Category News

On Saturday, May 31, 2018, this is how things are going.

Fighting

• In a Russian attack on the village of Vasyliv Khutir in northeastern Kharkiv, eight people were hurt, according to regional governor Oleh Syniehubov, including two teenagers.

Ceasefire

• Ukraine has resisted US and Russian pressure to agree to a second round of peace talks in Istanbul on Monday, contending that it first needs to hear Russian demands for a ceasefire. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the president of Ukraine, stated that Russia “is doing everything possible to make sure the next potential meeting does not produce any results.”
• Andrii Sybiha, the foreign minister of Ukraine, added that Kyiv needed to be aware of the Russian ceasefire proposals in advance to ensure that the talks would be “substantial and meaningful,” without stating in detail what Kyiv would do if it failed to receive the document or set a delivery date.
• As long as Western nations stopped arming Ukraine and preventing Kyiv from mobilizing troops, Russia’s UN ambassador, Vassily Nebenzia, stated to the UN Security Council that Moscow was ready to consider a ceasefire.

• Lindsey Graham, a well-known US Republican senator, stated during a visit to Kyiv that a bill to impose sanctions on Russia is expected to be introduced by the Republican-led US Senate next week. Graham, who met Zelenskyy on Friday in Kyiv, claimed to have spoken with Donald Trump prior to his trip, and that Moscow is now anticipating taking concrete steps.
• Trump claimed to have been surprised and depressed by the Russian bombing of Ukraine while attempting to arrange a ceasefire, and that both Putin and Zelenskyy were stubborn.
• Trump’s special representative for Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, argued that Washington did not want to see Ukraine join the US-led military alliance, and that Russia’s concern about the NATO expansion was fair.
• Moscow was pleased, according to Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, who noted that a Russian delegation would be traveling to Istanbul and prepared for discussions with Ukraine on Monday morning.
• The next step, according to Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, would be to try to host a meeting between Trump, Putin, and Zelenskyy.

Economy

Donald Trump, president of the United States, has announced that his administration will increase steel import tariffs from 25% to 50%.

Trump defended his most recent tariff increase as a benefit to the nation’s manufacturing sector when speaking to steelworkers and supporters at a rally outside Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Trump told the audience that “we’re going to increase the steel tariffs in the United States of America from 25% to 50%, which will even more secure the steel industry there.” Nobody will maneuver around that, they say.

It is still unclear how the tariff increase will impact the United Kingdom’s earlier trade agreement with Canada and Mexico or the free-trade agreement there.

The nature of the agreement between US Steel, Japan’s largest steel producer, and Nippon Steel, left ambiguous. Trump continued to promote the two companies’ partnership as a “blockbuster agreement.”

Trump cited the agreement as saying, “There has never been a $14 billion investment in the history of the steel industry in the United States of America.”

Steel tariff increases

Trump and his team’s campaign events on Friday marked their return to the same location where they had previously held numerous election-season campaign events.

Trump’s campaign for reelection in 2024 based on a rally to working-class voters, including those in the Rust Belt, a manufacturing hub that has declined in response to changing industry trends and increased overseas competition.

The region’s key swing states, including Pennsylvania and Michigan, were there on election day, helping to win Trump’s second term.

Trump’s “America First” campaign is seen as a policy platform intended to support the nation’s manufacturing sector. Tariffs and other protectionist measures have been a key component of that agenda.

For instance, Trump announced a preliminary slate of 25-percent tariffs on steel and aluminum in March, prompting significant trading partners like Canada to take retaliatory measures.

He also imposed a blanket 10-percent tariff on nearly all of his trade partners the following month, as well as higher country-specific import taxes. The 10-percent tariff remained in place while those were quickly halted in the midst of widespread criticism and economic shockwaves.

Trump has argued that the tariffs are a crucial negotiation tool to sway more foreign investment into the US economy.

However, economists have warned that price increases will likely increase as a result of US consumers’ pressure being “hard reset” of the global economy, as well as significant tax increases like tariffs.

Given the sudden shifts in his policies, Rachel Ziemba, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, said the most recent tariff increase on steel also indicates that negotiating trade deals with Trump may lead to “limited benefits.”

Additionally, she said, Friday’s announcement suggests that Trump is likely to continue to impose tariffs.

The issue is that, among other things, raising steel tariffs is bad for manufacturing and the energy sector. Overall, Ziemba explains that it is unfavorable to the US economy and adds uncertainty to the macro outlook.

Businesses, interest groups, and states have all filed lawsuits to stop the import tax increases, which Trump has also faced in the US.

For instance, on Thursday, a federal court briefly upheld Trump’s request to impose his extensive list of international tariffs before a short-lived appeals court abruptly paused that decision.

A partnership with Nippon Steel

The anticipated focus of Friday’s rally in Pittsburgh was on Nippon Steel’s proposed acquisition of US Steel, the second-largest steel producer in the nation, prior to the tariff increase’s announcement.

At the start of his speech, Trump stated, “We’re here today to celebrate a blockbuster agreement that will ensure this storied American company stays an American company.”

However, labor unions were largely against the merger between Nippon Steel and US Steel because it had been contentious.

Trump initially stated he would not support the acquisition when he returned to the White House in January, a similar position held by his predecessor, former US President Joe Biden.

He has since changed his mind and backed the agreement, though. He made an announcement last week that Nippon would only have “partial ownership” of US Steel.

Trump stated on Friday that the new agreement would give Nippon a “14 billion commitment to the future” of US Steel, but he would not provide specifics about how the ownership agreement would turn out.

Trump addressed the crowd of steelworkers, “Oh, you’re gonna be happy.” There is a lot of money in your path, the statement reads.

The Republican leader also poetically described the US’s history of steel, describing it as the engine that drives the nation’s economy.

He continued, “If you don’t have steel, you don’t have a country,” adding that the city of Pittsburgh used to produce more steel than most entire nations could.

For its part, US Steel hasn’t given investors any information about the revised deal. Meanwhile, Nippon hasn’t disclosed the terms of the agreement, despite a statement that supports the proposed “partnership.”

Despite being one of its principal opponents, the national United Steelworkers Union has been among the unionized workers affected by the acquisition.

The union questioned whether the new arrangement “makes any significant changes” from the initial proposal in a statement released prior to the rally.

In a statement citing firmer details that had not yet been made, the union said that “Nippon has consistently maintained that it would only invest in US Steel’s facilities if it owned the company outright.

“Over the past few days, there hasn’t been anything in the reporting that suggests Nippon has retreated from this position.”

Following a turbulent start to his second term, Trump has attempted to reassure his base of voters with the Friday rally.

Sejong, South Korea – By the standards of Seoul’s teeming metropolises, Sejong is not very much of a city.

Sejong, a planned city located about 100 kilometers (62 miles) south of Seoul, does not even make the top 20 urban centers, with a population of 400 000 people.

Sejong could soon become the nation’s “de facto” capital, if South Korea’s most likely next leader has his way.

In response to a renewed push to find a new administrative capital, Lee Jae-myung, the clear favorite in Tuesday’s presidential election, has pledged to relocate Sejong’s presidential office, legislature, and numerous public institutions.

In the run-up to the election, Lee vowed to make Sejong the de facto administrative capital and Daejeon the world center of science.

Through social consensus, I’ll also advocate for the complete relocation of the presidential office and the National Assembly to Sejong.

Late President Roh Moo-hyun, who argued that moving the capital would help promote development in South Korea’s central region and ease congestion, came up with the idea for Sejong in 2003.

The following year, the Constitutional Court decided that Seoul should remain Sejong, which set back Roh’s plans for Sejong.

Seoul has remained Seoul’s official capital as well as the center of political, economic, and cultural life despite the relocation of the prime minister’s office and about a dozen ministries over the years as a result of decentralization efforts by successive governments.

About 26 million people live in Greater Seoul, making up the majority of South Korea’s population, and the majority of the region’s top businesses, universities, hospitals, and cultural institutions are clustered there.

Sejong’s broad streets, which were mostly quiet on a recent Friday afternoon, were a world away from Seoul’s bustling alleyways.

A number of government employees were waiting for a bus to the capital at the city’s express bus station.

At least twice a month, Kevin Kim, a 30-year-old civil servant, spends the weekend in Seoul.

Kim, who has resided in Sejong for almost two years, told Al Jazeera, “My family, friends, and girlfriend are in Seoul.”

“I have to go to Seoul because there are so many big hospitals there.”

Lee Ho-baek, a start-up employee in Sejong, also makes monthly trips to Seoul.

He claimed that despite moving to Sejong a year ago, there simply isn’t enough amenities or activities for us in the city.

Candidate Lee’s pledge has sparked tentative signs of city growth after years of stumbling blocks to Sejong’s development, including concerns about costs and constitutional legitimacy.

Real estate transactions increased by threefold in April from the same time last year.

Sejong’s future is uncertain because of its ties to changing political whims, but its long-term viability is a concern.

Apartment prices increased by 45 percent during discussions about the Democratic Party’s potential 2020 re-election of the presidential office and legislature, but they also dropped by 45 percent in the following years.

As Friday afternoon turned into evening, the streets of Sejong’s Nasung-dong, a popular neighborhood dotted with parks, shopping centers, and flashy apartments, were quiet.

The highly anticipated multifunctional mall M-Bridge, which had been designed by the firm of global architect Thom Mayne, was largely deserted.

The highest rate in the country is 25 percent vacancy rate for medium- to large-sized shopping centers, according to the Korea Real Estate Board.

Young people are fewer attractive in comparison.

According to Jace Kim, a restaurant owner who visited Sejong in 2015, “weekdays are busier than weekends in our city.”

The majority of city employees “spend their time and money elsewhere.” Given that our city is relatively undeveloped and newly constructed, it makes for a great place for mothers and children. However, there are no major universities or businesses that will draw young people here.

Washington, DC, according to Moon Yoon-sang, a research fellow at the Korea Development Institute (KDI).

It’s hoped that Sejong will host conventions and significant meetings instead of Seoul, Moon said in an interview with Al Jazeera.

Although there are only two major hotels in the city right now, the National Assembly’s relocation is anticipated to have a significant impact.

Sejong’s mayor, Park Jin, a professor at KDI’s School of Public Policy and Management, said he supports the designation.

Relocating the capital would require a constitutional amendment that would need to be approved by the majority of the voters in a referendum and two-thirds of the National Assembly.

In a survey conducted by Hankook Research in 2022, 54.9 percent of respondents said they were against moving the capital to Sejong, but 51.7 percent opposed removing Seoul’s National Assembly and the president’s office.

Seoul’s talent pool and essential infrastructure are all retained by the country, according to Park, who told Al Jazeera. “The country needs to invest in developing our other major cities.”

“For Sejong, combining with Daejeon to become the nation’s center for administrative and research,” says Daejeon.

To maintain healthy urbanization, Park believes that the country’s five major cities outside of the greater Seoul area should have at least 4 million residents.

The second-largest city in South Korea, Busan, has 3.26 million residents. Due to record-low birth rates and a declining young workforce, the Korea Employment Information Service officially declared Busan a potential extinction site last year.

Internal migration to Seoul has exacerbated the country’s regional population declines even more. Last year, more than 418, 000 people re-located to the capital.

By 2040, Sejong hopes to have 800,000 residents, roughly twice as many as it currently does.

“Today, there are many people who won’t consider immigrating to Sejong. It’s very challenging for both members of married couples to find jobs outside of Seoul in a time when both are expected to be employed, Moon said.

“We might see differences in how people view Sejong in the next ten years.”

According to Park, building a city from scratch is not a quick project.

Washington, DC – When the Heritage Foundation, a well-known right-wing think tank in the US, released a playbook last year to combat the Palestinian solidarity movement, it received little media coverage.

However, more than eight months later, activists and media outlets are now more critical of the policy document, in part because President Donald Trump appears to be sticking to its instructions.

The authors of Project Esther have released a report as a set of counterterrorism tips, but critics claim the document’s main goal is to “poison” anti-Israeli groups by portraying them as Hamas sympathizers.

In response to growing outcry against US support of Israel’s Gaza war, which UN experts and human rights organizations have characterized as a genocide, Project Esther was founded.

What is Project Esther, and how does it work against activists? The document’s current implications for the US are discussed in detail here.

The Heritage Foundation is what?

The Heritage Foundation is a well-known conservative think tank based in Washington, DC, whose stated goals are “formulating and promoting public policies that are based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.”

However, in opposition to Israeli government policies, critics claim that Project Esther calls for government interference to restrict individual freedoms, including the right to free speech and association.

Victoria Coates, a vice president at the Heritage Foundation who served as Trump’s deputy national security adviser, is in charge of the project, according to a report from the New York Times that was released earlier this month.

Project 2025, which critics call an authoritarian playbook for the second Trump presidency, is also funded by The Heritage Foundation.

Democrats repeatedly criticized Trump in Project 2025 ahead of the elections last year, but the then-candidate vehemently disapproved of the document.

What is the objective of Project Esther?

Within 24 months, the initiative claims to “dismantle the infrastructure that sustains” the “Hamas Support Network.”

What does Project Esther define as the “Hamas Support Network”?

The Hamas Support Network (HSN), according to the authors, is a group that supports Palestinian rights.

They define the alleged network as “people and organizations that are directly and indirectly engaged in Hamas’ cause in defiance of American values and American national security interests.”

In essence, the document claims that the “pro-Palestinian movement” is “in effect a terrorist support network.”

Exists there a “Hamas Support Network”?

No.

Hamas is one of the few US-based networks that has strict laws prohibiting the distribution of material support to “terrorist organizations,” including there.

The Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), which the Heritage Foundation refers to as a network member, described Project Esther’s accusations as “outlandish.”

According to Miller, “It exposes the length of lies and absurdity that they are going through in an effort to destroy the Palestinian rights movement.”

Al Jazeera requested comment, but The Heritage Foundation did not.

How is Project Esther hoping to end the Palestinian rights movement?

The document calls for a broad-ranging legal, political, and financial campaign against Palestinians who support their rights.

19 of the initiative’s objectives are described as “desired effects.”

They include denying access to universities for Palestinian rights advocates who are not US citizens, making sure that “anti-Semitic content” on social media platforms is not tolerated, and providing evidence of “criminal activity” by Palestine advocates to the executive branch.

Additionally, it calls for the refusal to grant permits for demonstrations aimed at advancing Palestinian rights.

Project Esther urges Israel’s supporters to conduct “legal, private research” into pro-Palestine organizations to “uncover criminal wrongdoing” and undermine their standing.

The tactic of using litigation to pressure opponents is referred to as “we must wage lawfare.”

Does the Trump administration have any policy recommendations?

It appears to be the case.

According to Coates, “the phase we’re in is starting to execute some of the lines of effort in terms of legislative, legal, and financial penalties for what we believe to be significant amounts of terrorism.”

Trump’s crackdown on college protests seems to be in line with Project Esther’s objectives.

For instance, the US government has temporarily revoked visas for Israeli-trained foreign students. This is in line with a suggestion in Project Esther that students should be identified as “in violation of student visa requirements.”

Canary Mission, a website that targets and demonizes pro-Palestine students, is also frequently mentioned by The Heritage Foundation in its Project Esther footnotes. Additionally, it is suspected that the Trump administration relies on the website to identify students who might be deported along with other pro-Israel organizations.

Additionally, Project Esther mentions professors who are “hostile to Israel” in programs like “Middle East/North Africa” or “Islamic studies.”

The Trump administration has been putting pressure on top universities to reform their academic departments, including their Middle East studies programs, because they think they are biased in favor of Palestinians. At Trump’s request, Columbia University, for example, appointed a provost to review its programs “starting with the Middle East” department.

Al Jazeera contacted The White House for comment, but the agency did not respond.

What organizations are Project Esther’s target groups?

The initiative specifically mentions a number of student organizations that are affiliated with the so-called Hamas Support Network, as well as several Arab, Muslim, and progressive Jewish organizations.

According to the initiative, “the network revolves around” the educational and civic advocacy organization American Muslims for Palestine (AMP).

Osama Abuirshaid, the executive director of AMP, criticized Project Esther for using the term “Muslim” in its name, which serves as an outlet for Islamophobic bigotry.

“Palestine is a facile target for American Muslims.” It’s simple to assume responsibility for the actions of American Muslims and Palestinians given the tendencies of Islamophobia. That is a name that sticks, Abuirshaid told Al Jazeera.

Because of its effectiveness and “solid constituency,” he added, the group is also a target.

“If they can cripple and subdue AMP, the movement will experience a chilling effect.” They therefore believe that other organizations will stop working on Palestine solidarity if they can bring us down, Abuirshaid said.

Why should we emphasize universities?

Because Israel is stifling the support of young people in the US, Tariq Kenney-Shawa, a US policy fellow at the Palestinian think tank Al-Shabaka, claimed Project Esther is targeted at universities.

He claimed on Al Jazeera’s The Take podcast, “That’s why there’s such a vehement focus on universities and college campuses.”

According to Kenney-Shawa, US demographics have been indicating a downward trend toward support for Israel’s war on Gaza. The change is more pronounced on college campuses, though.

While this change is evidently much more acute in the left and among young Americans, Kenney-Shawa said.

According to a recent poll conducted by the Pew Research Center, 53% of Americans with disabilities have negative views of Israel. This percentage rises to 71% among Democrats under the age of 50.

Project Esther is it effective?

Advocates claim that the Palestinian solidarity movement’s immediate crackdown threatens activists’ safety and well-being, particularly those who study abroad. However, there has also been a backlash as a result.

According to JVP’s Miller, “the extreme nature of these attacks has also encouraged people to defiantly continue to speak out in the face of these attacks.”

“And it has actually, in many cases, awakened people who weren’t paying attention to the hypocrisy that has been present for a long time in the refusal to silence and censor Palestinian rights activists.”

In response to free speech concerns, a bill that expanded restrictions on boycotts of Israel was introduced by a number of right-wing lawmakers and Trump allies earlier in May.

Miller’s comments were echoed by Abuirshaid. He made it clear that the focus on Palestine has been “distracted” by the media’s attacks, arrests, and lawsuits against activists and student protesters.