CDC calls for universal mask wearing as cases surge

Written on 11 November 2020.

Rabat – Democrats failed to produce a “blue wave” of resistance against US President Donald Trump despite a rising COVID-19 death toll. In a country mired in several crises the incumbent was able to keep results “too close to call.” With 50 million Americans facing food insecurity, an economy in tatters, and a continuously climbing COVID-19 fatality count, Democrats failed to outright defeat Trump on election night.

   Democrats had counted on a sense of disgust with President Trump’s performance and rhetoric as an electoral strategy. While this strategy got the party’s supporters to the polls, it failed to offer the transformative change that can cause voters to abandon political allegiances. 

   Instead of galvanizing voters, Democrats appear to have offended Trump voters for holding similar xenophobic views as their leader, while offering little in terms of transformative change.

Optimism turns to despair

   Similar to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 strategy, Democrats had amplified Trump’s racism and corruption while failing to offer strong policy proposals to alleviate American suffering. They presented the race as a battle for the “soul of America,” while voters appeared to have been looking for clear and practical support in a time of crisis.

   Democrats’ failure to produce a landslide victory over Trump will have stunned many. Democratic campaign veteran James Carville had boasted about an upcoming electoral humiliation for Trump. A few hours into election night however, Carville’s tweets went silent. Confident Democratic-aligned commentators started the night with a Cheshire smile and concluded the hours of reporting with a painful grimace. 

Democrats’ strategy

   Weeks of polling had boosted the Biden campaign’s feeling of a large and inevitable victory. Trump would finally be held to account for his blatant racism and mismanagement, according to Democrats. The fact that American voters came out in large numbers to support Trump on election day appears to have indeed revealed part of America’s soul.

   Democrats had revolved their strategy on highlighting Trump’s failures of leadership, while presenting their candidate Joe Biden as a moderate alternative. The campaign urged for a return to the diplomatic and incremental approach of the Obama administration. Biden’s campaign did not propose any ambitious program to truly alleviate economic suffering.

   Instead Democrats were distracted by identity politics, making empty statements and posing for pictures wearing Kente scarves in response to the justified outrage of millions of Black voters. With millions facing economic despair, the Biden promise to return to 2016-style politics failed to offer a practical way out of voters’ current misery.

   The Democratic campaign focused on preaching to those already appalled at Trump’s behavior. With mock empathy woven throughout its rhetoric it failed to propose a transformative alternative vision for America.

Transformative change

   As the horse race between Biden and Trump, and Republicans and Democrats, for the electoral college progressed during election night, it became clear US citizens had indeed voted for transformative change—on the level of state initiatives. 

   Oregon voted to decriminalize all drugs, a historic shift in a country known for jailing vast numbers of non-violent people who use drugs.

   Traditionally conservative states like Arizona, South Dakota, and Montana legalized cannabis. In Washington D.C. the use of psychedelic mushrooms will no longer be illegal while Oregon will legalize the medical use of these drugs, formally considered to be high risk substances.

   In Colorado citizens appear to have voted to overturn the electoral college system itself, by voting to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. In California voters chose to expand democratic rights to people on parole by allowing them to run for office through Proposition 17. 

   US voters did not appear reluctant to vote for ambitious and innovative new ideas; the Democrats appear to simply have failed to offer any in the presidential race.

Consequences

   The absence of outright victory on election night, as predicted, will mean that the result will likely be mired in controversy for weeks to come. Trump has followed through with his earlier statements that he would consider election night as the “true result” of the electorate. Millions of uncounted ballots now produce an atmosphere of uncertainty in which Trump flourishes.

   As the US continues to count votes, numbers are likely to shift in Biden’s favor. Yet the fact that Democrats could not outright defeat a candidate like Trump should be a dire condemnation of their campaign strategy and political abilities. With hundreds of thousands of Americans dead due to COVID-19 and an economic crisis on par with the Great Depression, Trump should have been one of the easiest incumbents to defeat in US history. 

   The fact that Democrats failed to prosecute and humiliate Trump outright is a dire warning about the future of their party, and the absence of any true political balance in the US.

Jasper Hamann -- Morocco World News

Written on 03 November 2020.

Written on 11 November 2020.

Donald Trump’s refusal to accept the reality that Joe Biden won last week’s election is not merely an overgrown child’s tantrum. By deliberately seeking to undermine the results, Trump and a wide swath of Republican leaders are laying the groundwork to overturn them—an act that, were we watching it unfold abroad, we’d call a coup d’état. Just consider:

• Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell hasn’t acknowledged Biden’s victory.
• Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has promised there will be “a smooth transition to a second Trump administration.”
• Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt says that Trump “may have not have been defeated at all.”
• Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson says he won’t congratulate Biden because “there’s nothing to congratulate him about.”
• The White House is reportedly vetting appointees for a second Trump term.
• Attorney General Bill Barr has issued a memo authorizing federal prosecutors to pursue claims of voter fraud.
• And Trump’s legal team continues to pursue baseless litigation promoting unfounded conspiracy theories.

   These are not the actions of a president and political party prepared to peacefully hand over power after losing an election. They are the exact opposite: a deliberate strategy seeking to annul the expression of the popular will. It is a dangerous scheme that, at best, will fray confidence in our already fragile democracy. At worst, it will succeed and keep Trump in office against all right and all law.

   This is, of course, exactly what we expected from Trump. But where are Democratic leaders in denouncing this with the righteous fury this moment requires? Why have we not seen Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, their chief lieutenants, and their most prominent allies all gather before the Capitol and, in one voice, expose this plot against America for what it is?

   We can’t just let Trump play out the string. We can’t, as one nameless Republican pleaded, “humor him” while we tell ourselves, “Jan. 20 can’t come soon enough.” The peril is too great. Trump’s attempted coup probably will not succeed, but that is not a good or acceptable reason to ignore it. Even if it fails, Trump can do great damage on his way out.

   Top Democrats must stand up for democracy while there is still time, to show the country and the world that we will not tolerate the GOP’s assault on this great nation and all it stands for. The stakes are too high to delay any longer.

Written on 02 November 2020.

In a post on Twitter, Turkey’s Minister of Transport and Infrastructure Adil Karaismailoglu, announced that Turkey has expanded its search and rescue area of responsibility to cover the “Blue Homeland,” a doctrine which aspires to give Turkey control over the waters of the eastern Aegean and the northern Mediterranean.

   In the map posted by Mr Karaismailoglu, half of the Aegean Sea- which is Greek and thus EU waters apparently, is assigned to Turkey's "Blue Homeland". That alone should have caused an uproar in the EU and Greece's European partners, but in reality, after Germany's request, any decision on sanctions or action against Turkey, has been delayed until December.

   Which of course means that Greece and Cyprus will have to just get used to Turkish ships violating their waters, while their European counterparts.... are trying to achieve what exactly? The more they show disunity and reluctance in decisively dealing with Erdogan's government, the more he is going to test Greece and Europe to get what he wants.  He will push it as far as he can to challenge the EU.

   Turkey has been signaling its intentions for some time now, yet Europe is unable to make up its mind on how to deal with its growing aggression and confidence. The involvement of Turkish troops in Northern Syria, Libya, the support towards Azerbaijan in its ongoing war against Armenia, never mind its treatment of Greece and Cyprus, should worry Europe. But for now, Germany remains calm and eager to appease Erdogan.

   It is understandable that many EU countries have interests in Turkey, and not just Germany; Italy, Malta, Spain, the Netherlands too, have agreements with the Turks. However, if they do not act towards Turkey in the same way they acted against Belarus and Russia over Lukashenko and Navalny's poisoning, any efforts of the EU achieving credibility as a world player and political power will be laughable. What use will the EU  have if it cannot protect its own member states from a third country, even on purely financial terms?

   Recently, Greece has signed some very successful agreements for gas exploration in the region with Israel and Cyprus. It also saw some billion worth of investment from Microsoft. These achievements are all in jeopardy if Greece enters into a war or conflict with Turkey, which begs the question: does Europe really want to see a prosperous and stable Greece and southern Balkan region?

   Right now the block is bound together by primarily financial agreements, with any effort for a single foreign policy and a bigger role in the world affairs being blocked by national governments and their interests. Who can take seriously the EU if it mainly shoots its arrows towards Russia and China, which are foremost a threat to the American hegemony.

   The only country which tried to bring some attention to its cause, was of course Cyprus. The tiny island nation took a stand and blocked sanctions against Belarus, if the same was not in consideration for Turkey. In the early October EU Summit however, it compromised and conceded to pressure from its partners to give up its veto. We can only imagine what promises or threats its EU peers made, in order for Cyprus to agree.

   Perhaps the recent decision by its government to give up its "golden passport" scheme is a clue, in which Cypriot -- thus EU passport and effectively citizenship -- could be sold to millionaires from around the world in exchange of a hefty lump-sum, . The EU had its sight on this scheme for some time now, so most likely Cyprus had to give it up in exchange of something that is yet to be revealed.

   Because Cyprus is not the only EU member state that adopted such practices. Malta and Bulgaria have the same scheme in place and although they faced similar criticism, they are yet to be compliant to the block's pressure, even it would be the right thing to do; a widespread EU ban on citizenship trade.

   The island nation had it tough from Turkey since the '70s. Recently though, since Israel and Cyprus signed gas exploration deals, the Turks have been doing everything to harass and sabotage the Cypriot efforts. The aim of course is to pressure its leadership to accept co-exploration, or face permanent partition of the island.

   In the recent election in the so called "Republic of Northern Cyprus", the Turkish Cypriot hardliner-Ersin Tatar, a nationalist who favors stronger ties with Turkey, scored a surprise victory. The ousting of the pro-unification incumbent president Mustafa Akinci, is a clear statement of Turkey's bluff or intentions.

   When the EU accepted the Cypriot Republic as a member, it very well knew what it was getting into. And although many would like to blame the Greek Cypriots for rejecting the disputed Annan Plan, which aimed to unify the country, they ignore the obvious failings of the proposals that the plan included.

   In the plan, Turkey was granted rights to interfere with the treaty between Egypt and the Republic of Cyprus on the Delimitation of the Exclusive Economic Zone. Cyprus' rights to its Continental Shelf in the south would have also been answerable to Turkey, which was granted the right of stationing Turkish troops on the island of Cyprus perpetually, again making full independence impossible.

   The Ethnic groups in Cyprus are Greek 77%, Turkish 18%, other 5% of the population. The Annan plan equated the representation of the two major ethnic groups in the proposed Senate and in the Supreme Court giving 50-50 representation to the two communities. The majority becomes a minority in important decision centres.

   The above are only a few reasons why the Greek Cypriots rejected such humiliating agreement, not to mention that the British bases on the island were never discussed, nor any compensation for property lost to the Turkish settlers. In fact, all of them would be granted citizenship or residence rights leading to citizenship. Those settlers opting to return to Turkey would be compensated by Cyprus and Greek Cypriots. Even though Turkey systematically brought in the settlers to alter the demography of the island, it had no responsibility for their repatriation.

   It becomes obvious that this plan was drafted in order to humiliate the Greek Cypriots, or to make sure they rejected it. Given the fact that if the Cyprus dispute was resolved, it could potentially pave the way for a Turkish entry in the EU, or at least signal the removal of a major obstacle, it is no wonder that such preposterous demands were made in it.

   In other words, the interests of big powers and players in the region, decided the future of the island, its relationship with Turkey, its place in the EU, the Turkish relations with the block and so on. Who is paying the price for vested national interests in the region? Once again, the Greeks and the Cypriots, the EU's periphery and the whole of East Mediterranean and South Balkans.

   With a Turkey so volatile, desperate and angry at Europe's rejection, false promises and delays in what it promised or agreed (we can only speculate what Europe discussed with the Turks over the refugee crisis, the ongoing EU membership bid etc), Greece, Cyprus and the whole region can never find peace and without it, no prosperity or stability. Who will be paying for this in the long term? The European tax payer of course.

   If Greece and Cyprus require constant help with their finances, or "overspend" in buying German, Dutch, French, Italian, British and US weaponry, then no one can expect to see his taxes spent in investing in green industries in the region, as the EU aims for the future. Unless of course these plans are drafted only for the core EU members, not the peripheral ones.

   Europe must come into a decision about Turkey and soon. The more it lingers in order to save and serve its financial interests in the country, the more harm it is done in the region. Either sanction the Turks into conformity, kick them out of NATO, or negotiate their real demands behind their stance; Erdogan must want something promissed badly to repeatedly blackmail the EU. Since Europeans do nothing, this will continue to the detriment of East Mediterranean, Cyprus and Greece.

   Non action is not an option and European leaders know it,yet are afraid of dealing with the aftermath and concequences. Which is of course, another European fiasco in its efforts of a single foreign policy and influence in-nevermind the world, but primarily its own doorstep.

Christos Mouzeviris