foreignpolicy--2020-03-27--Cambodia’s Leaders Line Up a Coronavirus Scapegoat

The Khmer Times , an English-language daily , is not known for criticizing the Cambodian government .
Owned by a Malaysian businessman who has been linked to the long-ruling Cambodian People ’ s Party—and , rumor says , has financial ties to perennial Prime Minister Hun Sen ’ s children—the publication can be trusted to parrot the party line .
So that raises the question of who was behind its attack March 23 , when it ran a scathing critique of the Ministry of Health ’ s handling of Cambodia ’ s escalating COVID-19 crisis .
It began : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Health on several occasions and even suggested for the Minister to be replaced in the pending Cabinet Reshuffle.
” In a rush to heap scorn upon the health minister , it failed to even name him .
He is Mam Bunheng .
Remember that name , as he ’ s about to become the fall guy as the COVID-19 crisis worsens in Cambodia .
Cambodia sits right next to China , and travel between the two is frequent .
Until recently , however , COVID-19 cases hadn ’ t shown up—at least officially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a lack of testing .
On March 22 , there was a rise of 31 cases from the previous day .
So far , most cases are of foreign tourists , and no one knows quite how high the numbers might spike .
What ’ s certain though , is that Cambodia ’ s economy will slump this year .
Moody ’ s Investors Service , a subsidiary of the ratings agency , downgraded its gross domestic product growth forecast for Cambodia to 4.5 percent , which , except for a blip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis , would be the worst in two decades .
Further downgrades are likely given the global economic situation .
As the crisis worsens , Hun Sen is looking for scapegoats , while a pliant media is seemingly preparing the ground for the Ministry of Health to take the fall .
Phnom Penh is accustomed to throwing relatively junior officials under the bus after crises .
When a building collapsed in Sihanoukville last year , killing 28 people , Hun Sen fired Nhim Vanda as vice president of the National Committee for Disaster @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prime minister to appoint a close ally , former military commander Kun Kim , onto that committee .
[ Mapping the Coronavirus Outbreak : Get daily updates on the pandemic and learn how it ’ s affecting countries around the world . ]
Hun Sen , who was ever-present at press conferences and public events between January and early March , has been seen less frequently in recent days .
Social media rumors that he contracted COVID-19 last month got a boost when he said March 9 that he would be tested after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That was weeks ago , and he hasn ’ t yet revealed if he actually took the test , nor its results if he did .
Persistent chitchat that he traveled to Singapore for treatment—as he usually does when sick and unwilling to use his own country ’ s subpar medical services—are probably false .
More likely , he doesn ’ t want to be seen too publicly nowadays .
Hun Sen ’ s own complacent decisions and messaging since January have been left out of any criticisms , including the Khmer Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gaffes , including his claim that Cambodia was safe from the coronavirus because it couldn ’ t spread in the country ’ s sweltering heat .
Analysts say that from the beginning , his actions have been motivated more by maintaining good relations with China—now Cambodia ’ s closest ally and main financial benefactor—than protecting the health of the Cambodian people .
After the coronavirus outbreak was finally revealed by Chinese authorities in late January , Hun Sen followed Beijing ’ s request and refused to close off transport to and from China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first and only foreign leader to visit Beijing during the height of its outbreak .
There , he pledged his country ’ s undying loyalty to President Xi Jinping .
A week later , Hun Sen intervened to allow the Westerdam cruise ship to dock in Cambodia ’ s port of Sihanoukville on Feb. 13 , despite it being turned away by other countries .
This earned Hun Sen high praise from some in the international community for his humanitarian solidarity ( including a thank-you tweet from U.S. President Donald Trump ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggested passengers who tested negative for COVID-19 in Cambodia tested positive once out of the country .
Hun Sen doesn ’ t just need to protect himself but his allies—including the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces ’ generals and its de facto chief , Hun Manet , the prime minister ’ s eldest son and likely chosen successor , after Cambodia failed to cancel a joint military training exercise with Chinese forces that began March 14 .
Only after the center of the epidemic shifted to Europe in mid-March did the Cambodian government begin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March 14 , it has banned travel from several European countries , shut schools and universities , and banned religious gatherings , and it is now trying to prevent people from congregating in public spaces .
Travel to neighboring Vietnam and Thailand has also been blocked along most border crossings .
On March 25 , the government said it was considering whether to declare a “ state of emergency ” over the crisis , though analysts are still unsure exactly what extra constitutional powers it would give Phnom Penh that it currently doesn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this month announced a $ 2 billion fund to help businesses and workers through this crisis .
But it ’ s the case of too little , too late .
Health services are rushing to find space to treat and quarantine potential cases , while the Cambodian public has been panicked by sudden and dramatic requests to self-isolate .
Back in the days of Mao Zedong , Chinese propaganda was seemingly able to convince much of the public that the calamities of the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution were the result of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mao himself .
“ If only Mao knew ” about the poverty and famine , he would do something about it , people thought .
Present-day Chinese propaganda is now trying to convince the public that President Xi Jinping isn ’ t to blame .
Provincial officials in Hubei are to blame , state-run newspapers say , and the Chinese people must be grateful to Xi for stepping in to solve the situation only after local officials messed up .
In the coming days and weeks , expect Phnom Penh to try spinning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sen knew about the actual situation on the ground , then Cambodia wouldn ’ t have been so poorly prepared to tackle this escalating crisis , the ruling party-aligned media will insinuate .
How can he be blamed if he received incorrect or delayed information from his ministers , they will ask , as the Khmer Times article implied .
But Hun Sen did know—and blame should be laid at his feet , too .

The Khmer Times, an English-language daily, is not known for criticizing the Cambodian government. Owned by a Malaysian businessman who has been linked to the long-ruling Cambodian People’s Party—and, rumor says , has financial ties to perennial Prime Minister Hun Sen’s children—the publication can be trusted to parrot the party line.
The Khmer Times, an English-language daily, is not known for criticizing the Cambodian government. Owned by a Malaysian businessman who has been linked to the long-ruling Cambodian People’s Party—and, rumor says, has financial ties to perennial Prime Minister Hun Sen’s children—the publication can be trusted to parrot the party line.
So that raises the question of who was behind its attack March 23, when it ran a scathing critique of the Ministry of Health’s handling of Cambodia’s escalating COVID-19 crisis. It began: “Khmer Times has criticized the Ministry of Health on several occasions and even suggested for the Minister to be replaced in the pending Cabinet Reshuffle.” In a rush to heap scorn upon the health minister, it failed to even name him. He is Mam Bunheng. Remember that name, as he’s about to become the fall guy as the COVID-19 crisis worsens in Cambodia.
Cambodia sits right next to China, and travel between the two is frequent. Until recently, however, COVID-19 cases hadn’t shown up—at least officially. That’s probably a result of a lack of testing. On March 22, there was a rise of 31 cases from the previous day. So far, most cases are of foreign tourists, and no one knows quite how high the numbers might spike. What’s certain though, is that Cambodia’s economy will slump this year. Moody’s Investors Service, a subsidiary of the ratings agency, downgraded its gross domestic product growth forecast for Cambodia to 4.5 percent, which, except for a blip in 2009 because of the global financial crisis, would be the worst in two decades. Further downgrades are likely given the global economic situation.
As the crisis worsens, Hun Sen is looking for scapegoats, while a pliant media is seemingly preparing the ground for the Ministry of Health to take the fall. Phnom Penh is accustomed to throwing relatively junior officials under the bus after crises. When a building collapsed in Sihanoukville last year, killing 28 people, Hun Sen fired Nhim Vanda as vice president of the National Committee for Disaster Management. Conveniently, this allowed the prime minister to appoint a close ally, former military commander Kun Kim, onto that committee.
[Mapping the Coronavirus Outbreak: Get daily updates on the pandemic and learn how it’s affecting countries around the world.]
Hun Sen, who was ever-present at press conferences and public events between January and early March, has been seen less frequently in recent days. Social media rumors that he contracted COVID-19 last month got a boost when he said March 9 that he would be tested after complaining of a “stuffy nose.” That was weeks ago, and he hasn’t yet revealed if he actually took the test, nor its results if he did. Persistent chitchat that he traveled to Singapore for treatment—as he usually does when sick and unwilling to use his own country’s subpar medical services—are probably false. More likely, he doesn’t want to be seen too publicly nowadays.
Hun Sen’s own complacent decisions and messaging since January have been left out of any criticisms, including the Khmer Times article. These include a litany of gaffes, including his claim that Cambodia was safe from the coronavirus because it couldn’t spread in the country’s sweltering heat. Analysts say that from the beginning, his actions have been motivated more by maintaining good relations with China—now Cambodia’s closest ally and main financial benefactor—than protecting the health of the Cambodian people.
After the coronavirus outbreak was finally revealed by Chinese authorities in late January, Hun Sen followed Beijing’s request and refused to close off transport to and from China. In early February, he became the first and only foreign leader to visit Beijing during the height of its outbreak. There, he pledged his country’s undying loyalty to President Xi Jinping.
A week later, Hun Sen intervened to allow the Westerdam cruise ship to dock in Cambodia’s port of Sihanoukville on Feb. 13, despite it being turned away by other countries. This earned Hun Sen high praise from some in the international community for his humanitarian solidarity (including a thank-you tweet from U.S. President Donald Trump), but Cambodians were less salutary after suggested passengers who tested negative for COVID-19 in Cambodia tested positive once out of the country.
Hun Sen doesn’t just need to protect himself but his allies—including the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces’ generals and its de facto chief, Hun Manet, the prime minister’s eldest son and likely chosen successor, after Cambodia failed to cancel a joint military training exercise with Chinese forces that began March 14.
Only after the center of the epidemic shifted to Europe in mid-March did the Cambodian government begin to take the situation seriously. Since March 14, it has banned travel from several European countries, shut schools and universities, and banned religious gatherings, and it is now trying to prevent people from congregating in public spaces. Travel to neighboring Vietnam and Thailand has also been blocked along most border crossings. On March 25, the government said it was considering whether to declare a “state of emergency” over the crisis, though analysts are still unsure exactly what extra constitutional powers it would give Phnom Penh that it currently doesn’t wield. Hun Sen earlier this month announced a $2 billion fund to help businesses and workers through this crisis.
But it’s the case of too little, too late. Health services are rushing to find space to treat and quarantine potential cases, while the Cambodian public has been panicked by sudden and dramatic requests to self-isolate.
Back in the days of Mao Zedong, Chinese propaganda was seemingly able to convince much of the public that the calamities of the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution were the result of incompetent officials on the ground, not Mao himself. “If only Mao knew” about the poverty and famine, he would do something about it, people thought. Present-day Chinese propaganda is now trying to convince the public that President Xi Jinping isn’t to blame. Provincial officials in Hubei are to blame, state-run newspapers say, and the Chinese people must be grateful to Xi for stepping in to solve the situation only after local officials messed up.
In the coming days and weeks, expect Phnom Penh to try spinning a similar yarn. If only Hun Sen knew about the actual situation on the ground, then Cambodia wouldn’t have been so poorly prepared to tackle this escalating crisis, the ruling party-aligned media will insinuate. How can he be blamed if he received incorrect or delayed information from his ministers, they will ask, as the Khmer Times article implied. But Hun Sen did know—and blame should be laid at his feet, too.


foreignpolicy--2020-03-27--When Home Is More Dangerous Than the Coronavirus

When Home Is More Dangerous Than the Coronavirus Imagine living in fear of the person who shares your home .
Imagine that every day is a nightmare of criticism , name-calling , control of what you eat and wear , and physical violence .
Now imagine that you ’ re trapped inside with that person while the world is grappling with an ongoing health crisis .
Amid the coronavirus pandemic , people in countries worldwide , from Malaysia to New Zealand , are facing calls to self-isolate in order to halt the spread of the disease .
Everyone is paying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or a lack of social contact .
But for those already in unsafe situations under the shadow of domestic violence , self-isolation could be fatal .
Domestic violence affects people of all ages , genders , sexualities , cultures , and levels of income .
It ’ s not a problem directed solely at women , although they are statistically more likely to experience domestic violence than men .
In the U.K. , where I live , 1.6 million women experienced domestic violence in the year ending March 2019 .
Women are also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sustained abuse—83 percent of those who suffered more than 10 incidents were female .
And women are more likely to be killed at the hands of abusive partners or ex-partners , with at least 114 women losing their lives in Britain in 2019 .
[ Mapping the Coronavirus Outbreak : Get daily updates on the pandemic and learn how it ’ s affecting countries around the world . ]
That ’ s a pattern that repeats worldwide—especially in countries where social services are poor or nonexistent and where housing situations are deeply insecure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , migrant women were particularly vulnerable to abuse even before the outbreak ; reports of domestic violence have surged since people have been confined to their homes .
In some areas , calls to police stations have increased threefold compared to the same period last year .
Chinese police have a poor record of handling domestic violence and are even less prepared now that their time and energy are consumed by handling quarantines .
In South Korea , where an energized women ’ s movement has been facing a renewed wave of misogyny @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to abusing girlfriends in past relationships when surveyed .
While Korea hasn ’ t been forced to adopt harsh isolation measures thanks to a test-and-trace policy , the crisis has made it even harder to find new housing in a country already suffering from a severe shortage of shelter , as seen in the Oscar-winning movie Parasite .
And in Italy , which passed tough new domestic violence laws last year after an epidemic of femicide , women ’ s groups are already sounding the alarm , as they are in Germany .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s advice on self- or household-isolation will have a direct impact on women and children experiencing domestic abuse , ” the U.K.-based domestic violence charity Women ’ s Aid told Foreign Policy .
“ Home is not likely to be a safe place for survivors of domestic abuse .
We are concerned that social distancing and self-isolation will be used as a tool of coercive and controlling behavior by perpetrators and will shut down routes to safety and support.
” If people are forced to self-isolate , they are at risk of being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with less opportunity to access vital services .
Children are also suffering in these circumstances , as witnessing abuse can take the same toll on young people ’ s mental health as actually being abused themselves .
“ Self-isolation is an important step in the fight against the coronavirus … but can be dangerous for the thousands of children who grow up in homes with domestic abuse , ” said Emily Hilton , senior policy and public affairs officer at the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children .
Advocacy groups @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arguing that safety advice and planning for those experiencing domestic abuse should be included in the national government recommendations on COVID-19 .
The U.K. has spent the past 10 years under conservative governments that have stripped funding from essential services—including protection against domestic violence .
Funding cuts to local councils have amounted to 40 percent since 2010 , and council funding for women ’ s refuges has been slashed by $ 7.8 million .
“ The impact of self-isolation will also have a direct impact on specialist services , who are already operating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be rightly concerned about how to continue delivering life-saving support during the pandemic , ” said a Women ’ s Aid spokesperson .
“ They could see challenges in funding , staff shortages , and further demand for their help.
” There are also issues around domestic violence shelters .
They are often crowded spaces that operate on short notice .
That will make it particularly tough to cope with what may be growing demand while adhering to social distancing regulations .
Prioritizing testing for newly rehoused victims may need to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Question Time , British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was quizzed on the provisions in place for victims of domestic abuse .
He answered that funding was being put back into local councils to help them fulfil obligations .
But these vague answers do nothing to solve the problem .
At present , support for those suffering from domestic violence is not a statutory service—meaning that the extra funding for councils does not guarantee vital assistance for those in crisis .
There is some small good news .
The emergency restrictions set out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Regulations 2020 state that no person may leave the place they are living except under certain circumstances , including to “ avoid injury or illness or to escape the risk of harm.
” This means that people fleeing violent or coercive domestic situations will not be targeted by the police as flouting lockdown regulations .
While this is a welcome and sensible caveat , the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has also plunged people into financial insecurity , potentially trapping them in abusive situations .
More than a million people could lose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a stable income , it is much more difficult for victims to leave violent partners and protect themselves and their dependents .
As the world continues to battle the coronavirus crisis , those living in dangerous situations must not be forgotten .
Anyone experiencing domestic violence should be able to access immediate and appropriate support—not trapped with their abusers for weeks .
If you , or someone you know , are experiencing abuse in the U.K. , visit the Women ’ s Aid , Refuge , or ManKind sites , where you can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ services .
In an emergency , you should always call 999 .
If you live in the United States , contact the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence or the National Domestic Violence Hotline .
In an emergency , always call 911 .

Imagine living in fear of the person who shares your home. Imagine that every day is a nightmare of criticism, name-calling, control of what you eat and wear, and physical violence. Now imagine that you’re trapped inside with that person while the world is grappling with an ongoing health crisis.
Imagine living in fear of the person who shares your home. Imagine that every day is a nightmare of criticism, name-calling, control of what you eat and wear, and physical violence. Now imagine that you’re trapped inside with that person while the world is grappling with an ongoing health crisis.
Amid the coronavirus pandemic, people in countries worldwide, from Malaysia to New Zealand, are facing calls to self-isolate in order to halt the spread of the disease. Everyone is paying a price—whether from a loss of income or a lack of social contact. But for those already in unsafe situations under the shadow of domestic violence, self-isolation could be fatal.
Domestic violence affects people of all ages, genders, sexualities, cultures, and levels of income. It’s not a problem directed solely at women, although they are statistically more likely to experience domestic violence than men.
In the U.K., where I live, 1.6 million women experienced domestic violence in the year ending March 2019. Women are also more likely to be the victims of sustained abuse—83 percent of those who suffered more than 10 incidents were female. And women are more likely to be killed at the hands of abusive partners or ex-partners, with at least 114 women losing their lives in Britain in 2019.
[Mapping the Coronavirus Outbreak: Get daily updates on the pandemic and learn how it’s affecting countries around the world.]
That’s a pattern that repeats worldwide—especially in countries where social services are poor or nonexistent and where housing situations are deeply insecure. In China, where coronavirus originated, migrant women were particularly vulnerable to abuse even before the outbreak; reports of domestic violence have surged since people have been confined to their homes. In some areas, calls to police stations have increased threefold compared to the same period last year. Chinese police have a poor record of handling domestic violence and are even less prepared now that their time and energy are consumed by handling quarantines.
In South Korea, where an energized women’s movement has been facing a renewed wave of misogyny, nearly 80 percent of men admitted to abusing girlfriends in past relationships when surveyed. While Korea hasn’t been forced to adopt harsh isolation measures thanks to a test-and-trace policy, the crisis has made it even harder to find new housing in a country already suffering from a severe shortage of shelter, as seen in the Oscar-winning movie Parasite.
And in Italy, which passed tough new domestic violence laws last year after an epidemic of femicide, women’s groups are already sounding the alarm, as they are in Germany.
“We know that the government’s advice on self- or household-isolation will have a direct impact on women and children experiencing domestic abuse,” the U.K.-based domestic violence charity Women’s Aid told Foreign Policy. “Home is not likely to be a safe place for survivors of domestic abuse. We are concerned that social distancing and self-isolation will be used as a tool of coercive and controlling behavior by perpetrators and will shut down routes to safety and support.”
If people are forced to self-isolate, they are at risk of being trapped in abusive and coercive situations, with less opportunity to access vital services. Children are also suffering in these circumstances, as witnessing abuse can take the same toll on young people’s mental health as actually being abused themselves.
“Self-isolation is an important step in the fight against the coronavirus … but can be dangerous for the thousands of children who grow up in homes with domestic abuse,” said Emily Hilton, senior policy and public affairs officer at the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children.
Advocacy groups such as Women’s Aid are arguing that safety advice and planning for those experiencing domestic abuse should be included in the national government recommendations on COVID-19. The U.K. has spent the past 10 years under conservative governments that have stripped funding from essential services—including protection against domestic violence. Funding cuts to local councils have amounted to 40 percent since 2010, and council funding for women’s refuges has been slashed by $7.8 million.
“The impact of self-isolation will also have a direct impact on specialist services, who are already operating in an extremely challenging funding climate and will be rightly concerned about how to continue delivering life-saving support during the pandemic,” said a Women’s Aid spokesperson. “They could see challenges in funding, staff shortages, and further demand for their help.”
There are also issues around domestic violence shelters. They are often crowded spaces that operate on short notice. That will make it particularly tough to cope with what may be growing demand while adhering to social distancing regulations. Prioritizing testing for newly rehoused victims may need to be a priority.
During last week’s Question Time, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was quizzed on the provisions in place for victims of domestic abuse. He answered that funding was being put back into local councils to help them fulfil obligations. But these vague answers do nothing to solve the problem. At present, support for those suffering from domestic violence is not a statutory service—meaning that the extra funding for councils does not guarantee vital assistance for those in crisis.
There is some small good news. The emergency restrictions set out in the U.K.’s Health Protection Regulations 2020 state that no person may leave the place they are living except under certain circumstances, including to “avoid injury or illness or to escape the risk of harm.” This means that people fleeing violent or coercive domestic situations will not be targeted by the police as flouting lockdown regulations.
While this is a welcome and sensible caveat, the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has also plunged people into financial insecurity, potentially trapping them in abusive situations. More than a million people could lose their livelihoods in Britain alone. Without a stable income, it is much more difficult for victims to leave violent partners and protect themselves and their dependents.
As the world continues to battle the coronavirus crisis, those living in dangerous situations must not be forgotten. Anyone experiencing domestic violence should be able to access immediate and appropriate support—not trapped with their abusers for weeks.
If you, or someone you know, are experiencing abuse in the U.K., visit the Women’s Aid, Refuge, or ManKind sites, where you can access support from national online and telephone services. In an emergency, you should always call 999. If you live in the United States, contact the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence or the National Domestic Violence Hotline. In an emergency, always call 911.


foreignpolicy--2020-03-27--Death by Drone: America’s Vicious Legacy in Afghanistan

Ordinary Afghans say it has happened to them many times and never—not once—has it made news anywhere outside Afghanistan .
Last November , an American Reaper drone targeted a group of villagers in the mountainous area of Afghanistan ’ s southeastern province of Paktia and killed seven of them .
Paktia has long been home to Taliban militants , but local residents say all the victims were civilians , including three women and one child .
They had gone to the remote area to graze their cattle and collect wood .
Suddenly , they were dead .
“ Nobody wants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the murderers will face justice one day .
God is our only hope , ” said Mohammad Anwar , a resident of Zazai Aryub , a district in Paktia .
The perpetrators he is talking about are sitting far away in one of the many U.S. military bases where drone operators are working from .
According to Anwar , who is related to the victims , some families lost their male breadwinners , as often happens after such attacks .
“ They are desperate .
Their future is very uncertain , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conversation .
And now it is more uncertain than ever , even after 18 and a half years of war .
The newly signed U.S.-Taliban truce contains secret annexes that reportedly will give the Taliban information allowing the Islamist insurgent group to prevent attacks during the U.S. withdrawal .
But the Afghan national government and its officials have been cut out of the deal—though it calls for peace talks between various Afghan factions—and even more so , ordinary Afghans , who have no recourse to justice and don ’ t know whether the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We are like ants for them , ” said Islam Khan , a resident of Paktia .
“ The murderers need to face a trial .
If it ’ s not happening , it just reveals that the Western world does not care about the Afghans they are murdering.
” According to Lisa Ling , a former drone technician with the U.S. military in Afghanistan , civilian casualties caused by drone strikes must be investigated and regarded as war crimes .
“ I think that every strike where community leaders speak out and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ civilians should be thoroughly investigated by the ICC [ International Criminal Court ] and the international community should listen , ” she told Foreign Policy via Signal .
Ling , who has become a whistleblower and staunch critic of drone attacks , believes that “ this kind of warfare is wrong on so many levels ” and that the United States can not “ fight terror with terror.
” Neither the U.S. military nor the CIA responded to a request for comment for this story .
But both typically portray drone attacks as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alleged militants ” or “ suspected terrorists , ” and actual on-the-ground investigations rarely take place afterward .
According to a recent analysis of 228 official U.S. military investigations conducted in Afghanistan , Iraq , and Syria between 2002 and 2015 , most investigations of alleged civilian casualty incidents didn ’ t include even one visit .
The military conducted site inspections in only 16 percent of the casualty investigations reviewed for the study by researchers from the Center for Civilians in Conflict and the Columbia Law School Human Rights Institute .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paktia .
Not a single U.S. investigator is believed to have visited the site of the killings afterward .
On its Dari Twitter page , U.S. Central Command reported that an action had allegedly killed Taliban members from Faryab province in the same timespan , but it did not mention any drone strikes nor civilian casualties .
Despite the U.S.-Taliban truce , residents of Zazai Aryub are still afraid , saying that they have been haunted by American drone strikes for years and that their fate is often ignored by both the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ They keep saying that they are killing terrorists .
But that ’ s not true .
Farmers , shepherds , and women are not terrorists .
One of the victims , Naqib Jan , was a 2-year-old child , ” said Khan , who works as a teacher in a local village .
During the last months and years , several relatives and members of his family were killed by drone strikes .
He claims that his fellow tribesmen are terrified and depressed , suffering from trauma , and that many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We tried to raise our voice , and we even confronted President Ashraf Ghani with this issue , but he does not care , ” Khan said .
While in the past , former Afghan President Hamid Karzai took a critical stance toward U.S. airstrikes and criticized them in public , Ghani ’ s administration , which is heavily dependent on the United States for aid and support at a time when the Taliban are winning in many parts of the country , has preferred to largely conform to Washington ’ s “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mostly ignoring civilian casualties .
In some cases , Ghani ’ s officials have even rejected the findings of independent observers and human rights organizations that offered proof of civilian harm .
U.S. military officials have sometimes claimed that their Afghan army allies ordered the strikes .
In early March , senior judges at the ICC authorized an investigation into alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Afghanistan .
By doing so , they overturned an earlier rejection of the inquiry .
Mainly , the ICC investigation will look at actions by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But immediately after the ICC ’ s announcement , U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo attacked the ruling , describing it as “ reckless , ” and said the United States would outline measures in the coming weeks to prevent its citizens being brought before the court .
“ This is a truly breathtaking action by an unaccountable political institution masquerading as a legal body , ” Pompeo told a news conference .
In terms of possible U.S. war crimes , the ICC is focusing on alleged CIA torture and some cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ However , according to various reports , drone strikes , such as the one that wiped out Khan ’ s family members , will not be included in the inquiry .
“ These strikes could be seen as violations of international humanitarian law .
But that does not make it a war crime , which has to be intentional or sufficiently reckless .
But determining recklessness requires a legal analysis in each case of the evidence , ” Patricia Gossman , an associate Asia director for Human Rights Watch , told Foreign Policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ States done an effective job of investigating any of these strikes , rights officials say , especially since the International Security Assistance Force was disbanded in 2014 and the U.S. military was in control once again .
Family members of the victims in Paktia believe that there is no doubt about the nature of those human rights violations .
“ We don ’ t believe that it was a mistake .
It happened too often .
We want the culprits to face prosecution and trial , ” Khan said .
Other Afghans share @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a war crime , and it needs to be prosecuted properly .
We are not interested in quibbling words and phrases .
We want justice .
This is just one case out of thousands that took place since the end of 2001 , ” said Abdul Malik Zazai , the head of Paktia ’ s provincial council , in a phone conversation .
Afghanistan is the most drone-bombed country in the world .
The United States dropped more bombs on Afghanistan in 2019 than in any other years since the Defense Department began @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new figures released by the U.S. military , at least 7,423 bombs and other munitions were dropped on the country in 2019 , a nearly eightfold increase from 2015 and an average of 20 bombs a day .
In its numbers , the U.S. military does not differentiate between strikes conducted by drones or those conducted by conventional aircraft .
At the end of 2001 , the age of drone warfare began in Afghanistan , where the very first lethal strike of an unmanned aircraft took place .
According to the London-based Bureau @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. drone warfare around the world , at least 6,825 drone strikes took place in 2019 in Afghanistan .
The total number of victims remains unknown since most of these attacks are taking place in remote areas like in Zazai Aryub .
“ The Americans are benefiting from the nature of this war and from the status quo of the international community .
They believe that they are above the law , ” said Karim Popal , an Afghan German lawyer who is representing the victims of a 2009 NATO airstrike that was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ province .
Back then , dozens of civilians were killed .
A German court rejected considering the massacre as a war crime and paying compensation to the victims ’ families .
A few years later , the responsible colonel was promoted by the army .
Recently , however , a hearing took place in front of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg , France , with no outcome as yet .
“ This is a big success , but at the same time , it ’ s very clear that many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States , are not interested in addressing the crimes their troops committed , ” Popal said by phone .
“ Imagine being the Afghan father or mother who heard that the one who killed their children did not face any trial but was promoted .
It ’ s a shame .
”

Ordinary Afghans say it has happened to them many times and never—not once—has it made news anywhere outside Afghanistan. Last November, an American Reaper drone targeted a group of villagers in the mountainous area of Afghanistan’s southeastern province of Paktia and killed seven of them. Paktia has long been home to Taliban militants, but local residents say all the victims were civilians, including three women and one child. They had gone to the remote area to graze their cattle and collect wood. Suddenly, they were dead.
Ordinary Afghans say it has happened to them many times and never—not once—has it made news anywhere outside Afghanistan. Last November, an American Reaper drone targeted a group of villagers in the mountainous area of Afghanistan’s southeastern province of Paktia and killed seven of them. Paktia has long been home to Taliban militants, but local residents say all the victims were civilians, including three women and one child. They had gone to the remote area to graze their cattle and collect wood. Suddenly, they were dead.
“Nobody wants to listen to us. I doubt that the murderers will face justice one day. God is our only hope,” said Mohammad Anwar, a resident of Zazai Aryub, a district in Paktia. The perpetrators he is talking about are sitting far away in one of the many U.S. military bases where drone operators are working from.
According to Anwar, who is related to the victims, some families lost their male breadwinners, as often happens after such attacks. “They are desperate. Their future is very uncertain,” he told Foreign Policy in a phone conversation.
And now it is more uncertain than ever, even after 18 and a half years of war. The newly signed U.S.-Taliban truce contains secret annexes that reportedly will give the Taliban information allowing the Islamist insurgent group to prevent attacks during the U.S. withdrawal. But the Afghan national government and its officials have been cut out of the deal—though it calls for peace talks between various Afghan factions—and even more so, ordinary Afghans, who have no recourse to justice and don’t know whether the drone strikes will let up.
“We are like ants for them,” said Islam Khan, a resident of Paktia. “The murderers need to face a trial. If it’s not happening, it just reveals that the Western world does not care about the Afghans they are murdering.”
According to Lisa Ling, a former drone technician with the U.S. military in Afghanistan, civilian casualties caused by drone strikes must be investigated and regarded as war crimes. “I think that every strike where community leaders speak out and tell us that we are killing their civilians should be thoroughly investigated by the ICC [International Criminal Court] and the international community should listen,” she told Foreign Policy via Signal. Ling, who has become a whistleblower and staunch critic of drone attacks, believes that “this kind of warfare is wrong on so many levels” and that the United States cannot “fight terror with terror.”
Neither the U.S. military nor the CIA responded to a request for comment for this story. But both typically portray drone attacks as “precision strikes” that kill “alleged militants” or “suspected terrorists,” and actual on-the-ground investigations rarely take place afterward. According to a recent analysis of 228 official U.S. military investigations conducted in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria between 2002 and 2015, most investigations of alleged civilian casualty incidents didn’t include even one visit. The military conducted site inspections in only 16 percent of the casualty investigations reviewed for the study by researchers from the Center for Civilians in Conflict and the Columbia Law School Human Rights Institute.
Children in Balkh province, northern Afghanistan, in April 2019. Airstrikes there have increased during recent months.
The same was true of the strike in Paktia. Not a single U.S. investigator is believed to have visited the site of the killings afterward. On its Dari Twitter page, U.S. Central Command reported that an action had allegedly killed Taliban members from Faryab province in the same timespan, but it did not mention any drone strikes nor civilian casualties.
Despite the U.S.-Taliban truce, residents of Zazai Aryub are still afraid, saying that they have been haunted by American drone strikes for years and that their fate is often ignored by both the U.S. military and the Afghan government in Kabul. “They keep saying that they are killing terrorists. But that’s not true. Farmers, shepherds, and women are not terrorists. One of the victims, Naqib Jan, was a 2-year-old child,” said Khan, who works as a teacher in a local village. During the last months and years, several relatives and members of his family were killed by drone strikes. He claims that his fellow tribesmen are terrified and depressed, suffering from trauma, and that many children fear to play outside.
“We tried to raise our voice, and we even confronted President Ashraf Ghani with this issue, but he does not care,” Khan said.
While in the past, former Afghan President Hamid Karzai took a critical stance toward U.S. airstrikes and criticized them in public, Ghani’s administration, which is heavily dependent on the United States for aid and support at a time when the Taliban are winning in many parts of the country, has preferred to largely conform to Washington’s “global war on terrorism” narrative, mostly ignoring civilian casualties. In some cases, Ghani’s officials have even rejected the findings of independent observers and human rights organizations that offered proof of civilian harm. U.S. military officials have sometimes claimed that their Afghan army allies ordered the strikes.
In early March, senior judges at the ICC authorized an investigation into alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Afghanistan. By doing so, they overturned an earlier rejection of the inquiry. Mainly, the ICC investigation will look at actions by U.S, Afghan, and Taliban troops. But immediately after the ICC’s announcement, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo attacked the ruling, describing it as “reckless,” and said the United States would outline measures in the coming weeks to prevent its citizens being brought before the court. “This is a truly breathtaking action by an unaccountable political institution masquerading as a legal body,” Pompeo told a news conference.
In terms of possible U.S. war crimes, the ICC is focusing on alleged CIA torture and some cases of forced disappearances and extrajudicial killings. However, according to various reports, drone strikes, such as the one that wiped out Khan’s family members, will not be included in the inquiry. “These strikes could be seen as violations of international humanitarian law. But that does not make it a war crime, which has to be intentional or sufficiently reckless. But determining recklessness requires a legal analysis in each case of the evidence,” Patricia Gossman, an associate Asia director for Human Rights Watch, told Foreign Policy via email.
Nor has the United States done an effective job of investigating any of these strikes, rights officials say, especially since the International Security Assistance Force was disbanded in 2014 and the U.S. military was in control once again.
Mohammad Kabir, pictured in May 2017, lives in a village in Maidan Wardak province, which is regularly targeted by airstrikes and night raids. His brother was killed by a drone strike. “Everyone here fears the drones, especially the children. They can’t sleept at night“, he said.
Family members of the victims in Paktia believe that there is no doubt about the nature of those human rights violations. “We don’t believe that it was a mistake. It happened too often. We want the culprits to face prosecution and trial,” Khan said. Other Afghans share his opinion. “It’s a war crime, and it needs to be prosecuted properly. We are not interested in quibbling words and phrases. We want justice. This is just one case out of thousands that took place since the end of 2001,” said Abdul Malik Zazai, the head of Paktia’s provincial council, in a phone conversation.
Afghanistan is the most drone-bombed country in the world. The United States dropped more bombs on Afghanistan in 2019 than in any other years since the Defense Department began keeping track in 2006. According to new figures released by the U.S. military, at least 7,423 bombs and other munitions were dropped on the country in 2019, a nearly eightfold increase from 2015 and an average of 20 bombs a day.
In its numbers, the U.S. military does not differentiate between strikes conducted by drones or those conducted by conventional aircraft. At the end of 2001, the age of drone warfare began in Afghanistan, where the very first lethal strike of an unmanned aircraft took place.
According to the London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which is observing U.S. drone warfare around the world, at least 6,825 drone strikes took place in 2019 in Afghanistan. The total number of victims remains unknown since most of these attacks are taking place in remote areas like in Zazai Aryub.
“The Americans are benefiting from the nature of this war and from the status quo of the international community. They believe that they are above the law,” said Karim Popal, an Afghan German lawyer who is representing the victims of a 2009 NATO airstrike that was ordered by a German colonel in Kunduz province. Back then, dozens of civilians were killed. A German court rejected considering the massacre as a war crime and paying compensation to the victims’ families. A few years later, the responsible colonel was promoted by the army.
Recently, however, a hearing took place in front of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, with no outcome as yet.
“This is a big success, but at the same time, it’s very clear that many Western countries, including Germany and the United States, are not interested in addressing the crimes their troops committed,” Popal said by phone. “Imagine being the Afghan father or mother who heard that the one who killed their children did not face any trial but was promoted. It’s a shame.”


foreignpolicy--2020-03-27--Today’s Coronavirus Anger Can Revive Tomorrow’s Welfare State

The word of our moment—the hopeful , talismanic word—is “ solidarity.
” As the coronavirus drives each of us into our private cubbyholes , we cherish every sign of mutuality .
Most of us have probably had an experience with this new embrace of sacrifice and fellow-feeling within our family or our workplace or among our friends .
The great question for policy is whether that spirit will extend outward from these intimate circles to embrace a city , a country , even the world .
Will this crisis make us so acutely aware of our mutual dependence that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aftermath—the kind of economic or social policies that in normal times lose out to the calculus of self-interest ?
Will governments invest in health care , housing , education , and training for citizens who have been left behind by the forces of globalization ?
Last year , one of us , Paul von Chamier , a policy analyst at the Center on International Cooperation , published a history of the adoption of progressive tax schemes that functions as a kind of solidarity index .
The question he asked was : Under what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inequality and provide for enhanced public goods by increasing taxation on the rich ?
Take a look at the past few centuries in Europe and you will see that inequality ebbs and flows over time .
As societies produce more , there is a historic trend toward ever more disparity .
Occasionally , dramatic events such as the fall of Rome or the Black Death serve as potent erasers of that trend .
However , societies , too , have the ability to address inequality through conscious policy , and every so often @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
High inequality levels can themselves help generate the political will for change , but this does not explain why many highly unequal societies stay the course while others , seemingly less in need of an overhaul , embrace real reform .
[ Mapping the Coronavirus Outbreak : Get daily updates on the pandemic and learn how it ’ s affecting countries around the world . ]
While one might imagine that either democracies , with their dependence on the popular sentiment , or certainly socialist governments , with their commitment to social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the political will to make these tough choices , the data shows otherwise .
In this respect , the power of wealthy interests typically triumphs over the public good .
In fact , the paradigm shift to solidarity almost always proceeds from a negative shock that serves as a lightning rod for social anger .
It is then the work of politics to channel that anger into change .
Politics becomes , in effect , an exercise in storytelling that maps the crisis onto the policy outcome .
Looking back , two main @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frustration .
The first one centers on compensatory fairness .
During World War I , the top income tax rate in both the U.K. and Canada shot up from nearly zero to 60 and 70 percent respectively .
The money was needed for the war effort , but the change also meant more redistribution and expansion of public services , such as education and health care , that stayed in place well after the war .
This shift kicked in as the governments were forced to conscript young men , mostly from poor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The combination of the massive cost of the war mobilization and the supreme sacrifice of the soldiers forged an unarguable case for taxation and social spending .
Income redistribution was framed not as charity but rather as the way to meet the popular demand that the rich make sacrifices in some way comparable to those being made by others .
The second narrative focuses on addressing fear of systemic instability .
When existing inequalities threaten a state ’ s very survival , governments see their way clear to policies otherwise deemed too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experience both of the United States in the Great Depression and Western Europe during the Cold War , when Communism was seen to menace the social order both from within and without .
More recently , though , the phenomenon has applied to developing nations .
In its historic report from 1993 on East Asia , the World Bank concluded that when countries there faced fundamental threats from insurgencies and separatists , their governments critically depended on the popular support of the poor .
The price for retaining that support was clear—more economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the World Bank listed some types of policies introduced by East Asian states to appease the working class : land reforms in Korea and Taiwan , rice subsidies in Malaysia , public housing programs in Hong Kong and Singapore .
What light does this shed on our own pandemic-afflicted world ?
The American economy is now forecast to drop between 8 percent and 24 percent over the coming year ; the collapse may prove yet more drastic elsewhere .
One can easily imagine a crisis of legitimacy similar to what the World Bank @ @ @ @ @ @ @ While economic failure may not threaten the stability of Western states , as happened in the 1930s , it is bound to produce a combustible mix of social anger , anguish , and urgency .
That public mood could deepen our already profound social schisms—or it could generate the kind of political narrative that leads to policy change .
What would that narrative sound like ?
While everyone , rich and poor alike , faces the possibility of sickness and death , the coronavirus has exposed the glaring inequities of all Western societies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be essential workers , delivering our food , providing utilities , and keeping the transportation systems working despite the pandemic .
These “ low-skilled ” workers are now indispensable in fighting off the coronavirus .
Many of them , especially in the United States , can not afford proper health care and lack guaranteed paid sick leave .
Their jobs are vulnerable even in the best of times .
They are also among the most affected by the downsides of the emerging gig economy .
The Coronavirus War Economy Will Change the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a war footing , it doesn ’ t just help them survive a crisis—it alters them forever .
This situation is analogous , if scarcely equal , to the mass mobilization of the two world wars .
Indeed , both Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel , the leaders of France and Germany respectively , have deployed the language of war time to summon their people to acts of sacrifice in the name of public good .
What ’ s more , the pandemic has placed all of us in a position of dependence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , equivalent to the front-line deployment of troops in the struggle against the virus .
The circumstances are ripe for the first narrative to take hold .
Soon enough , essential workers and those who support them might raise a valid demand for the societal solidarity to take on a material rather than symbolic form .
It ’ s premature to suggest that the solidarity we already see among family , friends , and colleagues will extend to this larger sense of shared fate and thus to the argument for compensatory fairness .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ days of our crisis .
Perhaps , alternatively , we should expect less from the affirmative sense of gratitude toward those at the bottom who have sacrificed most for the common good and more from the fear of the brewing anger and desperation of the 99 percent .
There have been , in this regard , a few straws in the wind .
Actress Gal Gadot and about 20 other famous Hollywood artists provoked wrath when they tried to commiserate with people affected by COVID-19 by posting a video of them singing “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We are all in this together !
” Gadot claimed—only to be overwhelmed by a wave of angry comments about how the rich are not contributing enough money to solve the crisis .
There appears to be a growing public resentment against the wealthy getting access to COVID-19 tests and treatments before the people who need it more .
Coincidentally , a few days ago , somewhat odd news emerged that a majority of Silicon Valley billionaires have already secured a luxury apocalypse bunker for themselves .
It is precisely the deep-seated inequality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of solidarity look so hollow—even though , for once , we are all in this together .
Thanks to the very unequal suffering we have begun to experience , the coronavirus is likelier to deepen than to alleviate our social divisions .
But it does not have to be so .
Political leaders will make choices that will shape and channel the public mood .
We will see , once the worst of this crisis is over , how democracies react to their transformed circumstances .
In President Donald Trump , of course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who seems deaf to the language of solidarity as well as blithe in the face of human suffering .
We will see whether his Democratic challenger , presumably Joe Biden , is prepared to speak the language of compensatory fairness as he addresses the nation ’ s future .

The word of our moment—the hopeful, talismanic word—is “solidarity.” As the coronavirus drives each of us into our private cubbyholes, we cherish every sign of mutuality. Most of us have probably had an experience with this new embrace of sacrifice and fellow-feeling within our family or our workplace or among our friends.
The word of our moment—the hopeful, talismanic word—is “solidarity.” As the coronavirus drives each of us into our private cubbyholes, we cherish every sign of mutuality. Most of us have probably had an experience with this new embrace of sacrifice and fellow-feeling within our family or our workplace or among our friends.
The great question for policy is whether that spirit will extend outward from these intimate circles to embrace a city, a country, even the world. Will this crisis make us so acutely aware of our mutual dependence that we adopt—if not now, then in the aftermath—the kind of economic or social policies that in normal times lose out to the calculus of self-interest? Will governments invest in health care, housing, education, and training for citizens who have been left behind by the forces of globalization?
Last year, one of us, Paul von Chamier, a policy analyst at the Center on International Cooperation, published a history of the adoption of progressive tax schemes that functions as a kind of solidarity index. The question he asked was: Under what political circumstances do nations agree to address inequality and provide for enhanced public goods by increasing taxation on the rich?
Take a look at the past few centuries in Europe and you will see that inequality ebbs and flows over time. As societies produce more, there is a historic trend toward ever more disparity. Occasionally, dramatic events such as the fall of Rome or the Black Death serve as potent erasers of that trend. However, societies, too, have the ability to address inequality through conscious policy, and every so often, they actually decide to do so. High inequality levels can themselves help generate the political will for change, but this does not explain why many highly unequal societies stay the course while others, seemingly less in need of an overhaul, embrace real reform.
[Mapping the Coronavirus Outbreak: Get daily updates on the pandemic and learn how it’s affecting countries around the world.]
While one might imagine that either democracies, with their dependence on the popular sentiment, or certainly socialist governments, with their commitment to social justice, would be able to marshal the political will to make these tough choices, the data shows otherwise. In this respect, the power of wealthy interests typically triumphs over the public good. In fact, the paradigm shift to solidarity almost always proceeds from a negative shock that serves as a lightning rod for social anger. It is then the work of politics to channel that anger into change. Politics becomes, in effect, an exercise in storytelling that maps the crisis onto the policy outcome.
Looking back, two main narratives have been successful in focusing social frustration. The first one centers on compensatory fairness. During World War I, the top income tax rate in both the U.K. and Canada shot up from nearly zero to 60 and 70 percent respectively. The money was needed for the war effort, but the change also meant more redistribution and expansion of public services, such as education and health care, that stayed in place well after the war. This shift kicked in as the governments were forced to conscript young men, mostly from poor or working-class communities, into the army. The combination of the massive cost of the war mobilization and the supreme sacrifice of the soldiers forged an unarguable case for taxation and social spending. Income redistribution was framed not as charity but rather as the way to meet the popular demand that the rich make sacrifices in some way comparable to those being made by others.
The second narrative focuses on addressing fear of systemic instability. When existing inequalities threaten a state’s very survival, governments see their way clear to policies otherwise deemed too hard to enact. This was the experience both of the United States in the Great Depression and Western Europe during the Cold War, when Communism was seen to menace the social order both from within and without. More recently, though, the phenomenon has applied to developing nations. In its historic report from 1993 on East Asia, the World Bank concluded that when countries there faced fundamental threats from insurgencies and separatists, their governments critically depended on the popular support of the poor. The price for retaining that support was clear—more economic solidarity. In a follow-up publication, the World Bank listed some types of policies introduced by East Asian states to appease the working class: land reforms in Korea and Taiwan, rice subsidies in Malaysia, public housing programs in Hong Kong and Singapore.
Listen Now: Don't Touch Your Face A new podcast from Foreign Policy covering all aspects of the coronavirus pandemic Learn More
What light does this shed on our own pandemic-afflicted world? The American economy is now forecast to drop between 8 percent and 24 percent over the coming year; the collapse may prove yet more drastic elsewhere. One can easily imagine a crisis of legitimacy similar to what the World Bank described afflicting middle-income and developing countries. While economic failure may not threaten the stability of Western states, as happened in the 1930s, it is bound to produce a combustible mix of social anger, anguish, and urgency. That public mood could deepen our already profound social schisms—or it could generate the kind of political narrative that leads to policy change. What would that narrative sound like?
While everyone, rich and poor alike, faces the possibility of sickness and death, the coronavirus has exposed the glaring inequities of all Western societies. Poor people are far more likely to be essential workers, delivering our food, providing utilities, and keeping the transportation systems working despite the pandemic. These “low-skilled” workers are now indispensable in fighting off the coronavirus. Many of them, especially in the United States, cannot afford proper health care and lack guaranteed paid sick leave. Their jobs are vulnerable even in the best of times. They are also among the most affected by the downsides of the emerging gig economy.
Read More An American propaganda poster from World War II. An American propaganda poster from World War II. The Coronavirus War Economy Will Change the World When societies shift their economies to a war footing, it doesn’t just help them survive a crisis—it alters them forever. Argument | Nicholas Mulder Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi greets children waving Indian flags as he arrives in Kathmandu, Nepal, for a summit. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi greets children waving Indian flags as he arrives in Kathmandu, Nepal, for a summit. India Is Pushing Back Against China in South Asia Beijing’s attempts to encircle New Delhi are being systematically reversed. Analysis | Derek Grossman Visitors to the Dobbins Outlook view the lights of Phoenix, which is now the fifth-largest city in the United States. Visitors to the Dobbins Outlook view the lights of Phoenix, which is now the fifth-largest city in the United States. Arizona Is Not Running Out of Water or Workers The state will remain a destination for foreign investment due to a skilled workforce, leadership in water conservation, and low tax burdens. Response | Danny Seiden
This situation is analogous, if scarcely equal, to the mass mobilization of the two world wars. Indeed, both Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel, the leaders of France and Germany respectively, have deployed the language of war time to summon their people to acts of sacrifice in the name of public good. What’s more, the pandemic has placed all of us in a position of dependence on those who remain on the job, equivalent to the front-line deployment of troops in the struggle against the virus. The circumstances are ripe for the first narrative to take hold. Soon enough, essential workers and those who support them might raise a valid demand for the societal solidarity to take on a material rather than symbolic form. It’s premature to suggest that the solidarity we already see among family, friends, and colleagues will extend to this larger sense of shared fate and thus to the argument for compensatory fairness. But we are still in the early days of our crisis.
Perhaps, alternatively, we should expect less from the affirmative sense of gratitude toward those at the bottom who have sacrificed most for the common good and more from the fear of the brewing anger and desperation of the 99 percent. There have been, in this regard, a few straws in the wind. Actress Gal Gadot and about 20 other famous Hollywood artists provoked wrath when they tried to commiserate with people affected by COVID-19 by posting a video of them singing “Imagine” by John Lennon. “We are all in this together!” Gadot claimed—only to be overwhelmed by a wave of angry comments about how the rich are not contributing enough money to solve the crisis.
There appears to be a growing public resentment against the wealthy getting access to COVID-19 tests and treatments before the people who need it more. Coincidentally, a few days ago, somewhat odd news emerged that a majority of Silicon Valley billionaires have already secured a luxury apocalypse bunker for themselves.
It is precisely the deep-seated inequality of Western societies that makes the imagery of solidarity look so hollow—even though, for once, we are all in this together. Thanks to the very unequal suffering we have begun to experience, the coronavirus is likelier to deepen than to alleviate our social divisions. But it does not have to be so. Political leaders will make choices that will shape and channel the public mood. We will see, once the worst of this crisis is over, how democracies react to their transformed circumstances. In President Donald Trump, of course, the United States has a leader who seems deaf to the language of solidarity as well as blithe in the face of human suffering. We will see whether his Democratic challenger, presumably Joe Biden, is prepared to speak the language of compensatory fairness as he addresses the nation’s future.


foreignpolicy--2020-03-27--The Political Wizardry of Benjamin Netanyahu

TEL AVIV , Israel—Benjamin Netanyahu just did it again .
The longest-serving leader in Israel ’ s history appears to have struck a deal with the head of the opposition that would allow him to serve as prime minister for another 18 months , once again demonstrating his total mastery over Israeli politics .
In doing so , Netanyahu managed to force a split in the rival Blue and White party , dramatically weakening the one political force that posed a challenge to his leadership and coopting its erstwhile leader , Benny Gantz .
The agreement , which still needs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was struck shortly before the opposition was to pull off a complex parliamentary maneuver that could have loosened Netanyahu ’ s grip on power .
But Gantz withdrew his support for the maneuver at the last minute , agreeing instead to provide Netanyahu with the margin for a solid governing majority , one that eluded him in three election cycles over the past year .
“ Time after time , Netanyahu proves that he ’ s the last politician [ standing ] , ” wrote Yoav Krakovsky , a political commentator for Israel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its website .
“ He ’ s the one that knows how to play the game , to control the narrative—and defeat all his rivals.
” Under the deal , Netanyahu would continue serving as prime minister till late next year and then cede the position to Gantz , who would also serve for an 18-month period .
It was not immediately clear what guarantees Gantz received regarding the rotation of power or how it would be enforced .
Gantz said he agreed to join a Netanyahu-led government—after promising voters he would not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public health and economic crises spawned by the coronavirus outbreak .
Netanyahu is facing trial for corruption charges , which Gantz had previously said made him unfit to govern .
“ At this hour , no one has the right to stand idly by , ” Gantz said after news of the deal emerged .
“ Everyone must put Israel before everything else.
” Netanyahu , who heads the right-wing Likud party , has been sharply criticized for his handling of the outbreak and for allowing a deterioration in Israel ’ s public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has used the crisis to his advantage .
Earlier this month , he ordered the closing of most courts , a decision that delayed the start of his own trial from March to May .
After three general elections in less than a year—the last one on March 2—the deal would give Israel its first durable government since December 2018 .
Gantz faced severe criticism for the move from his own camp .
Just last month , he described Netanyahu as a dangerous autocrat—the Israeli version of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Blue and White party , an amalgam of several factions , refused to join a Netanyahu-led government and will remain in opposition .
A political cartoon in the liberal Haaretz newspaper depicted Gantz ejecting from a crashing Blue and White party plane ( Gantz ’ s three-general party leadership was nicknamed “ the cockpit ” ) into a firefighter ’ s jump net secured by Netanyahu and his coalition partners .
Gantz joins a line of center-left politicians who have challenged Netanyahu and then joined forces with him—only to see their credibility tarnished @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tzipi Livni , and Isaac Herzog .
“ There ’ s no debating it .
Netanyahu has won big .
Even though the elections ended in a tie again , in which there was no possibility for anyone to form a government , Gantz raised a white flag and gave Netanyahu triple victory , ” wrote Tal Shalev , the political correspondent for Israel ’ s Walla News website .
“ He violated his promise not to sit with [ Netanyahu ] and gave him another year and a half in power .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coming corona failures , and the cherry on top : He dismantled the most serious ruling alternative to the Likud in the last decade.
” Netanyahu succeeded , in part , thanks to the yawning gap in political experience between himself and Gantz , the former military chief of staff who entered politics just 18 months ago .
At 70 , Netanyahu has been in politics for more than three decades .
He demonstrated remarkable stamina during the election campaigns , compared to Gantz .
“ It ’ s always premature to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ listened to what political analysts say for years , ‘ This is the last year for Netanyahu.
’ He is a master politician , ” said Michael Oren , a former ambassador to the United States who worked closely with Netanyahu .
“ Think of what he has done in the last two years : He has fended off the police , the state prosecutor , the whole judiciary , an attempted coup within his own party , three elections , an intermittent crisis on the Gaza border , and now the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Netanyahu ’ s Likud party won a three-seat advantage over Blue and White in the last election , but his coalition of religious and right-wing parties remained three seats short of a 61-vote majority in the Knesset .
Time and again throughout three post-election negotiating stints , Netanyahu was able to rally those allies—his so-called parliamentary bloc—and potential rivals from his own party to prevent defections to Gantz .
“ Allies in the bloc behaved like a franchisee of Netanyahu .
They showed utter loyalty and devotion , even in the face @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like they agreed to a noncompete clause , ” said Mitchell Barak , a pollster and a former Netanyahu staffer .
But Gantz had a weak political hand to play .
Despite receiving a mandate from President Reuven Rivlin to form a government last week , giving him a month ’ s time for coalition haggling , Gantz faced serious challenges uniting political parties in the center and left of the political spectrum .
“ To me this is the best possible outcome , ” Oren said .
“ We have a government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis better , it will help us interface with the U.S. administration , and the peace plan .
It ’ s a government which , if Iran decides to come to blows with us , will be able to grapple with that challenge.
” Israeli left-wingers and Arab politicians mourned the lost opportunity to form a coalition with the support of the Arab-led Joint List , which represents the country ’ s one-fifth minority—a potential signal event .
Gantz had indicated in recent weeks that an emergency coalition should include “ all parts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ referring to the Joint List .
No Arab-led party has ever taken part in a governing coalition .
“ Never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity , ” tweeted Ayman Odeh , the leader of the Joint List , sarcastically invoking the mantra used by Israelis to mock the Palestinian leadership .
He was referring to Gantz .
Gantz is serving as speaker of the parliament while coalition negotiations with Netanyahu proceed—giving him the some leverage in the talks .
As speaker , Gantz could move for the passage of a law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parliament , dealing a blow to Netanyahu ’ s long-term political survival .
But Gantz seems unwilling to wage that kind of political warfare as long as Israel reels from the pandemic .
The country has gone under lockdown and hospitals are strained , as some 3,000 Israelis have been infected .
Some Netanyahu critics saw an advantage to the deal .
With Gantz in the government , Netanyahu would have a hard time pursuing parts of his right-wing and religious agenda , including limiting the powers of the Supreme Court and promoting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bank .
But many other moderates seemed distraught by the turn of the events .
“ You betrayed all of your promises and the people who followed you , ” said a disappointed Lior Schleien , the host of a popular political satire show , in a video .
“ Where are all of your declarations about how Bibi shouldn ’ t be prime minister ?
”

TEL AVIV, Israel—Benjamin Netanyahu just did it again.
The longest-serving leader in Israel’s history appears to have struck a deal with the head of the opposition that would allow him to serve as prime minister for another 18 months, once again demonstrating his total mastery over Israeli politics.
In doing so, Netanyahu managed to force a split in the rival Blue and White party, dramatically weakening the one political force that posed a challenge to his leadership and coopting its erstwhile leader, Benny Gantz.
The agreement, which still needs to be hammered out in detail, was struck shortly before the opposition was to pull off a complex parliamentary maneuver that could have loosened Netanyahu’s grip on power.
But Gantz withdrew his support for the maneuver at the last minute, agreeing instead to provide Netanyahu with the margin for a solid governing majority, one that eluded him in three election cycles over the past year.
“Time after time, Netanyahu proves that he’s the last politician [standing],” wrote Yoav Krakovsky, a political commentator for Israel’s public broadcaster Kan, on its website. “He’s the one that knows how to play the game, to control the narrative—and defeat all his rivals.”
Under the deal, Netanyahu would continue serving as prime minister till late next year and then cede the position to Gantz, who would also serve for an 18-month period. It was not immediately clear what guarantees Gantz received regarding the rotation of power or how it would be enforced.
Gantz said he agreed to join a Netanyahu-led government—after promising voters he would not do so under any circumstances—because of the public health and economic crises spawned by the coronavirus outbreak. Netanyahu is facing trial for corruption charges, which Gantz had previously said made him unfit to govern.
“At this hour, no one has the right to stand idly by,” Gantz said after news of the deal emerged. “Everyone must put Israel before everything else.”
Netanyahu, who heads the right-wing Likud party, has been sharply criticized for his handling of the outbreak and for allowing a deterioration in Israel’s public health system for years. But he has used the crisis to his advantage. Earlier this month, he ordered the closing of most courts, a decision that delayed the start of his own trial from March to May.
After three general elections in less than a year—the last one on March 2—the deal would give Israel its first durable government since December 2018.
Gantz faced severe criticism for the move from his own camp. Just last month, he described Netanyahu as a dangerous autocrat—the Israeli version of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. More than half the members of his Blue and White party, an amalgam of several factions, refused to join a Netanyahu-led government and will remain in opposition.
A political cartoon in the liberal Haaretz newspaper depicted Gantz ejecting from a crashing Blue and White party plane (Gantz’s three-general party leadership was nicknamed “the cockpit”) into a firefighter’s jump net secured by Netanyahu and his coalition partners.
Gantz joins a line of center-left politicians who have challenged Netanyahu and then joined forces with him—only to see their credibility tarnished. The list includes Ehud Barak, Tzipi Livni, and Isaac Herzog.
“There’s no debating it. Netanyahu has won big. Even though the elections ended in a tie again, in which there was no possibility for anyone to form a government, Gantz raised a white flag and gave Netanyahu triple victory,” wrote Tal Shalev, the political correspondent for Israel’s Walla News website.
“He violated his promise not to sit with [Netanyahu] and gave him another year and a half in power. He agreed … to share responsibility for the coming corona failures, and the cherry on top: He dismantled the most serious ruling alternative to the Likud in the last decade.”
Netanyahu succeeded, in part, thanks to the yawning gap in political experience between himself and Gantz, the former military chief of staff who entered politics just 18 months ago. At 70, Netanyahu has been in politics for more than three decades. He demonstrated remarkable stamina during the election campaigns, compared to Gantz.
“It’s always premature to eulogize Benjamin Netanyahu. I’ve listened to what political analysts say for years, ‘This is the last year for Netanyahu.’ He is a master politician,” said Michael Oren, a former ambassador to the United States who worked closely with Netanyahu.
“Think of what he has done in the last two years: He has fended off the police, the state prosecutor, the whole judiciary, an attempted coup within his own party, three elections, an intermittent crisis on the Gaza border, and now the coronavirus. And the guy is still standing.”
Netanyahu’s Likud party won a three-seat advantage over Blue and White in the last election, but his coalition of religious and right-wing parties remained three seats short of a 61-vote majority in the Knesset.
Time and again throughout three post-election negotiating stints, Netanyahu was able to rally those allies—his so-called parliamentary bloc—and potential rivals from his own party to prevent defections to Gantz.
“Allies in the bloc behaved like a franchisee of Netanyahu. They showed utter loyalty and devotion, even in the face of cannibalizing themselves. It’s like they agreed to a noncompete clause,” said Mitchell Barak, a pollster and a former Netanyahu staffer.
But Gantz had a weak political hand to play. Despite receiving a mandate from President Reuven Rivlin to form a government last week, giving him a month’s time for coalition haggling, Gantz faced serious challenges uniting political parties in the center and left of the political spectrum.
“To me this is the best possible outcome,” Oren said. “We have a government that enables us to deal with the crisis better, it will help us interface with the U.S. administration, and the peace plan. It’s a government which, if Iran decides to come to blows with us, will be able to grapple with that challenge.”
Israeli left-wingers and Arab politicians mourned the lost opportunity to form a coalition with the support of the Arab-led Joint List, which represents the country’s one-fifth minority—a potential signal event. Gantz had indicated in recent weeks that an emergency coalition should include “all parts” of the Israeli politic, apparently referring to the Joint List. No Arab-led party has ever taken part in a governing coalition.
“Never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity,” tweeted Ayman Odeh, the leader of the Joint List, sarcastically invoking the mantra used by Israelis to mock the Palestinian leadership. He was referring to Gantz.
Gantz is serving as speaker of the parliament while coalition negotiations with Netanyahu proceed—giving him the some leverage in the talks. As speaker, Gantz could move for the passage of a law banning candidates facing indictment from standing for parliament, dealing a blow to Netanyahu’s long-term political survival.
But Gantz seems unwilling to wage that kind of political warfare as long as Israel reels from the pandemic. The country has gone under lockdown and hospitals are strained, as some 3,000 Israelis have been infected.
Some Netanyahu critics saw an advantage to the deal. With Gantz in the government, Netanyahu would have a hard time pursuing parts of his right-wing and religious agenda, including limiting the powers of the Supreme Court and promoting annexation of Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
But many other moderates seemed distraught by the turn of the events.
“You betrayed all of your promises and the people who followed you,” said a disappointed Lior Schleien, the host of a popular political satire show, in a video. “Where are all of your declarations about how Bibi shouldn’t be prime minister?”