historical average of 30 percent, according to the American Foreign Service Association. Under U.S. law, career diplomats must outnumber political appointees in ambassadorial roles. That balance is under threat, with 57 percent of ambassador nominations this year going to political appointees.
That’s it for today.
For more from FP, visit foreignpolicy.com, subscribe here, or sign up for our other newsletters. Send your tips, comments, questions, or corrections to morningbrief@foreignpolicy.com.