Gaza protest voting in Georgia, Washington threatens Biden’s reelection: Activists

Gaza protest voting in Georgia, Washington threatens Biden’s reelection: Activists
Protesters take part in the “March for Gaza” in Washington, DC, on March 2, 2024. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 14 March 2024
Follow

Gaza protest voting in Georgia, Washington threatens Biden’s reelection: Activists

Gaza protest voting in Georgia, Washington threatens Biden’s reelection: Activists
  • #AbandonBiden activists say president likely to lose swing states, hampering November presidential bid
  • Joe Biden, Donald Trump have secured their parties’ nominations after this week’s primaries

CHICAGO: A significant number of Arab and Muslim voters turned their backs on President Joe Biden in Georgia’s and Washington State’s Democratic primary elections on Tuesday — part of a trend likely to threaten his reelection in November’s polls, according to activist organizations.

Voters chose to “not vote” or to vote “uncommitted” to protest Biden’s support for Israel’s war on Gaza, where more than 31,000 Palestinians have been killed, said the #AbandonBiden and ListentoGeorgia campaign bodies.

Voters in Washington State cast “uncommitted” ballots. But Arab and Muslim voters in Georgia could not, and were instead urged by activists to turn in blank ballot papers as a message to Biden that they do not support what they view as genocide and are calling for a ceasefire. They could also vote for other minor candidates rather than Biden.

The Georgia and Washington State protest votes, along with similar voting in Minnesota, Michigan and several other states, pose a serious threat to Biden’s reelection in November, Farah Khan, co-founder of the #AbandonBiden movement, told Arab News. 

Preliminary numbers in Georgia, where Biden won by a razor-thin margin of 11,779 votes to defeat Donald Trump in 2020, show Biden’s reelection is far from certain, she said. 

Biden “can’t redeem himself now. Come November, it’s going to be really hard for him,” Khan added. “We know he’s … feeling the pressure because he keeps making promises on Gaza and making trips to Michigan without telling the public where he plans to be, like he’s dodging the protesters.”

The protest vote was more significant in Washington State where 48,619 voters, nearly 8 percent of the total, cast “uncommitted” votes just in the Democratic primary. In 2020, Biden won Washington State over Trump by a significant 785,000 votes. 

While the #AbandonBiden vote there will not jeopardize his hold on the state, the uncommitted totals were significant and will increase in November, activists said.

If the 8 percent “uncommitted” vote holds in the general election, Biden could face a much closer fight with Trump.

https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2024/03/13/results-washington-presidential-primary-trump-biden-uncommitted

“Clearly, Georgia had a bit more of an uphill battle than in North Carolina, which had a ‘no preference’ option to affirmatively select,” Pooyan Ordoubadi, co-chair of the North Carolina #AbandonBiden coalition, told Arab News.

“Georgia was decided by less than 12,000 votes in 2020, so even a tiny sliver of disillusioned voters would be extremely problematic for Biden.

“Over three-quarters of Democratic voters are demanding a ceasefire. The large numbers of protest votes show how many voters, across all ages and demographics, are opposed to the US-funded genocide in Gaza. Biden can’t win without us.

“We need to ask why, if the Democrats believe that a Trump presidency would mean the end of democracy, they’re willing to risk it all to support a fascist government in Israel engaged in ethnic cleansing and genocide.”

Khan said: “These numbers are telling you a pretty loud story about the challenges he (Biden) faces. The movement is just getting started.

“Once the primaries wrap up, we’re going to be working very hard to have the momentum picking up. Michigan and Georgia are very tough battlegrounds for him.”

Because there were no “uncommitted” votes to count in Georgia, activists had to calculate the differences between total registered voters versus total votes cast.

Georgia election officials estimated that only slightly more than 11-12 percent of the state’s 7.95 million registered voters requested ballots on Tuesday.

https://sos.ga.gov/election-data-hub

https://www.savannahnow.com/story/news/politics/state/2024/03/12/election-day-georgia-march-12-primary-live-updates/72937683007/

With nearly 98 percent of votes counted in Georgia by Wednesday morning, Biden received 95.19 percent, or 274,820 votes, while two minor challengers won 4.81 percent, or 13,896 votes.

Many Arab and Muslim protesters were encouraged to vote “blank ballots,” although the state election board would not confirm the total number. 

https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/GA/120015/web.317647/#/summary

Activists in the ListentoGeorgia coalition of local faith leaders and political organizations and activists said at least 6,455 Georgia voters submitted blank ballots in response to their protest calls.

Additionally, in Georgia two minor candidate rivals received what appears to be more than 14,000 anti-Biden votes. Georgia election officials did not release numbers for the blank ballots.

The total number of blank ballots returned, combined with the known opposition votes, put the anti-Biden protest at well over the 11,779 votes he received in Georgia in 2020 to defeat Trump.

Biden has not addressed questions or references to the #AbandonBiden campaign over his pro-Israel policies.

But at a rally on Tuesday in Atlanta, a protester in the audience yelled: “What are you going to do, Genocide Joe?  Tens of thousands of Palestinians ...” Supporters drowned out the protester, chanting: “Four more years.”

But Biden responded: “Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait ... Look, I don’t resent … his passion.  There’s a lot of Palestinians who are being unfairly victimized.”

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2024/03/11/remarks-by-president-biden-at-a-campaign-event-atlanta-ga-march-9-2024/

But Khan said no matter how one analyzes the numbers, Biden’s razor-thin 2020 Georgia victory vanishes and jeopardizes his reelection.

“Even Washington voters are showing their disapproval of Biden. Washington voted 7.6 percent uncommitted, almost 47,000 votes — that’s a pretty clear sign,” she added.

“Based on active engagement we’re witnessing on the ground, we’ll see a lot more Arab and Muslim voters turn out in November’s election.”

 Khan said she expects the trend to continue in upcoming state primaries with large Arab and Muslim voter populations, including in Arizona, Florida, Illinois and Ohio on March 19, Wisconsin on April 2, Maryland and West Virginia on May 14, and New Jersey on June 4.

“Muslim and Arab voters are taking their allies, like the Black and Brown and larger progressive community, with them in uniting behind a message to reject genocide,” she added.

To become president, a candidate in the November presidential election must win at least 270 of the 538 Electoral College votes assigned to the 50 states and territories based on voter population. 

In 2020, Biden won 306 electoral votes while Trump received 232. If Biden loses 36 electoral votes by losing at least three states he won four years ago, he cannot win reelection. Michigan, North Carolina and Minnesota represent 41 total electoral votes.

The #AbandonBiden campaign said their protest against Biden is not an expression of support for Trump, although Trump or a third-party candidate such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. could benefit.

If no candidate wins the minimum of 270 electoral votes in the Nov. 5 presidential election, the selection of a president could go to the US House of Representatives, according to the country’s constitution.

https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/faq#no270

Khan said the various #AbandonBiden coalitions are expected to gather after the Democratic and Republican conventions to vet alternative candidates for endorsement, although details have not yet been finalized.

Biden’s deputy campaign manager in Georgia did not respond to an Arab News request for comment.


Mass weddings and singing mailmen as Filipinos mark Valentine’s Day

Mass weddings and singing mailmen as Filipinos mark Valentine’s Day
Updated 14 February 2025
Follow

Mass weddings and singing mailmen as Filipinos mark Valentine’s Day

Mass weddings and singing mailmen as Filipinos mark Valentine’s Day
  • Filipinos go all-out on Valentine’s Day to express love and affection
  • Flower prices at popular marketplaces nearly double on the holiday

MANILA: Shopping malls were filled with heart motifs and red hues, while stalls of pre-arranged bouquets and flowers dotted the streets of Philippine cities on Friday, as Filipinos celebrated Valentine’s Day.

The holiday is rooted in Christian tradition, honoring Saint Valentine, a third-century martyr who was imprisoned and later executed for ministering to persecuted Christians during the Roman Empire, including secretly officiating marriages for Roman soldiers.

In the predominantly Catholic Philippines, mass weddings are commonly held on this day, with local governments offering hundreds of couples the opportunity to marry when traditional weddings may be for some too expensive.

Other government initiatives, including express domestic deliveries brought by singing mailmen of the national post office, have helped Filipinos express affection and make romantic gestures.

The holiday has also become a commercial celebration of romance, with the prices of flowers at popular marketplaces such as the Dangwa market in Manila, nearly doubling. Roses and tulips have spiked to as high as $2 a piece, twice its price last week.

Tina Bautista, a coffee shop owner, has observed how businesses have been impacted by the holiday.

“The Philippines embraces Valentine’s Day. I see restaurants being fully booked, traffic gets heavier, and flower shops have lines of people buying last-minute bouquets. There’s romantic buzz everywhere — from love songs playing in establishments to special promos in cafes and hotels,” she told Arab News.

“One practice that stands out is how businesses get in on the celebration — coffee shops create Valentine’s drinks, malls set up photo booths for couples, and even schools organize Valentine-themed events.”

In the Philippines, men are the ones expected to display love and affection, due to the country’s longstanding courtship traditions.

For Kyle Pelaez, 25, Valentine’s Day is “more of an opportunity to show my appreciation to my partner outside of the daily ways,” he said.

“While we always make it a point to celebrate the occasion, we usually do it not on the day of Feb. 14 itself just to avoid the rush.”

Despite the romantic atmosphere, there are those who feel the social pressure of the holiday.

Justine Poblete, 31, does not see Valentine’s Day as an authentic part of Filipino culture and feels that people only partake in it because of social pressure.

“I think people are celebrating it because other people do. If there is any influence from Filipino culture, I think it’s the fact that women receive more special treatment than men. It’s always men who do romantic gestures,” she said.

“People are pressured to spend whether on gifts or dates … honestly, it can get a bit pressuring. It’s a bit of a shame walking outside with no significant other beside you, or no flowers or gifts in hand. And whether I’m holding a bouquet or not, I still feel awkward and uncomfortable.”

But others see the romanticism of the day.

Philip Juachon, 27, recalled how he used to look for the perfect bouquet for his girlfriend, which “also meant enduring the friendly banter of the people who would see you carrying it.”

While they have been together for 10 years, they always make it to a point to celebrate — if not on Valentine’s Day itself, then on the surrounding days.

“Filipinos are emotionally expressive and love having reasons to celebrate,” he said.

“I think it’s a mix of Filipinos’ love for celebrations, religious influence, and romantic nature. Having a specific day dedicated to love allows us to celebrate and express our affection and appreciation for the people we care about.”


EU chief warns a failed Ukraine would ‘weaken the United States’

EU chief warns a failed Ukraine would ‘weaken the United States’
Updated 14 February 2025
Follow

EU chief warns a failed Ukraine would ‘weaken the United States’

EU chief warns a failed Ukraine would ‘weaken the United States’
  • A failed Ukraine would weaken the United States, von der Leyen told Munich Security Conference

MUNICH: EU chief Ursula von der Leyen on Friday warned that forcing Ukraine into a bad deal would harm US interests, as she urged President Donald Trump to work together for a “just peace.”
“A failed Ukraine would weaken Europe, but it would also weaken the United States,” von der Leyen said at the Munich Security Conference.


Europe quietly works on a plan to send troops to Ukraine for post-war security

Europe quietly works on a plan to send troops to Ukraine for post-war security
Updated 14 February 2025
Follow

Europe quietly works on a plan to send troops to Ukraine for post-war security

Europe quietly works on a plan to send troops to Ukraine for post-war security
  • Britain and France are at the forefront of the effort, though details remain scarce
  • “I won’t get into the particular capabilities, but I do accept that if there is peace then there needs to be some sort of security guarantee for Ukraine,” Starmer said

BRUSSELS: Increasingly alarmed that US security priorities lie elsewhere, a group of European countries has been quietly working on a plan to send troops into Ukraine to help enforce any future peace settlement with Russia.
Britain and France are at the forefront of the effort, though details remain scarce. The countries involved in the discussions are reluctant to tip their hand and give Russian President Vladimir Putin an edge should he agree to negotiate an end to the war he launched three years ago.
What is clear is that Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky needs a guarantee that his country’s security will be assured until peace takes hold. The best protection would be the NATO membership that Ukraine has long been promised, but the US has taken that option off the table.
“I won’t get into the particular capabilities, but I do accept that if there is peace then there needs to be some sort of security guarantee for Ukraine and the UK will play its part in that,” British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said in cautious remarks on Thursday.
The Europeans began exploring what kind of force might be needed about a year ago, but the sense of urgency has grown amid concern that US President Donald Trump might go over their heads, and possibly even Ukraine’s, to clinch a deal with Putin.
Many questions remain unanswered but one stands out: what role, if any, might the United States play?
European powers consider the road ahead
In December, after Trump was elected but before he took office, a group of leaders and ministers huddled with Zelensky at NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte’s residence in Brussels. They came from Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Poland. Top European Union officials attended too.
The talks built on an idea promoted by French President Emmanuel Macron in early 2024. At the time his refusal to rule out putting troops on the ground in Ukraine prompted an outcry, notably from the leaders of Germany and Poland.
Macron appeared isolated on the European stage, but his plan has gained traction since.
Still, much about what the force might look like and who will take part will depend on the terms of any peace settlement, and more.
Italy has constitutional limits on the use of its forces. The Netherlands would need a greenlight from its parliament, as would Germany, whose position could evolve after the Feb. 23 elections usher in a new government. Poland is cautious, given lingering animosities with Ukraine that date from World War II.
A robust security force rather than peacekeepers
The makeup and role of the force will be dictated by the kind of peace deal that’s reached. If Russia and Ukraine can agree terms as the negotiations progress, it’s plausible that fewer security precautions and a smaller force would be needed.
But experts and officials warn that, as things stand, the Europeans must deploy a robust and sizeable contingent, rather than a team of peacekeepers like United Nations “blue helmets.”
“It has to be a real force (so) that the Russians know that if they ever tested it that they would get crushed. And you can be sure that Russia will test it,” Ben Hodges, the former Commanding General of US Army Europe, said last month at a European Policy Center think tank event.
“They violate every single agreement. So if we send a force in there, they’ve got to have airpower, large land forces, drones, counter-drones, air and missile defense. All of that,” he said. “If they go in there with a bunch of blue helmets and rifles, they will get crushed.”
Retired French General Dominique Trinquand, a former head of France’s military mission at the United Nations, agreed that UN peacekeepers are better suited “for deployment in zones that are far more stable.”
“For starters, mounting this operation with soldiers taken from across the world would take about a year,” he said.
How big a force?
The nature of the peace deal will determine the size and location of the European contingent. Zelensky has insisted on at least 100,000 to 150,000 troops. Media reports have speculated about a 30,000-40,000 strong force. Diplomats and officials have not confirmed either figure.
Ukraine also wants air support, not just boots on the ground.
What is clear is that the Europeans would struggle to muster a large-scale force, and certainly could not do it quickly.
In an interview on Friday with the Financial Times, Macron said that the idea of deploying a huge force is “far-fetched.”
“We have to do things that are appropriate, realistic, well thought, measured and negotiated,” he said.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth insisted this week on “robust international oversight of the line of contact,” a reference to the roughly 1,000-kilometer (600-mile) long front line. The Europeans are reluctant as that would require too many troops.
Nearly all agree that some kind of “American backstop” is essential. European armed forces have long relied on superior US logistics, air transport and other military capabilities.
The US lays down some rules
At NATO headquarters on Wednesday, Hegseth began describing the terms under which the US might agree to a force that would help provide Ukraine with the “robust security guarantees to ensure that the war will not begin again.”
“Any security guarantee must be backed by capable European and non-European troops,” Hegseth told almost 50 of Ukraine’s Western backers. If they go to Ukraine, he said, “they should be deployed as part of a non-NATO mission.”
Putin has said that he launched the invasion in part due to NATO territory expanding too close to Russia’s borders and is unlikely to accept any operation run by the world’s biggest military organization.
Any European allies taking part would not benefit from NATO’s collective security guarantee if they were attacked, Hegseth said. He underlined that “there will not be US troops deployed to Ukraine.”
He did not reveal what role the US might play.
From Ukraine’s perspective, a Europe-only operation simply would not work. “Any security guarantees are impossible without the Americans,” Ukrainian Foreign Minister Sybiha warned on Thursday.


Belarus committing ‘crimes against humanity’: UN investigators

Belarus committing ‘crimes against humanity’: UN investigators
Updated 14 February 2025
Follow

Belarus committing ‘crimes against humanity’: UN investigators

Belarus committing ‘crimes against humanity’: UN investigators
  • “The government of Belarus has committed widespread human rights violations against the country’s civilian population,” a UN group of independent experts said
  • The report said: “the crime against humanity of persecution on political grounds has been committed against Belarusians perceived as being critical of, or opposed to, the government“

GENEVA: Serious human rights violations remain rampant in Belarus, United Nations investigators said Friday, adding that some of the abuses by President Alexander Lukashenko’s government amounted to crimes against humanity.
“The government of Belarus has committed widespread human rights violations against the country’s civilian population, some amounting to crimes against humanity, as part of a brutal effort to quash all opposition” to Lukashenko’s rule, a UN group of independent experts said in a statement.
Publishing its first report since its establishment nearly a year ago, the group said it had documented “egregious violations,” including widespread torture, and warned that arbitrary arrests and detention on politically motivated grounds had “become a fixture of the tactics of Belarusian authorities.”
Among its conclusions, the report said “the crime against humanity of persecution on political grounds has been committed against Belarusians perceived as being critical of, or opposed to, the government.”
The expert group was created last April by the UN Human Rights Council, and tasked with investigating and establishing “the facts, circumstances and root causes of all alleged human rights violations and abuses committed in Belarus” since May 1, 2020.
The experts, who are independent and do not speak for the United Nations, were also asked to “collect, consolidate, preserve and analyze evidence of such violations and abuses and, where possible, to identify those responsible,” to help bring them to justice.
Belarus was gripped by months of unprecedented anti-government demonstrations after an August 2020 election resulted in a sixth term for Lukashenko — a staunch ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Lukashenko went on to win a seventh term last month in what critics termed a “sham election.”
The 2020 protests were followed by a brutal crackdown.
The UN experts said they conducted nearly 200 interviews in person and remotely with victims, witnesses and others in exile, and examined a large trove of video, photo and other documents for their report.
They said they had gathered “ample evidence” that men and women arrested on politically motivated grounds between 2020 and 2024 “were subjected to torture and ill-treatment at all stages of their detention.”
They reported beatings, electric shocks and rape threats against both detainees and their partners.
“Security forces displayed marked brutality toward LGBTIQ+ individuals, using physical violence and dehumanizing language,” the experts said.
People detained on politically motivated grounds in penal colonies across the country had meanwhile “described a discriminatory regime of detention designed not only to punish them, but also to crush any form of political resistance,” the report said.
It also highlighted how the Belarusian government last year adopted measures that “purged most potential sources of dissent and opposition,” including through enhanced digital surveillance used to monitor online activities, often leading to prosecutions.
Last year alone, at least 228 civil society organizations were “liquidated,” it said.
The experts called on the Belarusian government to immediately release all those unlawfully or arbitrarily detained, and to promptly launch independent and transparent investigations into all abuses, especially those thought to amount to crimes against humanity.
And the group called on the international community to help ensure accountability for the abuses, including through universal jurisdiction.


German president: accept that US won’t heed international rules

German president: accept that US won’t heed international rules
Updated 14 February 2025
Follow

German president: accept that US won’t heed international rules

German president: accept that US won’t heed international rules
  • “We have to accept that and we can deal with it,” Steinmeier said at the Munich Security Conference

FRANKFURT: Germany’s President Frank-Walter Steinmeier said the international community will have to deal with a disregard by the new US administration for established diplomatic rules.
“The new American administration has a very different world view to ours, one that has no regard for established rules, partnership and grown trust,” said the German head of state, whose office is largely ceremonial.
“We have to accept that and we can deal with it. But I am convinced that it is not in the interests of the international community for this world view to become the dominant paradigm,” he added, speaking at the Munich Security Conference on Friday.