RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.wsj.com/articles/i-grieve-for-my-native-india-11620078871?mod=opinion_lead_pos7

I’m an immigrant, happy and assimilated. I pay closer attention to America than I do to other parts of the world. This isn’t only because I live here. Settling in a country calls for integration that is meticulous, not just heartfelt. That doesn’t mean that I wall myself off from the world. Like many immigrants, I also pay near-obsessive attention to the land of my birth.

Previous immigrant generations needed to erase their old selves to become American. You were more American by being less Italian, or by letting the Greek or Serb in you dwindle. But America now demands less. I’ve never felt pressed to forget India, where I was born. Even if I’d wanted to, I wouldn’t be able, because of technology. An immigrant now can never let go of the country of his birth.

These days have been suffused with India. I’ve spent my waking hours reading and watching news, talking to people by telephone, taking in tweets and Facebook posts, all of which describe the enormity of India’s pandemic collapse. A decade ago, I spoke to Liberian immigrants who followed from afar that country’s battle with Ebola, and also to people from Haiti as they wrestled with the earthquake’s aftermath. They spoke to me of their impotence (at being unable to help), their guilt (being in America while relatives perished from precisely the sort of fate the immigrant moved here to avoid), and their gut-churning sense of distance from loved ones who’d been sickened or buried under rubble in Port-au-Prince.

I’m in close touch with my family. I speak daily to my mother, who is isolating at home in Delhi, and to my sister, who’s raising her Zoom-schooled sons in that city and doing her job as an elementary-school teacher. My brother works as an editor, putting out a publication whose reporters go out, masked and tireless, writing up the grim news they see. A part of that news was the death of his own wife’s father.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/democracies-abetted-irans-election-to-a-u-n-womens-rights-post/?utm_source=

The election of Iran, China, and other countries with delinquent human-rights records to the U.N.’s Commission on the Status of Women last month kicked off an international whodunnit.

According to the NGO U.N. Watch, at least five Western democracies eligible to vote on commission membership would have needed to support Tehran’s bid. Meanwhile, the U.S. government called the development “troubling” but declined to issue a sharper condemnation.

Human-rights advocates blame this ambiguous stance on the Biden administration’s efforts to reenter the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, as ongoing talks in Vienna get closer to producing an agreement to jumpstart the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. “The Biden administration has joined Canada and Europe in a most disciplined reticence to criticize the Islamic Republic’s mounting repression, in the hope that the lack of scrutiny will be seen by the regime as another concession to curb its nuclear program,” said Marian Memarsadeghi, a senior fellow at the Macdonald Laurier Institute.

The problems with Tehran’s participation in any international entity involving women’s equality should be self-evident. At a Monday morning U.N. Watch press conference that focused on Iran’s election to the commission, panelists, including Memarsadeghi and Shaparak Shajarizadeh, an activist who was jailed twice and assaulted for speaking out against Iran’s mandatory hijab law, pointed to Iran’s manifest hostility to women, including the fact that the age of marriage for girls is 13 and that domestic violence and marital rape are not criminally punishable. (Read more on this from Isaac Schorr.)

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17332/china-new-zealand-five-eyes

The survival of the alliance in its current form, though, is under threat after Ms Ardern’s administration announced that it was making improved trade relations with Beijing its priority, rather than maintaining its support for Five Eyes.

“No matter if they have five eyes or ten eyes, as soon as they dare to harm China’s sovereignty, security or development interests, they should be careful lest their eyes be poked blind.” — Zhao Lijian, the spokesman for China’s foreign minister, BBC, November 19, 2020.

New Zealand’s naive approach to the threat posed by Beijing not only poses a threat to the future of the alliance itself. There is a distinct possibility that Wellington could find itself being expelled from the alliance over its pro-Beijing stance.

As a senior Western intelligence official recently commented about New Zealand’s continued membership of the alliance, the country was now “on the edge of viability as a member” of the alliance because of its “supine” attitude to China and its “compromised political system”.

New Zealand’s socialist government may believe that it is a good idea to throw in their lot with China’s communist rulers. But by doing so, they risk sacrificing their future to domination by China’s despots.

China is making a deliberate attempt to create divisions within the elite “Five Eyes” intelligence-sharing alliance by forging closer relations with the left-wing government of New Zealand premier Jacinda Ardern.

The Five Eyes alliance, comprising the US, Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand, dates back to the Second World War, when a number of key allies decided to share intelligence in their bid to defeat Nazi Germany and Japan.

Today, maintaining intelligence-sharing cooperation between the five Anglophone nations is deemed essential to combating the threat posed by autocratic states, such as Russia and Communist China.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-u-s-can-support-freedoms-ferment-in-iran-11619986320?mod=opinion_lead_pos7

Even Iran has its bipartisan moments in American political circles. Democrats and Republicans alike now largely agree that the 2015 nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, needs to be renegotiated and its provisions strengthened. Members of both parties believe that any prospective agreement must address Tehran’s ballistic missiles and its suspect regional activities. Yet often missing is any serious consideration of Iran’s human-rights record. The most consequential victims of the theocratic regime are its own citizens, and their plight shouldn’t be ignored.

Human rights have played an important role in U.S. diplomacy. During the Cold War, American officials routinely brought up the Soviet Union’s repressive policies with their Russian counterparts. In 1975, as part of the Helsinki Accords, the U.S.S.R. agreed to “respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief.”

Soon, so-called Helsinki groups appeared in the Soviet bloc as civil-society activists used the Kremlin’s pledges against it. More than arms control and arms buildups, the Helsinki Accords triggered changes that loosened Moscow’s totalitarian grip. The accords empowered dissidents and highlighted Soviet domestic misdeeds.

One paradox of Iran is that conversations about the Islamic Republic are at times more sophisticated in Tehran than in Washington. Far from being beaten into ambivalence, Iranians are engaged in an informed discussion about their government’s priorities and even the viability of the regime. Former government officials, enterprising intellectuals, dissident clerics and reformist newspapers such as Sharq question many aspects of Islamist rule. They may be shut out of power, but they still command a national platform.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/will-peru-get-on-the-marxist-path-11619986216?mod=opinion_lead_pos8

Peruvians will vote in a runoff presidential election on June 6, and if the polls are correct, Marxist candidate Pedro Castillo will win. An upset by his rival, center-right candidate Keiko Fujimori, is not impossible, but she is definitely the underdog.

Ms. Fujimori trails Mr. Castillo by 10 percentage points in a Datum poll released Thursday night. Importantly, some 22% of those surveyed say they are either undecided or will cast a blank vote because they don’t support either candidate. Voting is mandatory in Peru.

Until Saturday Ms. Fujimori had been confined to campaigning in Lima because she is the subject of a criminal investigation. That prohibition on travel has been lifted and she now has six weeks—an eternity in Peruvian politics—to make up for lost time.

Mr. Castillo’s thinking is frighteningly similar to that of the late Hugo Chávez, who ruled Venezuela from 1999 until his death in 2013. Chavismo strangled Venezuela’s democratic institutions, sent human capital fleeing, destroyed the economy, and generated widespread poverty. The military dictatorship is now headed by Nicolás Maduro with important intelligence backing from Havana.

Venezuela was once one of the most advanced countries in the region. Today Venezuelans live primitively, often without running water, electricity or basic medical supplies.

https://www.westernjournal.com/french-generals-top-officers-warn-political-elites-military-intervention-divisive-critical-race-theory-breaks-society/

“The generals’ letter closed with the words of the late Cardinal Désiré-Joseph Mercier, famous in his own time for his pastoral resistance to the German occupation of Belgium during WWI. “When prudence is everywhere, courage is nowhere.” Indeed, it is time for the West to regain its courage.”

A massive group of former and current French military personnel signed an open letter this week warning of the imminent danger posed by so-called anti-racist ideology, and urging French President Emmanuel Macron to work quickly to prevent a civil war.

The letter, published in French magazine Valeurs Actuelles, was signed by 20 former French generals, 100 officers and over 1,000 other military personnel.

It accused the French government of kowtowing to destructive ideologies such as anti-racism and Islamism, which it said were being leveraged for the purposes of sowing unrest in French communities and risking a descent into full-blown civil war.

The signatories expressed grave concern with the government’s push to deconstruct and decolonize its own history in an attempt to placate a growing Islamism that has wracked the nation with violence and argued that radical Islam is being used to subject neighborhoods to dogmatic rules that go against the French Constitution, creating an unconstitutional parallel Islamic state.

“Perils are mounting, violence is increasing day by day,” the letter warned. “Who would have predicted ten years ago that a teacher would one day be beheaded when he left school?”

The sentence was a reference to the murder and beheading of Samuel Paty, a middle school teacher, in a Parisian suburb last year.

Paty had been teaching a course on free speech and showed his class the cartoon of Muhammad that Islamic terrorists claimed justified the Charlie Hebdo shooting. He was soon after ambushed, murdered and decapitated by a Muslim refugee. Seven more people were charged with facilitating the murder, including a local imam, a parent of one of his students and two students who attended the school.

Notably, the letter explicitly linked the growing threat of an Islamic insurgency in France with the everyday terror of violent socialist and anti-racist riots that have frequently piggybacked off of the chaos of the Yellow Vest protest movement.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17301/erdogan-reform-collapse

“We don’t see ourselves elsewhere but in Europe,” Erdoğan said on November 21. “We envisage building our future together with Europe.”

According to Turkish news site Gazete Duvar, a total of 128,872 people have been indicted in the past six years for insulting Erdoğan. Of those, 27,824 had to stand trial and 9,556 were convicted.

Apparently, Erdoğan wants a democratic system without opposition.

But who cares about the Constitution in a country where the governing bloc is proposing to close down even the Constitutional Court, in addition to banning opposition parties? All these autocratic measures occurred in the less than half-year since Erdoğan pledged democratic reforms.

A few years ago, then Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu had vehemently refuted claims that Turkey was a second-class democracy. He was right. Turkey has since remained a third-class democracy.

His critics often joke that when President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan pledges democratic reforms, one should run away immediately. His latest charm offensive in November, aimed at repairing Turkey’s badly-strained ties with the West and Western institutions, has proven that the joke still holds value.

“We don’t see ourselves elsewhere but in Europe,” Erdoğan said on November 21. “We envisage building our future together with Europe.” Two days later, Defense Minister Hulusi Akar described NATO as the “cornerstone of our defense and security policy” and said that Turkey was looking forward to cooperating with the incoming administration under Joe Biden in the United States. Erdoğan also promised a bold package of democratic reforms.

Less than five months later, Italy’s Prime Minister Mario Draghi had to call Erdoğan a “dictator.” That was not because an experienced European politician wanted to insult a Muslim head of state.

According to Turkish news site Gazete Duvar, a total of 128,872 people have been indicted in the past six years for insulting Erdoğan. Of those, 27,824 had to stand trial and 9,556 were convicted. By comparison, only 11 Turks had been convicted for insulting Ahmet Necdet Sezer, president between 2000 and 2007.

After Erdoğan’s latest reform pledge, on March 21, Turkish authorities arrested a pro-Kurdish opposition MP who had refused to leave parliament for several days after his seat was revoked. Ömer Faruk Gergerlioğlu “was brought out by force while he was in pyjamas and slippers” by “nearly 100 police officers,” the leftist Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) said in a statement.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/04/macrons-folly-bruce-bawer/

Last October I reported here that French president Emmanuel Macron had just “delivered what, on the face of it, seemed to be a remarkable speech on Islam.” Having previously been wishy-washy on the topic, he now promised a new program “intended to defend French laïcité, or official secularism, from ‘Islamist separatism,’” which he explicitly characterized as an existential threat to the Republic. Acknowledging that “one reason why ‘Islamist separatism’ had been allowed to fester was the ‘cowardice’ of French authorities,” Macron proclaimed that a new day had dawned.

In public services, in cultural and athletic associations, in schools and universities, and in other sectors of society, Islamic indoctrination would be officially, firmly, and comprehensively resisted, and Islam itself modernized into an “Islam of the Enlightenment.” My comment at the time was that a great deal of Macron’s scheme, on close examination, “starts to look not like a program for the secularizing of Islam but, rather, like a blueprint for propping up public laïcité while actively promoting private Islamic observance – a blueprint born, one imagines, of pie-in-the-sky hopes that, when the Muslims take over, they won’t replace the Napoleonic Code with sharia law.” In any event, given the decades of French government inaction on the Islam issue, it was hard to take Macron’s vows any more seriously than a boeuf bourguignon prepared with a Beaujolais. 

Two weeks after Macron’s speech, a Muslim named Abdoullakh Abouyezidovitch Anzorov beheaded a history teacher named Samuel Paty, who’d shown his students some cartoons of Muhammed as part of a lesson on freedom of expression. The French took to the streets in outrage (which soon subsided). The government expelled a couple of hundred immigrants who’d been identified as potential terrorists (leaving heaven knows how many hundreds of thousands of others). A mosque was closed (and has since been reopened). Macron praised Paty while also making the usual nice, empty noises about Islam, but admitted that he hadn’t done enough about the problem so far and again promised action. Again I was dubious. “What guarantee is there,” I wrote, “that Macron will keep his eye on the ball after the furor over Paty’s murder dies down – let alone that he will take action that is sweeping enough to make a real difference in this long-term civilizational war?”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/no-escape-from-hong-kong-11619650575?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

Mark another step in Hong Kong’s descent: On Wednesday the Legislative Council made it easier for the government to block Hong Kongers from leaving.

The new legislation gives authorities the power to prevent Hong Kong residents and foreigners from boarding any plane or vessel docked in the city. All that’s required to block a departure is an administrative order, not a court order. The text suggests broad extraterritorial reach. Watch if the implementing rules let authorities demand that a foreign plane or boat that has departed Hong Kong must return or make a detour so an arrest can be made.

The law means that millions of Hong Kongers who participated in the pro-democracy protests have reason to fear they’ll be trapped. The language is also ambiguous enough to worry foreigners working in the city. All of this expands the ambit of exit control beyond last year’s national-security law that lets authorities block the departure of anyone charged with secession, subversion, terrorism or “collusion” with vaguely defined foreign forces.

Beijing is installing the door locks now to avoid the embarrassment of a Hong Kong exodus. After the Communist Party violated the Sino-British Joint Declaration with its abridgement of autonomy, the United Kingdom offered a path to citizenship for Hong Kongers who hold British National (Overseas), or BN(O), passports, as well as their family members.

The British government said on March 19 that it had received some 27,000 applications from Hong Kongers seeking to resettle in the U.K., and the Home Office anticipates “between 123,000 and 153,700 BN(O) status holders and their dependents coming in the first year and between 258,000 and 322,400 over five years.” Bloomberg estimated this month that emigrating Hong Kongers may sell as much as $19.3 billion in property this year.

This brain drain is a tragedy for Hong Kong. But it’s no surprise that the same people who were willing to fight for their freedom in 2019 are now willing to flee for it as Communist control tightens. The U.S. should follow Britain’s lead and welcome Hong Kong’s refugees.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17283/china-antarctica

Rare earth materials are necessary components in the building of such various equipment as combat aircraft, weapons systems, wind turbines and electric vehicles, among other things. They are available in different geographic locations, but are difficult to process. Last year, China produced 90% of the world’s rare earth materials.

“In 1984, during China’s first Antarctic expedition, armed PLA Navy (PLAN) personnel helped set up China’s first Antarctic station—a fact that was not properly acknowledged in China’s report to the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research at the time… In recent years, PLA personnel have repeatedly participated in China’s Antarctic program without their presence being noted in China’s annual report under the Antarctic Treaty….” — Anne Marie Brady, report for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2017.

China is reportedly deceiving international audiences about its intentions in Antarctica. “China adopts one message on Antarctic issues for foreign audiences and another for domestic audiences”. — Anne Marie Brady, report for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2017.

“In 30 years, the Antarctic Treaty becomes modifiable, and the fate of a continent could hang in the balance.” — Professor Klaus Dodds, Royal Holloway University of London, July 12, 2018.

Both Russia and China are fighting to have prohibitions on resource extraction in the Antarctic relaxed. “A significant number of Chinese experts believe, contrary to international law, that the Madrid Protocol expires in 2048, along with the accompanying ban on mining in the Antarctic”. — Alexander B. Gray, National Interest, March 20, 2021.

It is probably not too far-fetched to assume that what lies behind the CCP’s concern for “environmental protection in Antarctica” will turn out to be desire for environmental exploitation.

Hardly a spot remains on the planet — and off — that China does not consider up for grabs, and that includes the North and South poles.