foreignpolicy--2020-10-30--France Reels from Second Terror Attack in a Month

France Reels from Second Terror Attack in a Month Here is today ’ s Foreign Policy brief : Authorities in France investigate knife attacker who killed three people in Nice , the U.S. presidential race enters its final turn , and Polish protesters march on Warsaw .
We welcome your feedback at morningbrief @ foreignpolicy.com .
French President Emmanuel Macron chairs a meeting of his security cabinet today in the wake of a deadly attack in Nice yesterday , in which three people were killed in the Notre-Dame basilica by a knife-wielding assailant .
The attacker is believed to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who had entered France illegally after being refused entry into Italy .
Aouissaoui , who was captured alive by French authorities , is being investigated for links to terrorist groups .
In a speech to the nation , French President Emmanuel Macron , described the attack as an act of terrorism .
Carrying on from the rhetoric he used following the killing of schoolteacher Samuel Paty by an 18-year-old Chechen man , Macron described France as being in an existential battle .
“ It is France that is under attack , ” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been under fire from leaders of many Muslim-majority countries in recent weeks , after a number of remarks that have been perceived as attacks on the Muslim faith , especially his declaration that “ Islam is a religion that is experiencing a crisis across the world.
” Protests have taken place across the world including in Mali , Iran , and Bangladesh .
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has used the opportunity to burnish his credentials as a defender of Muslims as well as a chance to ridicule Macron .
A far-right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ backfired internationally , Macron ’ s culture war rhetoric may be for an audience closer to home .
A recent poll of voting intentions in France ’ s 2022 first-round presidential election shows Macron neck and neck with far-right candidate Marine Le Pen , with both receiving the support of 25 percent of voters .
As H.A .
Hellyer argued recently in FP , much of Macron ’ s harsh rhetoric regarding Islam can be seen as an overture to Le Pen ’ s supporters .
Although Macron faces a far-right challenge , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the French way of life is under threat now seems to be shared across French society .
A poll taken after the attack on Samuel Paty found that 87 percent of respondents said that France ’ s secularist society was under threat .
U.S. election enters final phase .
As we enter the final weekend of the 2020 campaign , U.S. President Donald Trump will begin his day with a rally in Michigan and end it with a rally in Minnesota , and still have time for one in Wisconsin in between .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Arizona , while his rival running mate Sen. Kamala Harris visits Texas .
Not to be outdone by Trump , Democratic challenger Joe Biden will also visit three states today with stops in Iowa , Wisconsin , and Minnesota .
Throughout the campaign , FP has provided reporting from across the country , looking at smaller communities of voters whose connections span the globe , from Indian Americans in Texas , Latinos in Georgia , Irish Americans in Pennsylvania , and Colombian Americans in Florida .
Catch up on the entirety of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wants Turkey in Nagorno-Karabakh talks .
Russian President Vladimir Putin has called for Turkey to be included in future peace talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan in resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict .
Turkey supports Azerbaijan in the conflict and has been vocal about being left out of talks that have so far been led by the OSCE Minsk Group led by France , Russia , and the United States .
Speaking to a Russian investment forum on Thursday , Putin said that Turkey “ and a host of European states ” should be included @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue .
Protesters march on Warsaw .
Thousands are expected to descend on Poland ’ s capital Warsaw today after a week of constant protests over a constitutional court decision to further restrict abortion rights in the country .
The protests come as President Andrzej Duda appeared to soften the official line on abortions , saying they should be possible in the case of fetuses with deadly defects .
“ It can not be that the law requires this kind of heroism from a woman , ” Duda told a local radio station @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Coast and Moldova .
Months of anxiety come to a head in Ivory Coast this weekend , as Alassane Ouattara runs for a third term as president of the West African nation .
Ouattara ’ s decision to run again—after his anointed successor , Amadou Gon Coulibaly , died earlier this year—has caused an outcry among opposition leaders , who say he should not be legally allowed to stand in the election .
Writing in Foreign Policy , Jessica Moody outlines the stakes—and controversies—surrounding Saturday ’ s election .
President Igor Dodon is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goes to the polls in the first of two rounds of voting in the Moldovan presidential election .
The pro-Russian Dodon goes up against the pro-European Maia Sandu in a rerun of the 2016 election , when the outcome was decided by roughly 70,000 votes .
Moldovans living in Russia will be able to vote , too—and there will be more than twice as many polling stations available to them compared to 2016 , which should give Dodon a further edge .
Tanzania election aftermath .
The U.S. Embassy in Tanzania warned of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and intimidation ” in the country ’ s presidential and legislative election , held last Wednesday .
Preliminary results show incumbent John Magufuli in the lead , numbers his challenger Tundu Lissu does not believe are legitimate .
“ The results should not be recognized by any country in the world , ” Lissu told Reuters .
Newly locked down France and Germany should look to Finland for advice on how to balance newly imposed restrictions with overall life satisfaction .
According to a recent Eurobarometer survey , Finland weathered lockdown restrictions better @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 73 percent of Finns saying they were very or fairly easy to live under ; 23 percent of Finns said that the restrictions even improved their daily lives .
Along with Finland , the Netherlands , Estonia , and Latvia top the list of European countries which tolerated their lockdowns best .
At the bottom of the list was Portugal , where 62 percent found it difficult or very difficult to adapt to life under lockdown .
For more from FP , visit foreignpolicy.com , subscribe here , or sign up for our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comments , questions , or corrections to morningbrief @ foreignpolicy.com .

Here is today’s Foreign Policy brief: Authorities in France investigate knife attacker who killed three people in Nice, the U.S. presidential race enters its final turn, and Polish protesters march on Warsaw.
Here is today’s Foreign Policy brief: Authorities in France investigate knife attacker who killed three people in Nice, the U.S. presidential race enters its final turn, and Polish protesters march on Warsaw.
If you would like to receive Morning Brief in your inbox every weekday, please sign up here.
‘It Is France That Is Under Attack’
French President Emmanuel Macron chairs a meeting of his security cabinet today in the wake of a deadly attack in Nice yesterday, in which three people were killed in the Notre-Dame basilica by a knife-wielding assailant.
The attacker is believed to be Brahim Aouissaoui, a 21-year-old Tunisian migrant who had entered France illegally after being refused entry into Italy. Aouissaoui, who was captured alive by French authorities, is being investigated for links to terrorist groups.
In a speech to the nation, French President Emmanuel Macron, described the attack as an act of terrorism. Carrying on from the rhetoric he used following the killing of schoolteacher Samuel Paty by an 18-year-old Chechen man, Macron described France as being in an existential battle. “It is France that is under attack,” the president said.
Rising anger. Macron has been under fire from leaders of many Muslim-majority countries in recent weeks, after a number of remarks that have been perceived as attacks on the Muslim faith, especially his declaration that “Islam is a religion that is experiencing a crisis across the world.” Protests have taken place across the world including in Mali, Iran, and Bangladesh. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has used the opportunity to burnish his credentials as a defender of Muslims as well as a chance to ridicule Macron.
A far-right challenge. Although it seems to have backfired internationally, Macron’s culture war rhetoric may be for an audience closer to home. A recent poll of voting intentions in France’s 2022 first-round presidential election shows Macron neck and neck with far-right candidate Marine Le Pen, with both receiving the support of 25 percent of voters. As H.A. Hellyer argued recently in FP, much of Macron’s harsh rhetoric regarding Islam can be seen as an overture to Le Pen’s supporters.
Although Macron faces a far-right challenge, after two gruesome attacks the perception that the French way of life is under threat now seems to be shared across French society. A poll taken after the attack on Samuel Paty found that 87 percent of respondents said that France’s secularist society was under threat.
What We’re Following Today
U.S. election enters final phase. As we enter the final weekend of the 2020 campaign, U.S. President Donald Trump will begin his day with a rally in Michigan and end it with a rally in Minnesota, and still have time for one in Wisconsin in between. Vice President Mike Pence headlines two rallies in Arizona, while his rival running mate Sen. Kamala Harris visits Texas. Not to be outdone by Trump, Democratic challenger Joe Biden will also visit three states today with stops in Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota.
Throughout the campaign, FP has provided reporting from across the country, looking at smaller communities of voters whose connections span the globe, from Indian Americans in Texas, Latinos in Georgia, Irish Americans in Pennsylvania, and Colombian Americans in Florida. Catch up on the entirety of our Election 2020 coverage here.
Putin wants Turkey in Nagorno-Karabakh talks. Russian President Vladimir Putin has called for Turkey to be included in future peace talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan in resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Turkey supports Azerbaijan in the conflict and has been vocal about being left out of talks that have so far been led by the OSCE Minsk Group led by France, Russia, and the United States. Speaking to a Russian investment forum on Thursday, Putin said that Turkey “and a host of European states” should be included in order to find consensus on the issue.
Protesters march on Warsaw. Thousands are expected to descend on Poland’s capital Warsaw today after a week of constant protests over a constitutional court decision to further restrict abortion rights in the country. The protests come as President Andrzej Duda appeared to soften the official line on abortions, saying they should be possible in the case of fetuses with deadly defects. “It cannot be that the law requires this kind of heroism from a woman,” Duda told a local radio station.
Keep an Eye On
The other upcoming elections: Ivory Coast and Moldova. Months of anxiety come to a head in Ivory Coast this weekend, as Alassane Ouattara runs for a third term as president of the West African nation. Ouattara’s decision to run again—after his anointed successor, Amadou Gon Coulibaly, died earlier this year—has caused an outcry among opposition leaders, who say he should not be legally allowed to stand in the election. Writing in Foreign Policy, Jessica Moody outlines the stakes—and controversies—surrounding Saturday’s election.
President Igor Dodon is seeking a second term when his country goes to the polls in the first of two rounds of voting in the Moldovan presidential election. The pro-Russian Dodon goes up against the pro-European Maia Sandu in a rerun of the 2016 election, when the outcome was decided by roughly 70,000 votes. Moldovans living in Russia will be able to vote, too—and there will be more than twice as many polling stations available to them compared to 2016, which should give Dodon a further edge.
Tanzania election aftermath. The U.S. Embassy in Tanzania warned of “credible allegations of significant election-related fraud and intimidation” in the country’s presidential and legislative election, held last Wednesday. Preliminary results show incumbent John Magufuli in the lead, numbers his challenger Tundu Lissu does not believe are legitimate. “The results should not be recognized by any country in the world,” Lissu told Reuters.
Odds and Ends Newly locked down France and Germany should look to Finland for advice on how to balance newly imposed restrictions with overall life satisfaction. According to a recent Eurobarometer survey, Finland weathered lockdown restrictions better than any other European nation, with 73 percent of Finns saying they were very or fairly easy to live under; 23 percent of Finns said that the restrictions even improved their daily lives. Along with Finland, the Netherlands, Estonia, and Latvia top the list of European countries which tolerated their lockdowns best. At the bottom of the list was Portugal, where 62 percent found it difficult or very difficult to adapt to life under lockdown.
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.


foreignpolicy--2020-10-30--Why Inclusion Is Important for U.S. Foreign Policy

Why Inclusion Is Important for U.S. Foreign Policy This year , the United States has faced the dual challenges of struggling with the coronavirus pandemic and grappling with public anger over a history of structural racism .
The tragic death of George Floyd in particular unleashed a national outcry over police brutality : A wide range of citizens put aside their own health concerns to take to the streets and make their voices heard .
Recently , COVID-19 ’ s disproportionate harm to marginalized communities around the world has underscored how a policy of inclusion is essential to global development @ @ @ @ @ @ @ squander precious human assets when women , minority groups , and marginalized populations ( including those disadvantaged by the legacies of colonization or slavery ) are denied access to education , health care , or capital .
The Trump administration has repeatedly declined the chance to denounce white supremacist groups and expressed outright disdain for women and minorities .
The administration inaugurated in January 2021 will have an important opportunity to elevate social inclusion and halt a backsliding into a society where tribalism and repression can grow .
Social inclusion is a phrase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ varying ways .
In foreign policy , inclusion should not be a simple numbers game but rather a fundamentally new approach that informs both personnel and policy choices .
While there have been attempts to prioritize inclusion in previous administrations , the United States must now go even further .
It is naive to assume that merely recognizing or articulating the existence of a problem represents progress .
It is only the first step .
While the image of the United States as a trailblazer—imperfect but improving—has been tainted in the last four @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in an era of true inclusion .
But how ?
Change could begin with having the right people in the room where it happens .
National security agencies should not only reflect diversity in their ranks but incorporate diverse voices into their decision-making .
That requires creating incentive structures that change the culture of U.S. agencies .
Performance assessments and promotions must reward personnel prioritizing international policies of social inclusion .
The content of Washington ’ s international policy should now put social inclusion at its center.Minority groups and people of color should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Washington must work to integrate the voices and needs of the global south in its policies .
Doing so would advance international cooperation to tackle urgent issues of peace , climate , shared prosperity , and justice with a voice for affected populations—thereby serving U.S. interests .
The next administration should use its clout at the United Nations and multilateral banks to elevate voices from marginalized groups in high-level decision-making processes , a step that would involve integrating civil society into multilateral institutions in a structural way .
Incorporating a role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more comprehensive breakthroughs and solutions .
For example , robust participation of civil society has advanced the Ottawa anti-landmine treaty , the marked reduction of HIV mortality since 2004 , and the Paris climate accord .
The United States ’ strength stems in part from its extraordinary diversity and pluralism : Integrating social inclusion into both its personnel and its policy can and should become a defining feature .
As such , the content of Washington ’ s international policy should now put social inclusion at its center .
In order to advance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States must develop policies that deliver for the needs of all people .
Countries where minority , tribal , or religious groups are targeted for violence often become unstable for decades : Sudan , Afghanistan , North Korea , and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are vivid examples .
The long-term security threats from repressive or unaccountable states include the risks of mass migration , violent extremism , and prolonged conflict , to name just a few .
An integral part of addressing these outcomes should be a U.S. foreign policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and views are sidelined .
For instance , when a distinct group is targeted for repression , violence , and death—such as China ’ s repression of the practice of Islam and its subjugation in forced labor and extrajudicial killing of Uighurs—Washington could respond with more than condemnatory rhetoric .
It could condition China ’ s access to U.S. technology on reversing its atrocities .
Additionally , the United States should return to the U.N. Human Rights Council and spearhead the formation of a commission of inquiry ( similar to the one shedding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ atrocities ) ; U.S. leadership can and should rally more concerted and deliberate geopolitical action ( from historical allies and Muslim-majority countries alike ) to condemn atrocities against Muslims .
The next White House should also commit decisively to ensuring that women comprise at least half of its top foreign-policy positions and work with U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres to go beyond his worthy successes in increasing the proportion of women in the top leadership of the U.N .
The culture at most multilateral organizations remains male-dominated and chauvinist , resulting in profound policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ struggle with allegations of sexual harassment , bullying , and abuse of power at its headquarters , while accusations of sexual misconduct by U.N. peacekeepers in places such as Haiti and the Central African Republic have become all too familiar .
Instead of merely threatening to withhold funds , the United States should build political coalitions in multilateral bodies to hold their leaders or field personnel accountable.The next White House should also commit decisively to ensuring that women comprise at least half of its top foreign-policy positions .
The United States also needs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its policy .
The abuse of women and girls is not only an egregious and largely neglected human rights violation ; it is also a threat to global economic growth and prosperity by sidelining half of the world economy ’ s human assets .
By not proactively addressing global gender inequality , the United States misses an opportunity to enhance global growth—and in the longer term prevent violence and insecurity .
Globally , the COVID-19 crisis has led to alarming spikes in gender-based violence and the loss of critical economic opportunities and health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the right time for the United States to craft a bold new agenda to advance gender equality globally .
The next U.S. administration—in its first 100 days—should launch a new National Security Council Task Force on Gender Equality .
It should also create a robust cross-sectoral fund dedicated to reversing the catastrophic effects that COVID-19 has unleashed on women and girls , including targeted funds to combat gender-based violence .
A U.S.-led global strategy to advance gender equality should work toward elevating gender equality in multilateral programming and targeting the structural inequalities and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If elected as U.S. president , this new strategy could leverage Democratic nominee Joe Biden ’ s long-standing commitment to advancing women ’ s rights and combating gender-based violence toward reinstating the moral standing of the United States on the global stage .
Inclusion in personnel and in policy content is inseparable—each reinforces the other .
Promoting social inclusion to address a wide array of the world ’ s most serious problems is a focused and fitting way for the United States to reenter a leadership role in the global community after @ @ @ @ @ @

This year, the United States has faced the dual challenges of struggling with the coronavirus pandemic and grappling with public anger over a history of structural racism. The tragic death of George Floyd in particular unleashed a national outcry over police brutality: A wide range of citizens put aside their own health concerns to take to the streets and make their voices heard.
This year, the United States has faced the dual challenges of struggling with the coronavirus pandemic and grappling with public anger over a history of structural racism. The tragic death of George Floyd in particular unleashed a national outcry over police brutality: A wide range of citizens put aside their own health concerns to take to the streets and make their voices heard.
Recently, COVID-19’s disproportionate harm to marginalized communities around the world has underscored how a policy of inclusion is essential to global development and national security. Economies and societies squander precious human assets when women, minority groups, and marginalized populations (including those disadvantaged by the legacies of colonization or slavery) are denied access to education, health care, or capital.
The Trump administration has repeatedly declined the chance to denounce white supremacist groups and expressed outright disdain for women and minorities. The administration inaugurated in January 2021 will have an important opportunity to elevate social inclusion and halt a backsliding into a society where tribalism and repression can grow.
Social inclusion is a phrase thrown around quite often and used in varying ways. In foreign policy, inclusion should not be a simple numbers game but rather a fundamentally new approach that informs both personnel and policy choices. While there have been attempts to prioritize inclusion in previous administrations, the United States must now go even further. It is naive to assume that merely recognizing or articulating the existence of a problem represents progress. It is only the first step. While the image of the United States as a trailblazer—imperfect but improving—has been tainted in the last four years, the next administration can usher in an era of true inclusion. But how?
Change could begin with having the right people in the room where it happens. National security agencies should not only reflect diversity in their ranks but incorporate diverse voices into their decision-making. That requires creating incentive structures that change the culture of U.S. agencies. Performance assessments and promotions must reward personnel prioritizing international policies of social inclusion.
The content of Washington’s international policy should now put social inclusion at its center.Minority groups and people of color should be represented in U.S. foreign policy leadership, and Washington must work to integrate the voices and needs of the global south in its policies. Doing so would advance international cooperation to tackle urgent issues of peace, climate, shared prosperity, and justice with a voice for affected populations—thereby serving U.S. interests. The next administration should use its clout at the United Nations and multilateral banks to elevate voices from marginalized groups in high-level decision-making processes, a step that would involve integrating civil society into multilateral institutions in a structural way. Incorporating a role for civic and affected populations would advance more comprehensive breakthroughs and solutions. For example, robust participation of civil society has advanced the Ottawa anti-landmine treaty, the marked reduction of HIV mortality since 2004, and the Paris climate accord.
The United States’ strength stems in part from its extraordinary diversity and pluralism: Integrating social inclusion into both its personnel and its policy can and should become a defining feature. As such, the content of Washington’s international policy should now put social inclusion at its center. In order to advance its national and global security, the United States must develop policies that deliver for the needs of all people.
Countries where minority, tribal, or religious groups are targeted for violence often become unstable for decades: Sudan, Afghanistan, North Korea, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are vivid examples. The long-term security threats from repressive or unaccountable states include the risks of mass migration, violent extremism, and prolonged conflict, to name just a few. An integral part of addressing these outcomes should be a U.S. foreign policy that defends and supports those whose freedoms and views are sidelined.
For instance, when a distinct group is targeted for repression, violence, and death—such as China’s repression of the practice of Islam and its subjugation in forced labor and extrajudicial killing of Uighurs—Washington could respond with more than condemnatory rhetoric. It could condition China’s access to U.S. technology on reversing its atrocities. Additionally, the United States should return to the U.N. Human Rights Council and spearhead the formation of a commission of inquiry (similar to the one shedding such light on North Korea’s atrocities); U.S. leadership can and should rally more concerted and deliberate geopolitical action (from historical allies and Muslim-majority countries alike) to condemn atrocities against Muslims.
The next White House should also commit decisively to ensuring that women comprise at least half of its top foreign-policy positions and work with U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres to go beyond his worthy successes in increasing the proportion of women in the top leadership of the U.N. The culture at most multilateral organizations remains male-dominated and chauvinist, resulting in profound policy gaps. The United Nations continues to struggle with allegations of sexual harassment, bullying, and abuse of power at its headquarters, while accusations of sexual misconduct by U.N. peacekeepers in places such as Haiti and the Central African Republic have become all too familiar. Instead of merely threatening to withhold funds, the United States should build political coalitions in multilateral bodies to hold their leaders or field personnel accountable.The next White House should also commit decisively to ensuring that women comprise at least half of its top foreign-policy positions.
The United States also needs to prioritize gender in the content of its policy. The abuse of women and girls is not only an egregious and largely neglected human rights violation; it is also a threat to global economic growth and prosperity by sidelining half of the world economy’s human assets. By not proactively addressing global gender inequality, the United States misses an opportunity to enhance global growth—and in the longer term prevent violence and insecurity.
Globally, the COVID-19 crisis has led to alarming spikes in gender-based violence and the loss of critical economic opportunities and health services for women. This is precisely the right time for the United States to craft a bold new agenda to advance gender equality globally. The next U.S. administration—in its first 100 days—should launch a new National Security Council Task Force on Gender Equality. It should also create a robust cross-sectoral fund dedicated to reversing the catastrophic effects that COVID-19 has unleashed on women and girls, including targeted funds to combat gender-based violence.
A U.S.-led global strategy to advance gender equality should work toward elevating gender equality in multilateral programming and targeting the structural inequalities and pervasive culture of harassment within multilateral institutions. If elected as U.S. president, this new strategy could leverage Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s long-standing commitment to advancing women’s rights and combating gender-based violence toward reinstating the moral standing of the United States on the global stage.
Inclusion in personnel and in policy content is inseparable—each reinforces the other. Promoting social inclusion to address a wide array of the world’s most serious problems is a focused and fitting way for the United States to reenter a leadership role in the global community after a period of abrasive unilateralism.


foreignpolicy--2020-10-30--Give All Immigrants the Vote

Give All Immigrants the Vote

Over the last few years , Democrats have become increasingly focused on expanding the franchise .
In the teeth of Republican opposition , they ’ ve tried to restore voting rights to former prisoners convicted of felonies in Virginia and Florida .
They passed a D.C. statehood bill in the House that would have finally allowed people in the district to vote for representatives and senators .
They ’ ve been trying to restore the Voting Rights Act to protect the rights of Black voters .
These efforts are necessary and admirable .
But they don ’ t include the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and effectively excluded from the franchise in the United States : immigrants .
As Republicans continue to target immigrants with demagoguery and discrimination , it ’ s past time to consider giving them the means to protect themselves .
And the best way to empower the marginalized in a democracy is to give them the vote—even before they become citizens .
The right to vote should be extended to every adult resident of the United States .
The American Revolution was driven by the recognition that taxation without representation is tyranny .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had power over them with no accountability would inevitably become abusive .
There are about 25 million immigrants who are not yet citizens , and often have no path to become such , in the United States , including permanent legal immigrants , temporary legal immigrants , and undocumented people .
That ’ s more than the population of Florida —and around 10 times the population of the American colonies when they went to war with Great Britain .
Those immigrants , including undocumented ones , pay taxes— undocumented immigrants alone paid $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But despite their contributions , they can ’ t vote on how those tax dollars are spent , nor on how they should be treated by the government they support .
And , just as the Founding Fathers predicted , a population that has no representation is subject to abuse .
This is not new , but the Trump administration has famously ramped up the cruelty and tyranny directed at immigrants , regardless of their legal status .
President Donald Trump ’ s travel ban on several majority-Muslim countries has caused enormous pain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States to join family and suddenly found themselves excluded for the duration .
Ramped-up Immigration and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) raids have terrorized entire communities .
The Trump administration still has not reunited many children and their parents who were separated at the Mexican border .
Votes for immigrants is a controversial idea , to say the least .
Politicians regularly portray immigrants as outsiders and interlopers , who take American jobs and undermine American values .
Trump has built his political career on claiming immigrants bring crime and disease to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as Ross Douthat worry that too much immigration or insufficient border enforcement can lead to waves of migration , prompting a natural backlash in which society finds itself “ lurching toward populism.
” Immigrants in these narratives are dangerous in of themselves , or dangerous because their mere presence , as an illegitimate presence , pushes decent Americans to fascism .
But it ’ s not immigrants who push Americans toward fascism .
It ’ s the demonization of immigrants and the denial of rights to immigrants that allow authoritarianism and bigotry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do not protect people from any and all government abuses .
Women can vote , and that has not stopped the Trump administration from trying to roll back their rights to reproductive health care .
But there are around 3 million non-naturalized immigrants in Texas , around 11 percent of the population .
If they could vote , the current close presidential race in Texas might not be close at all .
With his reelection at stake , perhaps Trump would have thought twice about creating concentration camps for immigrants on the border @ @ @ @ @ @ @ harm them with impunity and without fear of electoral consequences .
But it threatens everyone else ’ s freedom and safety as well .
Demagogues can scapegoat immigrants to increase support for authoritarian measures and government power grabs .
ICE has repeatedly targeted U.S. citizens for arrest and deportation .
It has also tracked anti-Trump protesters and journalists who cover immigration ; hatred of immigrants creates an opening for government to restrict free speech .
Trump ’ s administration has used his promised anti-immigration border wall to justify eminent domain land grabs at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , disenfranchising immigrants makes it easier for anti-immigrant Republicans like Trump to win election , at which point they can target other marginalized groups , attack the press , and undermine everyone ’ s voting rights .
Votes for immigrants may seem like an unprecedented expansion of the franchise .
But many countries have already granted voting rights to noncitizens , especially in local elections .
Immigrants with five years of legal residence have voted in local elections in Belgium since 2006 , and a recent bill may extend that right to regional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote in local elections in Colombia , Bolivia , and New Zealand , among other countries .
Commonwealth citizens ( who make up 2.4 billion people worldwide ) legally resident in the United Kingdom can vote in all elections .
There is also a history of noncitizen voting in the United States itself .
The scholars Ron Hayduk and Michele Wucker write that noncitizen residents voted in local , state , and/or federal elections in 22 states and federal territories between 1776 and 1926 , until growing xenophobia put an end to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ smaller localities today .
A number of cities in Maryland allow both green card holders and undocumented people to vote in local elections .
In 2017 , College Park became the largest city in the country to allow immigrants to vote .
A handful of jurisdictions in the country allow noncitizen residents to vote in school board elections as well—a practice that has been found to increase student achievement .
It shouldn ’ t be a surprise that schools benefit when all parents can participate in the community , just as the nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Whether you ’ re talking about a school , a city , or a nation , government works best when you ’ re invested in your neighbors ’ welfare and they ’ re invested in yours .
A society in which some people are more equal than others—in which you have the right to determine your neighbors ’ fate without any input from them—is going to be an unequal society , sliding inevitably toward cruelty , intolerance , and authoritarianism .
Votes for noncitizen immigrants , including undocumented ones , may seem like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worth discussing .
But people scoffed at votes for Black people and women not so long ago .
At a time when one political party is increasingly resting its identity on xenophobia and hate , it ’ s worth offering another vision .
The country will be safer , more equal , and more just when everyone who lives under its government can vote .

Over the last few years, Democrats have become increasingly focused on expanding the franchise. In the teeth of Republican opposition, they’ve tried to restore voting rights to former prisoners convicted of felonies in Virginia and Florida . They passed a D.C. statehood bill in the House that would have finally allowed people in the district to vote for representatives and senators. They’ve been trying to restore the Voting Rights Act to protect the rights of Black voters.
Over the last few years, Democrats have become increasingly focused on expanding the franchise. In the teeth of Republican opposition, they’ve tried to restore voting rights to former prisoners convicted of felonies in Virginia and Florida. They passed a D.C. statehood bill in the House that would have finally allowed people in the district to vote for representatives and senators. They’ve been trying to restore the Voting Rights Act to protect the rights of Black voters.
These efforts are necessary and admirable. But they don’t include the group that has arguably been most sweepingly and effectively excluded from the franchise in the United States: immigrants. As Republicans continue to target immigrants with demagoguery and discrimination, it’s past time to consider giving them the means to protect themselves. And the best way to empower the marginalized in a democracy is to give them the vote—even before they become citizens. The right to vote should be extended to every adult resident of the United States.
The American Revolution was driven by the recognition that taxation without representation is tyranny. The American colonists believed that a government that had power over them with no accountability would inevitably become abusive.
There are about 25 million immigrants who are not yet citizens, and often have no path to become such, in the United States, including permanent legal immigrants, temporary legal immigrants, and undocumented people. That’s more than the population of Florida —and around 10 times the population of the American colonies when they went to war with Great Britain. Those immigrants, including undocumented ones, pay taxes— undocumented immigrants alone paid $11.6 billion in taxes in 2013. But despite their contributions, they can’t vote on how those tax dollars are spent, nor on how they should be treated by the government they support.
And, just as the Founding Fathers predicted, a population that has no representation is subject to abuse. This is not new, but the Trump administration has famously ramped up the cruelty and tyranny directed at immigrants, regardless of their legal status. President Donald Trump’s travel ban on several majority-Muslim countries has caused enormous pain to people who applied to enter the United States to join family and suddenly found themselves excluded for the duration. Ramped-up Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids have terrorized entire communities. The Trump administration still has not reunited many children and their parents who were separated at the Mexican border.
Votes for immigrants is a controversial idea, to say the least. Politicians regularly portray immigrants as outsiders and interlopers, who take American jobs and undermine American values. Trump has built his political career on claiming immigrants bring crime and disease to the United States. More intellectual conservatives such as Ross Douthat worry that too much immigration or insufficient border enforcement can lead to waves of migration, prompting a natural backlash in which society finds itself “lurching toward populism.” Immigrants in these narratives are dangerous in of themselves, or dangerous because their mere presence, as an illegitimate presence, pushes decent Americans to fascism.
But it’s not immigrants who push Americans toward fascism. It’s the demonization of immigrants and the denial of rights to immigrants that allow authoritarianism and bigotry to flourish.
Obviously, voting rights do not protect people from any and all government abuses. Women can vote, and that has not stopped the Trump administration from trying to roll back their rights to reproductive health care. But there are around 3 million non-naturalized immigrants in Texas, around 11 percent of the population. If they could vote, the current close presidential race in Texas might not be close at all. With his reelection at stake, perhaps Trump would have thought twice about creating concentration camps for immigrants on the border.
Disenfranchising immigrants makes it easy to harm them with impunity and without fear of electoral consequences. But it threatens everyone else’s freedom and safety as well. Demagogues can scapegoat immigrants to increase support for authoritarian measures and government power grabs. ICE has repeatedly targeted U.S. citizens for arrest and deportation. It has also tracked anti-Trump protesters and journalists who cover immigration; hatred of immigrants creates an opening for government to restrict free speech. Trump’s administration has used his promised anti-immigration border wall to justify eminent domain land grabs at the border. And, of course, disenfranchising immigrants makes it easier for anti-immigrant Republicans like Trump to win election, at which point they can target other marginalized groups, attack the press, and undermine everyone’s voting rights.
Votes for immigrants may seem like an unprecedented expansion of the franchise. But many countries have already granted voting rights to noncitizens, especially in local elections. Immigrants with five years of legal residence have voted in local elections in Belgium since 2006, and a recent bill may extend that right to regional elections. Qualified resident foreigners can also vote in local elections in Colombia, Bolivia, and New Zealand, among other countries. Commonwealth citizens (who make up 2.4 billion people worldwide) legally resident in the United Kingdom can vote in all elections.
There is also a history of noncitizen voting in the United States itself. The scholars Ron Hayduk and Michele Wucker write that noncitizen residents voted in local, state, and/or federal elections in 22 states and federal territories between 1776 and 1926, until growing xenophobia put an end to the practice.
Noncitizen voting continues in some smaller localities today. A number of cities in Maryland allow both green card holders and undocumented people to vote in local elections. In 2017, College Park became the largest city in the country to allow immigrants to vote. A handful of jurisdictions in the country allow noncitizen residents to vote in school board elections as well—a practice that has been found to increase student achievement.
It shouldn’t be a surprise that schools benefit when all parents can participate in the community, just as the nation benefits when its residents are empowered. Whether you’re talking about a school, a city, or a nation, government works best when you’re invested in your neighbors’ welfare and they’re invested in yours. A society in which some people are more equal than others—in which you have the right to determine your neighbors’ fate without any input from them—is going to be an unequal society, sliding inevitably toward cruelty, intolerance, and authoritarianism.
Votes for noncitizen immigrants, including undocumented ones, may seem like an impossible, impractical dream, not worth discussing. But people scoffed at votes for Black people and women not so long ago. At a time when one political party is increasingly resting its identity on xenophobia and hate, it’s worth offering another vision. The country will be safer, more equal, and more just when everyone who lives under its government can vote.


foreignpolicy--2020-10-30--America’s Cultural Institutions Are Quietly Fueled by Russian Corruption

Over the past four years , a number of post-Soviet oligarchs have made headlines for their direct involvement in U.S. politics .
By some counts , nearly a dozen oligarchs landed in the crosshairs of Special Counsel Robert Mueller ’ s investigation into Russia ’ s interference in the 2016 election , with several more coming under scrutiny during President Donald Trump ’ s recent impeachment saga .
These oligarchs ’ financial activities in the United States , however , are by no means limited to politics or connections to political interference campaigns .
Instead , they extend to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which has gone previously unreported .
A new database compiled by the Anti-Corruption Data Collective reveals that seven of these post-Soviet oligarchs connected to interference efforts have donated between $ 372 million and $ 435 million to more than 200 of the most prestigious non-profit institutions in the U.S. over the past two decades .
The list of recipients covers the gauntlet : from prestigious think tanks like the Brookings Institution and the Council on Foreign Relations , to world-renowned universities such as Harvard and the University of Southern California , to cultural @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Museum of Modern Art ( MOMA ) and the Kennedy Center in Washington D.C .
Although some of these donations have been previously reported , our research offers the most complete overview of the role of post-Soviet oligarchs in the largely opaque world of philanthropy .
To pull back the curtain , we pulled together information from private companies such as NOZA ( which aggregates data on donations to U.S.-based foundations , think tanks , universities , and other organizations ) as well as IRS 990 forms and annual reports over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no allegations of any illegality in any of the donations , and the authors are happy to share specific examples upon request . )
A few caveats : Because no comprehensive database of philanthropic donations exists in the United States , we can not identify every donation made by the oligarchs , particularly ones to smaller institutions that might not leave a paper trail .
Additionally , the publicly available documents we accessed often only capture the monetary range in which each donation fell , rather than its specific value .
Therefore , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ based on these ranges .
But taken together , the staggering donations we managed to compile , which come from either the oligarchs directly or via the companies or foundations they run , raise significant questions about how U.S. organizations scrutinize money they receive .
The gifts also highlight the urgent need for changes in the ways these institutions oversee such donations—and the ways the U.S. government oversees such institutions .
The most obvious question is : Why exactly do these oligarchs bankroll think tanks , universities , cultural centers , and religious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their cash in assets such as real estate , hedge funds , and anonymous shell companies , there ’ s no possibility of money laundering through philanthropic donations .
Rather , the gifts appear to follow two specific threads .
On the one hand , donating to institutions such as think tanks may be about establishing a potential toehold over policy decisions in Washington .
Indeed , such considerations have helped spark recent calls for greater transparency within American think tank funding , with many failing to disclose details about their substantial donations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department specifically called on think tanks to “ disclose prominently on their websites funding they receive from foreign governments , including state-owned or state-operated subsidiary entities.
” The second primary reasoning behind such donations relates to so-called reputation laundering .
Broadly speaking , reputation laundering refers to donors positioning themselves as philanthropists , obscuring links to prior business practices and relations with sanctioned oligarchs or kleptocratic regimes .
That is , oligarchs use these donations—and the willingness of institutions to accept the funds without any pushback—to soften and whitewash their own personal images @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national governments as well .
For instance , some of the gifts in the database appear to be in the pursuit of softening Russia ’ s image abroad .
Our analysis points to a glaring hole in the U.S. ’ s anti-kleptocracy efforts .
Much as hedge fund managers , shell company operators , and realtors face no legal requirements to check their clients ’ finances for potential signs of money laundering , so , too , are the institutions mentioned above—universities and think tanks , cultural institutes and foundations—perfectly free to receive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That is , unlike American banks , there are no due diligence requirements in the realm of charitable donations .
Of course , accepting such gifts doesn ’ t come without its own costs , for both the recipients and the broader public alike .
By not adequately doing their due diligence , charitable institutions can face blowback from laundering the image of foreign billionaires who , in some cases , have been directly involved in efforts to upend American democracy .
Recent spates of activism have caught universities in the crossfire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fuels .
Accepting millions of dollars in funds from suspicious figures could trigger similar scrutiny and backlash .
Such concerns are not just hypothetical .
In multiple cases , British universities have suffered significant reputational damage from taking money from post-Soviet oligarchs .
For instance , the University of Cambridge found itself embroiled in a financing scandal after a multimillion-pound gift from a foundation linked to Dmitry Firtash , a Ukrainian oligarch at the center of Trump ’ s impeachment ( and currently awaiting extradition to the United States ) .
Numerous news @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and after his 2014 arrest—with articles continuing to come out in the American press , given his role in the Trump impeachment saga .
Some in the broader public might welcome the generosity of oligarchs towards cultural and charitable institutions that desperately need the funding .
But in this case , the ends can not justify the means : Many oligarchs have unfairly exploited economic opportunities in their home countries only to pivot to a new and better life in the West .
If the United States is serious about promoting democratization and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blindly accept the proceeds of such looting , even if they find a home among institutions it values .
The opacity plaguing philanthropy also obscures how powerful elites can use charitable contributions to achieve political aims and push their own interests above the average voter .
Thankfully , there are ways to manage these risks .
More transparency is needed , ideally through a centralized , publicly accessible database with information on donors and donations .
A forthcoming paper from the National Endowment for Democracy regarding oligarchic funding for American and British universities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Reputation Laundering in the University Sector in U.S. and U.K. ” ) recommends a “ comprehensive , searchable list of all donations ( foreign and domestic ) over a modest threshold , ” as well as “ the identity of donor , amount and major stipulations , ” all of which should be a perfectly acceptable threshold to American universities—and should set a model for the think tanks , cultural centers , and foundations mentioned above .
But transparency isn ’ t a panacea .
To that end , these institutes and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regarding gift acceptance policy , including “ the ethical guidelines and core principles that all donations should conform to , ” as the NED paper mentions .
They should also create formal committees to review donations .
And when it comes to vetting these donors , there must be greater emphasis and effort at conducting due diligence .
Not only should all potential donors be vetted for the sources of their wealth , but extensive searches should be implemented for any and all negative news coverage .
Charitable institutions should consider accessing basic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) use to identify potential “ politically exposed persons ” ( PEPs ) , such as the PEP database offered by LexisNexis .
Given that these PEPs undergo enhanced scrutiny when trying to access the American financial system , there is no reason they shouldn ’ t face the same scrutiny when routing their cash to nonprofits .
After all , more research is also needed on the risks of unscrutinized donations originating from Chinese state entities , Gulf kleptocrats , or others .
U.S. institutions have hoovered up hundreds of millions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only be a matter of time before we figure out how much more money linked to suspect foreign sources has helped support these institutions , as well .

Over the past four years, a number of post-Soviet oligarchs have made headlines for their direct involvement in U.S. politics. By some counts, nearly a dozen oligarchs landed in the crosshairs of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, with several more coming under scrutiny during President Donald Trump’s recent impeachment saga.
Over the past four years, a number of post-Soviet oligarchs have made headlines for their direct involvement in U.S. politics. By some counts, nearly a dozen oligarchs landed in the crosshairs of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, with several more coming under scrutiny during President Donald Trump’s recent impeachment saga.
These oligarchs’ financial activities in the United States, however, are by no means limited to politics or connections to political interference campaigns. Instead, they extend to a range of philanthropic activities, much of which has gone previously unreported.
A new database compiled by the Anti-Corruption Data Collective reveals that seven of these post-Soviet oligarchs connected to interference efforts have donated between $372 million and $435 million to more than 200 of the most prestigious non-profit institutions in the U.S. over the past two decades. The list of recipients covers the gauntlet: from prestigious think tanks like the Brookings Institution and the Council on Foreign Relations, to world-renowned universities such as Harvard and the University of Southern California, to cultural icons such as the New York’s Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) and the Kennedy Center in Washington D.C.
Although some of these donations have been previously reported, our research offers the most complete overview of the role of post-Soviet oligarchs in the largely opaque world of philanthropy. To pull back the curtain, we pulled together information from private companies such as NOZA (which aggregates data on donations to U.S.-based foundations, think tanks, universities, and other organizations) as well as IRS 990 forms and annual reports over the past two decades. (There are no allegations of any illegality in any of the donations, and the authors are happy to share specific examples upon request.)
A few caveats: Because no comprehensive database of philanthropic donations exists in the United States, we cannot identify every donation made by the oligarchs, particularly ones to smaller institutions that might not leave a paper trail. Additionally, the publicly available documents we accessed often only capture the monetary range in which each donation fell, rather than its specific value. Therefore, some of the numbers cited are estimated based on these ranges.
But taken together, the staggering donations we managed to compile, which come from either the oligarchs directly or via the companies or foundations they run, raise significant questions about how U.S. organizations scrutinize money they receive. The gifts also highlight the urgent need for changes in the ways these institutions oversee such donations—and the ways the U.S. government oversees such institutions.
The most obvious question is: Why exactly do these oligarchs bankroll think tanks, universities, cultural centers, and religious groups? Unlike kleptocratic networks that stash their cash in assets such as real estate, hedge funds, and anonymous shell companies, there’s no possibility of money laundering through philanthropic donations.
Rather, the gifts appear to follow two specific threads. On the one hand, donating to institutions such as think tanks may be about establishing a potential toehold over policy decisions in Washington. Indeed, such considerations have helped spark recent calls for greater transparency within American think tank funding, with many failing to disclose details about their substantial donations received. This month, the State Department specifically called on think tanks to “disclose prominently on their websites funding they receive from foreign governments, including state-owned or state-operated subsidiary entities.”
The second primary reasoning behind such donations relates to so-called reputation laundering. Broadly speaking, reputation laundering refers to donors positioning themselves as philanthropists, obscuring links to prior business practices and relations with sanctioned oligarchs or kleptocratic regimes. That is, oligarchs use these donations—and the willingness of institutions to accept the funds without any pushback—to soften and whitewash their own personal images. Reputation laundering can also extend to national governments as well. For instance, some of the gifts in the database appear to be in the pursuit of softening Russia’s image abroad.
Our analysis points to a glaring hole in the U.S.’s anti-kleptocracy efforts. Much as hedge fund managers, shell company operators, and realtors face no legal requirements to check their clients’ finances for potential signs of money laundering, so, too, are the institutions mentioned above—universities and think tanks, cultural institutes and foundations—perfectly free to receive funds with few if any questions asked. That is, unlike American banks, there are no due diligence requirements in the realm of charitable donations.
Of course, accepting such gifts doesn’t come without its own costs, for both the recipients and the broader public alike. By not adequately doing their due diligence, charitable institutions can face blowback from laundering the image of foreign billionaires who, in some cases, have been directly involved in efforts to upend American democracy. Recent spates of activism have caught universities in the crossfire for investing in private prisons and fossil fuels. Accepting millions of dollars in funds from suspicious figures could trigger similar scrutiny and backlash.
Such concerns are not just hypothetical. In multiple cases, British universities have suffered significant reputational damage from taking money from post-Soviet oligarchs. For instance, the University of Cambridge found itself embroiled in a financing scandal after a multimillion-pound gift from a foundation linked to Dmitry Firtash, a Ukrainian oligarch at the center of Trump’s impeachment (and currently awaiting extradition to the United States). Numerous news articles linked Cambridge to Firtash both before and after his 2014 arrest—with articles continuing to come out in the American press, given his role in the Trump impeachment saga.
Some in the broader public might welcome the generosity of oligarchs towards cultural and charitable institutions that desperately need the funding. But in this case, the ends cannot justify the means: Many oligarchs have unfairly exploited economic opportunities in their home countries only to pivot to a new and better life in the West. If the United States is serious about promoting democratization and economic justice abroad, it cannot blindly accept the proceeds of such looting, even if they find a home among institutions it values. The opacity plaguing philanthropy also obscures how powerful elites can use charitable contributions to achieve political aims and push their own interests above the average voter.
Thankfully, there are ways to manage these risks. More transparency is needed, ideally through a centralized, publicly accessible database with information on donors and donations. A forthcoming paper from the National Endowment for Democracy regarding oligarchic funding for American and British universities (“Foreign Funding, Authoritarian Influence and Reputation Laundering in the University Sector in U.S. and U.K.”) recommends a “comprehensive, searchable list of all donations (foreign and domestic) over a modest threshold,” as well as “the identity of donor, amount and major stipulations,” all of which should be a perfectly acceptable threshold to American universities—and should set a model for the think tanks, cultural centers, and foundations mentioned above.
But transparency isn’t a panacea. To that end, these institutes and their governing bodies should provide greater details regarding gift acceptance policy, including “the ethical guidelines and core principles that all donations should conform to,” as the NED paper mentions. They should also create formal committees to review donations. And when it comes to vetting these donors, there must be greater emphasis and effort at conducting due diligence. Not only should all potential donors be vetted for the sources of their wealth, but extensive searches should be implemented for any and all negative news coverage. Charitable institutions should consider accessing basic systems other financial entities (like banks) use to identify potential “politically exposed persons” (PEPs), such as the PEP database offered by LexisNexis. Given that these PEPs undergo enhanced scrutiny when trying to access the American financial system, there is no reason they shouldn’t face the same scrutiny when routing their cash to nonprofits.
After all, more research is also needed on the risks of unscrutinized donations originating from Chinese state entities, Gulf kleptocrats, or others. U.S. institutions have hoovered up hundreds of millions of dollars in suspect post-Soviet funding—and it will only be a matter of time before we figure out how much more money linked to suspect foreign sources has helped support these institutions, as well.


foreignpolicy--2020-10-30--The UAE’s Invisible Palestinian Hand

The UAE’s Invisible Palestinian Hand

Mohammed Dahlan looked like a disgraced has-been in 2011 .
That ’ s when Palestinian police ransacked his Ramallah home and sent the former Fatah security chief , who had emerged as a rival to Palestinian Authority ( PA ) President Mahmoud Abbas , scrambling across the Jordan River to take refuge in Abu Dhabi .
Still in exile in the United Arab Emirates , Dahlan has finally found an opportunity for sweet revenge .
In a new role as confidant of Persian Gulf leaders and regional strategic mastermind , Dahlan is helping to shape the Arab peace deals with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ berserk .
Over the past nine years , Dahlan has forged an unusually close relationship with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan , the iconoclastic ruler of the United Arab Emirates who gave Dahlan sanctuary when he fled from Abbas .
Born in a Gaza refugee camp , Dahlan operates as an international envoy for his boundlessly wealthy patron , helping to arrange business and political deals from northern Africa to Eastern Europe .
When the sun sets , Dahlan says , the two men take midnight joyrides in a fast car @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they cruise Abu Dhabi ’ s desert highways .
Their apparent friendship has made Dahlan an influential—if invisible—hand in crafting the Abraham Accords , the U.S.-brokered normalization agreements Israel signed last month with the UAE and Bahrain .
He is considered a behind-the-scenes architect of the Emirati stance that offers effusive support for Palestinian statehood while squeezing the 84-year-old Abbas into embarrassing positions , such as when Abbas found himself forced to turn down two planeloads of COVID-19 medical supplies for predictable face-saving reasons—because the UAE delivered them through Tel Aviv ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rejection of the aid in August and his furious denunciation of the peace deals as a “ stab in the back ” has alienated old allies across the region , including Saudi Arabia , the biggest and wealthiest Gulf nation .
I met Dahlan on the night before the 2011 police raid on his home in Ramallah , and was introduced to his wily magic .
Bin Zayed “ would not do anything vis-à-vis the Palestinians without consulting with Dahlan , ” Bishara A. Bahbah , a Palestinian academic and Abbas critic who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s former Middle East envoy Jason Greenblatt , told me .
“ He is crucial.
” A UAE official declined to discuss Dahlan ’ s relationship with the prince .
After a rollercoaster career in Palestinian politics—once courted in Washington as a potential successor to former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat , later purged from the West Bank as a corrupt usurper—Dahlan has learned to play the long game to get to the top .
Born in the Khan Yunis refugee camp , an overpopulated , fetid patch of the tiny Gaza @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the young leaders of the 1987 Palestinian uprising against Israel known as the intifada , learning Hebrew during multiple terms in Israeli prisons .
Eventually deported , Dahlan gained Arafat ’ s trust as a key aide when the Palestine Liberation Organization was based in Tunis .
Upon their return in 1993 with the Oslo peace accords , Dahlan led the ruling secular Fatah party in Gaza and commanded security operations there , turning into Arafat ’ s ruthless enforcer against opposition from the Islamist movement Hamas .
But while climbing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Arafat ’ s death in 2004 , Dahlan continuously clashed with Abbas , who saw him as an ambitious competitor who needed to be kept on a leash .
Dahlan took the blame in 2007 for failing to extinguish the violent rebellion in which Hamas took over Gaza .
He and Abbas have been hurling charges of corruption at each other for years , inflaming their mutual antipathy .
In the end , Dahlan ’ s popularity on the street was no protection against a police and criminal justice system controlled by Abbas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In 2014 , a Palestinian court convicted Dahlan in absentia of “ defaming Abbas ” and sentenced him to two years in prison .
A year later , he was sentenced to an additional three years for embezzlement .
The 59-year-old Dahlan is the ultimate Palestinian comeback kid—often down but never out .
Once branded a terrorist by Israel , he went on to become a central player in negotiating the Oslo peace agreements .
One U.S. administration after another seems to fall in love with him , starting with former President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ followed by President George W. Bush and now Trump .
In Gaza , Dahlan is able to play all sides , having grown up on the same trash-filled streets as Hamas leader Yahia Sinwar .
While Dahlan was despised by the Islamists when he ruled the territory and humiliated their uncooperative leaders by rounding them up to shave their beards and eyebrows , he now works with them as part of the Palestinian political opposition to Abbas .
Dahlan , who communicates sparingly on Twitter , has not been seen since 2011 within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gaza , but his wife Jalila has built support for him through periodic charitable visits to Gaza , including the staging of mass weddings for brides and grooms too poor to afford one .
Though he remains a dark horse , he is among a handful of candidates who consistently show up in political polling to succeed Abbas , who is a heavy smoker with a history of cardiac trouble .
I met Dahlan on the night before the July 28 , 2011 police raid on his home in Ramallah , and was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he almost never gives interviews to Western journalists , I was invited as a Bloomberg News reporter to meet him , along with a Palestinian fellow reporter .
We waited for almost an hour before the retired warlord greeted us in his living room wearing a satiny smoking jacket and slippers .
Smiling tiredly under his jet-black hair , Dahlan said he would have to cancel the planned formal interview because the time wasn ’ t right , but he ’ d be happy to chat off the record .
Then he sat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ casually admired my iPhone , and leafed through the apps until he found the recorder , which he closed .
Dahlan was unsparing in his disparagement of Abbas and said he hoped to unseat him one day in elections .
Apologizing for the confusion , he bid us goodbye and promised a future opportunity to talk .
The next morning , I woke up to a radio report that Dahlan had disappeared as scores of Palestinian commandos were sweeping through his house .
They arrested 10 of his personal bodyguards and hauled away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the basement .
As a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council , Dahlan carried immunity from arrest , but by the next day he was reported to have left the West Bank and crossed into neighboring Jordan .
For the moment , Dahlan lives in the shadows , feathering his nest in Abu Dhabi with business connections and dipping his toes into the Abbas succession drama .
It took another four years before we picked up the conversation , this time for a Bloomberg interview at his sprawling new home in Abu @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Boss designer T-shirt and blue jeans , Dahlan offered heaping platters of dates and chocolate bonbons as we spoke in his marble-floored living room .
The airy villa within sight of Abu Dhabi ’ s soaring skyscrapers had become known as an international salon , where both Palestinian and Israeli politicians mingled .
By that time , Dahlan had become increasingly engaged in business interests , describing himself as a “ door opener ” for clients because of the broad range of international contacts he developed while circling the globe with Arafat .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on close terms with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi , who consulted with him on how to confront radical Islamic movements , and the leaders of Serbia and Montenegro .
After wealthy Emiratis rescued Air Serbia in 2013 and invested in a $ 3 billion real estate development on the Belgrade waterfront , Dahlan and his family were given Serbian citizenship .
This time , Dahlan spoke on the record but in riddles , employing the sort of rhetorical vagueness for which his mentor Arafat was famous .
Rather than declare that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Dahlan said only that he would seek reelection to parliament and that he would bring what he called a “ value-added ” component to the leadership team after Abbas leaves the stage .
Above all , he expressed gratitude for the life he was able to rebuild in Abu Dhabi and fondness for the moonlight drives with the crown prince .
Of course , when you ’ re dealing with Dahlan , who declined to be interviewed this time , it ’ s hard to take things at face value .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who have accused him of having poisoned Arafat .
He ’ s also been accused of helping Israel ’ s Mossad kill a Hamas operative in Dubai , and there are published rumors ( which Dahlan has denied ) that he was actually on board one of the flights bringing UAE aid to the Palestinians that was rejected by Abbas .
While he appears to be influential in advising the UAE on how to handle the Palestinian leadership , his own political star currently seems dim .
His faction within Fatah , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rejecting the Abraham Accords , according to spokesman Dimitri Diliani .
Any normalization with Israel must take place in the framework of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative , which was first introduced by Saudi Arabia and requires that Israel surrender all occupied territory before the conflict can be resolved , he said .
That may have something to do with the fact that many of Dahlan ’ s associates across the West Bank were arrested by Abbas ’ s forces last month following the UAE deal , and his faction ’ s need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hostile to Israel .
His and Bin Zayed ’ s portraits were burned and stepped on in street protests against the UAE ’ s normalization deal with Israel .
For the moment , Dahlan lives in the shadows , feathering his nest in Abu Dhabi with business connections , dipping a toe or two into the Abbas succession drama , and lending advice to his Emirati friends on dealing with the Palestinians .
Much depends on whether Trump wins another term or Democratic candidate Joe Biden comes to the White House with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dahlan—and for the region—is whether he can get past revenge games with his old rivals and play a creative role in bringing the woebegone Palestinians into a rapidly transforming Middle East .

Mohammed Dahlan looked like a disgraced has-been in 2011. That’s when Palestinian police ransacked his Ramallah home and sent the former Fatah security chief, who had emerged as a rival to Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas, scrambling across the Jordan River to take refuge in Abu Dhabi. Still in exile in the United Arab Emirates, Dahlan has finally found an opportunity for sweet revenge. In a new role as confidant of Persian Gulf leaders and regional strategic mastermind, Dahlan is helping to shape the Arab peace deals with Israel that are driving an aging Abbas berserk.
Mohammed Dahlan looked like a disgraced has-been in 2011. That’s when Palestinian police ransacked his Ramallah home and sent the former Fatah security chief, who had emerged as a rival to Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas, scrambling across the Jordan River to take refuge in Abu Dhabi. Still in exile in the United Arab Emirates, Dahlan has finally found an opportunity for sweet revenge. In a new role as confidant of Persian Gulf leaders and regional strategic mastermind, Dahlan is helping to shape the Arab peace deals with Israel that are driving an aging Abbas berserk.
Over the past nine years, Dahlan has forged an unusually close relationship with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the iconoclastic ruler of the United Arab Emirates who gave Dahlan sanctuary when he fled from Abbas. Born in a Gaza refugee camp, Dahlan operates as an international envoy for his boundlessly wealthy patron, helping to arrange business and political deals from northern Africa to Eastern Europe. When the sun sets, Dahlan says, the two men take midnight joyrides in a fast car, singing favorite Arab tunes together as they cruise Abu Dhabi’s desert highways.
Their apparent friendship has made Dahlan an influential—if invisible—hand in crafting the Abraham Accords, the U.S.-brokered normalization agreements Israel signed last month with the UAE and Bahrain. He is considered a behind-the-scenes architect of the Emirati stance that offers effusive support for Palestinian statehood while squeezing the 84-year-old Abbas into embarrassing positions, such as when Abbas found himself forced to turn down two planeloads of COVID-19 medical supplies for predictable face-saving reasons—because the UAE delivered them through Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion airport. Abbas’s rejection of the aid in August and his furious denunciation of the peace deals as a “stab in the back” has alienated old allies across the region, including Saudi Arabia, the biggest and wealthiest Gulf nation.
Bin Zayed “would not do anything vis-à-vis the Palestinians without consulting with Dahlan,” Bishara A. Bahbah, a Palestinian academic and Abbas critic who co-writes opinion columns with U.S. President Donald Trump’s former Middle East envoy Jason Greenblatt, told me. “He is crucial.” A UAE official declined to discuss Dahlan’s relationship with the prince.
I met Dahlan on the night before the 2011 police raid on his home in Ramallah, and was introduced to his wily magic.
After a rollercoaster career in Palestinian politics—once courted in Washington as a potential successor to former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, later purged from the West Bank as a corrupt usurper—Dahlan has learned to play the long game to get to the top. Born in the Khan Yunis refugee camp, an overpopulated, fetid patch of the tiny Gaza Strip, Dahlan came of age as one of the young leaders of the 1987 Palestinian uprising against Israel known as the intifada, learning Hebrew during multiple terms in Israeli prisons. Eventually deported, Dahlan gained Arafat’s trust as a key aide when the Palestine Liberation Organization was based in Tunis. Upon their return in 1993 with the Oslo peace accords, Dahlan led the ruling secular Fatah party in Gaza and commanded security operations there, turning into Arafat’s ruthless enforcer against opposition from the Islamist movement Hamas.
But while climbing the Palestinian Authority’s ranks after Arafat’s death in 2004, Dahlan continuously clashed with Abbas, who saw him as an ambitious competitor who needed to be kept on a leash. Dahlan took the blame in 2007 for failing to extinguish the violent rebellion in which Hamas took over Gaza. He and Abbas have been hurling charges of corruption at each other for years, inflaming their mutual antipathy. In the end, Dahlan’s popularity on the street was no protection against a police and criminal justice system controlled by Abbas, giving Dahlan little choice but exile. In 2014, a Palestinian court convicted Dahlan in absentia of “defaming Abbas” and sentenced him to two years in prison. A year later, he was sentenced to an additional three years for embezzlement.
The 59-year-old Dahlan is the ultimate Palestinian comeback kid—often down but never out. Once branded a terrorist by Israel, he went on to become a central player in negotiating the Oslo peace agreements. One U.S. administration after another seems to fall in love with him, starting with former President Bill Clinton’s White House, followed by President George W. Bush and now Trump. In Gaza, Dahlan is able to play all sides, having grown up on the same trash-filled streets as Hamas leader Yahia Sinwar. While Dahlan was despised by the Islamists when he ruled the territory and humiliated their uncooperative leaders by rounding them up to shave their beards and eyebrows, he now works with them as part of the Palestinian political opposition to Abbas. Dahlan, who communicates sparingly on Twitter, has not been seen since 2011 within the boundaries of the West Bank and Gaza, but his wife Jalila has built support for him through periodic charitable visits to Gaza, including the staging of mass weddings for brides and grooms too poor to afford one. Though he remains a dark horse, he is among a handful of candidates who consistently show up in political polling to succeed Abbas, who is a heavy smoker with a history of cardiac trouble.
I met Dahlan on the night before the July 28, 2011 police raid on his home in Ramallah, and was introduced to his wily magic. While he almost never gives interviews to Western journalists, I was invited as a Bloomberg News reporter to meet him, along with a Palestinian fellow reporter. We waited for almost an hour before the retired warlord greeted us in his living room wearing a satiny smoking jacket and slippers. Smiling tiredly under his jet-black hair, Dahlan said he would have to cancel the planned formal interview because the time wasn’t right, but he’d be happy to chat off the record. Then he sat down beside me on the sofa, casually admired my iPhone, and leafed through the apps until he found the recorder, which he closed. Dahlan was unsparing in his disparagement of Abbas and said he hoped to unseat him one day in elections. Apologizing for the confusion, he bid us goodbye and promised a future opportunity to talk.
For the moment, Dahlan lives in the shadows, feathering his nest in Abu Dhabi with business connections and dipping his toes into the Abbas succession drama.
The next morning, I woke up to a radio report that Dahlan had disappeared as scores of Palestinian commandos were sweeping through his house. They arrested 10 of his personal bodyguards and hauled away a large cache of weapons and ammunition from the basement. As a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, Dahlan carried immunity from arrest, but by the next day he was reported to have left the West Bank and crossed into neighboring Jordan.
It took another four years before we picked up the conversation, this time for a Bloomberg interview at his sprawling new home in Abu Dhabi. Looking trim in a black Boss designer T-shirt and blue jeans, Dahlan offered heaping platters of dates and chocolate bonbons as we spoke in his marble-floored living room. The airy villa within sight of Abu Dhabi’s soaring skyscrapers had become known as an international salon, where both Palestinian and Israeli politicians mingled. By that time, Dahlan had become increasingly engaged in business interests, describing himself as a “door opener” for clients because of the broad range of international contacts he developed while circling the globe with Arafat. Besides Bin Zayed, Dahlan was also on close terms with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who consulted with him on how to confront radical Islamic movements, and the leaders of Serbia and Montenegro. After wealthy Emiratis rescued Air Serbia in 2013 and invested in a $3 billion real estate development on the Belgrade waterfront, Dahlan and his family were given Serbian citizenship.
This time, Dahlan spoke on the record but in riddles, employing the sort of rhetorical vagueness for which his mentor Arafat was famous. Rather than declare that he would compete for the Palestinian Authority presidency, Dahlan said only that he would seek reelection to parliament and that he would bring what he called a “value-added” component to the leadership team after Abbas leaves the stage. Above all, he expressed gratitude for the life he was able to rebuild in Abu Dhabi and fondness for the moonlight drives with the crown prince.
Of course, when you’re dealing with Dahlan, who declined to be interviewed this time, it’s hard to take things at face value. He’s flypaper for conspiracy theorists, who have accused him of having poisoned Arafat. He’s also been accused of helping Israel’s Mossad kill a Hamas operative in Dubai, and there are published rumors (which Dahlan has denied) that he was actually on board one of the flights bringing UAE aid to the Palestinians that was rejected by Abbas. While he appears to be influential in advising the UAE on how to handle the Palestinian leadership, his own political star currently seems dim. His faction within Fatah, the Democratic Reform Current, issued a statement rejecting the Abraham Accords, according to spokesman Dimitri Diliani. Any normalization with Israel must take place in the framework of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, which was first introduced by Saudi Arabia and requires that Israel surrender all occupied territory before the conflict can be resolved, he said. That may have something to do with the fact that many of Dahlan’s associates across the West Bank were arrested by Abbas’s forces last month following the UAE deal, and his faction’s need to position itself within a Palestinian consensus hostile to Israel. His and Bin Zayed’s portraits were burned and stepped on in street protests against the UAE’s normalization deal with Israel.
For the moment, Dahlan lives in the shadows, feathering his nest in Abu Dhabi with business connections, dipping a toe or two into the Abbas succession drama, and lending advice to his Emirati friends on dealing with the Palestinians. Much depends on whether Trump wins another term or Democratic candidate Joe Biden comes to the White House with a more multilateral approach. The question for Dahlan—and for the region—is whether he can get past revenge games with his old rivals and play a creative role in bringing the woebegone Palestinians into a rapidly transforming Middle East.