Pro-Palestinian protests sweep US college campuses following mass arrests at Columbia

Pro-Palestinian protests sweep US college campuses following mass arrests at Columbia
1 / 2
Pro-Palestinian supporters rally on the campus of Columbia University on April 22, 2024 in New York City. (AFP)
Pro-Palestinian protests sweep US college campuses following mass arrests at Columbia
2 / 2
Two student protesters converse at the Pro-Palestine protest encampment at the Columbia University campus in New York on Monday April 22, 2024. (AP)
Short Url
Updated 23 April 2024
Follow

Pro-Palestinian protests sweep US college campuses following mass arrests at Columbia

Pro-Palestinian protests sweep US college campuses following mass arrests at Columbia
  • Columbia University canceled in-person classes and police arrested dozens of students at New York University and Yale
  • Pro-Palestinian demonstrators set up encampments on other campuses around the country

NEW YORK: Columbia canceled in-person classes, dozens of protesters were arrested at Yale and the gates to Harvard Yard were closed to the public on Monday as some of the most prestigious US universities sought to diffuse campus tensions over Israel’s war with Hamas.
The various actions followed the arrest last week of more than 100 pro-Palestinian demonstrators who had camped out on Columbia’s green, as schools struggle with where to draw the line between allowing free expression while maintaining a safe and inclusive campus.
In addition to the demonstrations at the Ivy League schools, pro-Palestinian encampments have sprouted up on other campuses, including the University of Michigan, New York University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The protests have pitted students against one another, with pro-Palestinian students demanding that their schools condemn Israel’s assault on Gaza and divest from companies that sell weapons to Israel. Some Jewish students, meanwhile, say much of the criticism of Israel has veered into antisemitism and made them feel unsafe, and point out that Hamas is still holding hostages taken during the group’s Oct. 7 invasion.
Tensions remained high Monday at Columbia in New York City, where the campus gates were locked to anyone without a school ID and where protests broke out both on campus and outside.
US Rep. Kathy Manning, a Democrat from North Carolina who was visiting Columbia with three other Jewish members of Congress to view the encampment, told reporters after meeting with students from the Jewish Law Students Association that there was “an enormous encampment of people” who had taken up about a third of the green.
“We saw signs indicating that Israel should be destroyed,” she said after leaving the Morningside Heights campus.
A woman inside the campus gates led about two-dozen protesters on the street outside in a chant of, ” From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free! ” — a charged phrase that can mean vastly different things to different groups. Meanwhile, a small group of pro-Israel counter demonstrators protested nearby.
University President Minouche Shafik said in a message to the school community Monday that she was “deeply saddened” by what was happening on campus.
“To deescalate the rancor and give us all a chance to consider next steps, I am announcing that all classes will be held virtually on Monday,” Shafik wrote, noting that faculty and staff should work remotely when possible and that students who don’t live on campus should stay away.
Protests have roiled many college campuses since Hamas’ deadly attack on southern Israel, when militants killed about 1,200 people, most of them civilians, and took roughly 250 hostages. In response, Israel has killed more than 34,000 Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, according to the local health ministry, which doesn’t distinguish between combatants and non-combatants but says at least two-thirds of the dead are children and women.
Prahlad Iyengar, an MIT graduate student studying electrical engineering, was among about two dozen students who set up a tent encampment on the school’s Cambridge, Massachusetts, campus Sunday evening. They are calling for a ceasefire and are protesting what they describe as MIT’s “complicity in the ongoing genocide in Gaza,” he said.
“MIT has not even called for a ceasefire, and that’s a demand we have for sure,” Iyengar said.
He also said MIT has been sending out confusing rules about protests.
“We’re out here to demonstrate that we reserve the right to protest. It’s an essential part of living on a college campus,” Iyengar said.
On Sunday, Elie Buechler, a rabbi for the Orthodox Union’s Jewish Learning Initiative at Columbia, sent a WhatsApp message to nearly 300 Jewish students recommending they go home until it’s more safe for them on campus.
The latest developments came ahead of the Monday evening start of the Jewish holiday of Passover.
Nicholas Baum, a 19-year-old Jewish freshman who lives in a Jewish theological seminary building two blocks from Columbia’s Morningside Heights campus, said protesters over the weekend were “calling for Hamas to blow away Tel Aviv and Israel.” He said some of the protesters shouting antisemitic slurs were not students.
“Jews are scared at Columbia. It’s as simple as that. There’s been so much vilification of Zionism, and it has spilled over into the vilification of Judaism,” he said.
The protest encampment sprung up at Columbia on Wednesday, the same day that Shafik faced bruising criticism at a congressional hearing from Republicans who said she hadn’t done enough to fight antisemitism. Two other Ivy League presidents resigned months ago following widely criticized testimony they gave to the same committee.
In her statement Monday, Shafik said the Middle East conflict is terrible and that she understands that many are experiencing deep moral distress.
“But we cannot have one group dictate terms and attempt to disrupt important milestones like graduation to advance their point of view,” Shafik wrote.
Over the coming days, a working group of deans, school administrators and faculty will try to find a resolution to the university crisis, noted Shafik, who didn’t say when in-person classes would resume.
Several students at Columbia and its sister school, Barnard College, said they were suspended for taking part in last week’s protests, including Barnard student Isra Hirsi, the daughter of Democratic US Rep. Ilhan Omar.
At Yale, police officers arrested about 45 protesters and charged them with misdemeanor trespassing, said Officer Christian Bruckhart, a New Haven police spokesperson. All were being released on promises to appear in court later, he said.
Protesters set up tents on Beinecke Plaza on Friday and demonstrated over the weekend, calling on Yale to end any investments in defense companies that do business with Israel.
Nadine Cubeisy, a Yale student and one of the protest’s organizers, said it was disturbing that “this university that I’m going to, that I contribute to and that my friends give money to is using that money to fund violence.”
In a statement to the campus community on Sunday, Yale President Peter Salovey said university officials had spoken to the student protesters multiple times about the school’s policies and guidelines, including those regarding speech and allowing access to campus spaces.
School officials said they spoke with protesters over several hours and gave them until the end of the weekend to leave Beinecke Plaza. The said they again warned protesters Monday morning and told them that they could face arrest and discipline, including suspension, before police moved in.
A large group of demonstrators regathered after Monday’s arrests at Yale and blocked a street near campus, said Bruckhart. There were no reports of any violence or injuries.
Last week, the University of Southern California took the unusual step of canceling a planned commencement speech by its 2024 valedictorian, who had publicly supported Palestinians. The university cited security concerns in a decision that was praised by some pro-Israel groups but criticized by free-speech advocates.


Bangladesh protest leaders taken from hospital by police

Bangladesh protest leaders taken from hospital by police
Updated 8 sec ago
Follow

Bangladesh protest leaders taken from hospital by police

Bangladesh protest leaders taken from hospital by police
  • The Students Against Discrimination group organized this month’s street rallies against civil service hiring rules in Bangladesh
  • At least 195 people were killed in ensuing police crackdown, clashes in some of the worst unrest of PM Sheikh Hasina’s tenure

DHAKA: Bangladeshi police detectives on Friday forced the discharge from hospital of three student protest leaders blamed for deadly unrest, taking them to an unknown location, staff told AFP.
Nahid Islam, Asif Mahmud and Abu Baker Majumder are all members of Students Against Discrimination, the group responsible for organizing this month’s street rallies against civil service hiring rules.
At least 195 people were killed in the ensuing police crackdown and clashes, according to an AFP count of victims reported by police and hospitals, in some of the worst unrest of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s tenure.
All three were patients at a hospital in the capital Dhaka, and at least two of them said their injuries were caused by torture in earlier police custody.
“They took them from us,” Gonoshasthaya hospital supervisor Anwara Begum Lucky told AFP. “The men were from the Detective Branch.”
She added that she had not wanted to discharge the student leaders but police had pressured the hospital chief to do so.
Islam’s elder sister Fatema Tasnim told AFP from the hospital that six plainclothes detectives had taken all three men.
The trio’s student group had suspended fresh protests at the start of this week, saying they had wanted the reform of government job quotas but not “at the expense of so much blood.”
The pause was due to expire earlier on Friday but the group had given no indication of its future course of action.
Islam, 26, the chief coordinator of Students Against Discrimination, told AFP from his hospital bed on Monday that he feared for his life.
He said that two days beforehand, a group of people identifying themselves as police detectives blindfolded and handcuffed him and took him to an unknown location.
Islam added that he had come to his senses the following morning on a roadside in Dhaka.
Mahmud earlier told AFP that he had also been detained by police and beaten at the height of last week’s unrest.
Three senior police officers in Dhaka all denied that the trio had been taken from the hospital and into custody on Friday.
Police told AFP on Thursday that they had arrested at least 4,000 people since the unrest began last week, including 2,500 in Dhaka.
On Friday police said they had arrested David Hasanat, the founder and chief executive of one of Bangladesh’s biggest garment factory enterprises.
His Viyellatex Group employs more than 15,000 people according to its website, and its annual turnover was estimated at $400 million by the Daily Star newspaper last year.
Dhaka Metropolitan Police inspector Abu Sayed Miah said Hasanat and several others were suspected of financing the “anarchy, arson and vandalism” of last week.
Bangladesh makes around $50 billion in annual export earnings from the textile trade, which services leading global brands including H&M, Gap and others.
Student protests began this month after the reintroduction in June of a scheme reserving more than half of government jobs for certain candidates.
With around 18 million young people in Bangladesh out of work, according to government figures, the move deeply upset graduates facing an acute jobs crisis.
Critics say the quota is used to stack public jobs with loyalists to Hasina’s Awami League.
The Supreme Court cut the number of reserved jobs on Sunday but fell short of protesters’ demands to scrap the quotas entirely.
Hasina has ruled Bangladesh since 2009 and won her fourth consecutive election in January after a vote without genuine opposition.
Her government is also accused by rights groups of misusing state institutions to entrench its hold on power and stamp out dissent, including the extrajudicial killing of opposition activists.
Hasina continued a tour of government buildings that had been ransacked by protesters, on Friday visiting state broadcaster Bangladesh Television, which was partly set ablaze last week.
“Find those who were involved in this,” she said, according to state news agency BSS.
“Cooperate with us to ensure their punishment. I am making this call to the nation.”


Why Venezuela’s presidential election should matter to the rest of the world

Why Venezuela’s presidential election should matter to the rest of the world
Updated 27 July 2024
Follow

Why Venezuela’s presidential election should matter to the rest of the world

Why Venezuela’s presidential election should matter to the rest of the world
  • President Nicolas Maduro is being challenged by former diplomat Edmundo González Urrutia, who represents the resurgent opposition, and eight other candidates
  • Maduro’s popularity has dwindled due to an economic crisis caused by a drop in oil prices, corruption and government mismanagement

CARACAS, Venezuela: The future of Venezuela is on the line. Voters will decide Sunday whether to reelect President Nicolas Maduro, whose 11 years in office have been beset by crisis, or allow the opposition a chance to deliver on a promise to undo the ruling party’s policies that caused economic collapse and forced millions to emigrate.
Historically fractured opposition parties have coalesced behind a single candidate, giving the United Socialist Party of Venezuela its most serious electoral challenge in a presidential election in decades.
Maduro is being challenged by former diplomat Edmundo González Urrutia, who represents the resurgent opposition, and eight other candidates. Supporters of Maduro and Gonzalez marked the end of the official campaign season Thursday with massive demonstrations in the capital, Caracas.

Venezuelan opposition star Maria Corina Machado raises the hand of opposition presidential candidate Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia (L) in a show of support during a press conference in Caracas on July 25, 2024, ahead of Sunday's presidential election. (AFP)

Here are some reasons why the election matters to the world:
Migration impact

The election will impact migration flows regardless of the winner.
The instability in Venezuela for the past decade has pushed more than 7.7 million people to migrate, which the UN’s refugee agency describes as the largest exodus in Latin America’s recent history. Most Venezuelan migrants have settled in Latin America and the Caribbean, but they are increasingly setting their sights on the US.
A nationwide poll conducted in April by the Venezuela-based research firm Delphos indicated that about a quarter of the people in Venezuela were thinking about emigrating if Maduro wins again. Of those, about 47 percent said a win by the opposition would make them stay, but roughly the same amount indicated that an improved economy would keep them in their home country. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points.
The main opposition leader is not on the ballot

The most talked-about name in the race is not on the ballot: María Corina Machado. The former lawmaker emerged as an opposition star in 2023, filling the void left when a previous generation of opposition leaders fled into exile. Her principled attacks on government corruption and mismanagement rallied millions of Venezuelans to vote for her in the opposition’s October primary.

Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado greets supporters as she campaigns in support of former diplomat Edmundo González Urrutia in Caracas, Venezuela, on July 25, 2024. (REUTERS)

But Maduro’s government declared the primary illegal and opened criminal investigations against some of its organizers. Since then, it has issued warrants for several of Machado’s supporters and arrested some members of her staff, and the country’s top court affirmed a decision to keep her off the ballot.
Yet, she kept on campaigning, holding rallies nationwide and turning the ban on her candidacy into a symbol of the loss of rights and humiliations that many voters have felt for over a decade.
She has thrown her support behind Edmundo González Urrutia, a former ambassador who has never held public office, helping a fractious opposition unify.
They are campaigning together on the promise of economic reform that will lure back the millions of people who have migrated since Maduro became president in 2013.
González began his diplomatic career as an aide to Venezuela’s ambassador in the US in the late 1970s. He was posted to Belgium and El Salvador, and served as Caracas’ ambassador to Algeria. His last post was as ambassador to Argentina during Hugo Chávez’s presidency, which began in 1999.
Why is the current president struggling?
Maduro’s popularity has dwindled due to an economic crisis caused by a drop in oil prices, corruption and government mismanagement.
Maduro can still bank on a cadre of die-hard believers, known as Chavistas, including millions of public employees and others whose businesses or employment depend on the state. But the ability of his party to use access to social programs to make people vote has diminished as the economy has frayed.
He is the heir to Hugo Chávez, a popular socialist who expanded Venezuela’s welfare state while locking horns with the United States.
Sick with cancer, Chávez handpicked Maduro to act as interim president upon his death. He took on the role in March 2013, and the following month, he narrowly won the presidential election triggered by his mentor’s death.
Maduro was reelected in 2018, in a contest that was widely considered a sham. His government banned Venezuela’s most popular opposition parties and politicians from participating and, lacking a level playing field, the opposition urged voters to boycott the election.
That authoritarian tilt was part of the rationale the US used to impose economic sanctions that crippled the country’s crucial oil industry.
Mismanaged oil industry
Venezuela has the world’s largest proven crude reserves, but its production declined over several years, in part because of government mismanagement and widespread corruption in the state-owned oil company.
In April, Venezuela’s government announced the arrest of Tareck El Aissami, the once-powerful oil minister and a Maduro ally, over an alleged scheme through which hundreds of millions of dollars in oil proceeds seemingly disappeared.
That same month, the US government reimposed sanctions on Venezuela’s energy sector, after Maduro and his allies used the ruling party’s total control over Venezuela’s institutions to undermine an agreement to allow free elections. Among those actions, they blocked Machado from registering as a presidential candidate and arrested and persecuted members of her team.
The sanctions make it illegal for US companies to do business with state-run Petróleos de Venezuela S.A., better known as PDVSA, without prior authorization from the US Treasury Department. The outcome of the election could decide whether those sanctions remain in place.
An uneven playing field
A more free and fair presidential election seemed like a possibility last year, when Maduro’s government agreed to work with the US-backed Unitary Platform coalition to improve electoral conditions in October 2023. An accord on election conditions earned Maduro’s government broad relief from the US economic sanctions on its state-run oil, gas and mining sectors.
But days later, authorities branded the opposition’s primary illegal and began issuing warrants and arresting human rights defenders, journalists and opposition members.
A UN-backed panel investigating human rights violations in Venezuela has reported that the government has increased repression of critics and opponents ahead of the election, subjecting targets to detention, surveillance, threats, defamatory campaigns and arbitrary criminal proceedings.
The government has also used its control of media outlets, the country’s fuel supply, electric network and other infrastructure to limit the reach of the Machado-González campaign.
The mounting actions taken against the opposition prompted the Biden administration earlier this year to end the sanctions relief it granted in October.
 


FBI says Trump was indeed struck by bullet during assassination attempt

FBI says Trump was indeed struck by bullet during assassination attempt
Updated 27 July 2024
Follow

FBI says Trump was indeed struck by bullet during assassination attempt

FBI says Trump was indeed struck by bullet during assassination attempt
  • Earlier in the week, FBI Director Christopher Wray appeared to cast doubt on whether Trump had actually been hit by a bullet
  • FBI’s reluctance to immediately vouch for Trump’s version of events has been blasted by the Republican nominee and his supporters

WASHINGTON: Nearly two weeks after Donald Trump’s near assassination, the FBI confirmed Friday that it was indeed a bullet that struck the former president’s ear, moving to clear up conflicting accounts about what caused the former president’s injuries after a gunman opened fire at a Pennsylvania rally.
“What struck former President Trump in the ear was a bullet, whether whole or fragmented into smaller pieces, fired from the deceased subject’s rifle,” the agency said in a statement.
The statement from the FBI marked the most definitive law enforcement account of Trump’s injuries and followed ambiguous comments earlier in the week from Director Christopher Wray that appeared to cast doubt on whether Trump had actually been hit by a bullet.
The comment drew fury from Trump and his allies and further stoked conspiracy theories that have flourished on both sides of the political aisle amid a dearth of information following the July 13 attack.
Up until now, federal law enforcement agents involved in the investigation, including the FBI and Secret Service, had repeatedly refused to provide information about what caused Trump’s injuries. Trump’s campaign has also declined to release medical records from the hospital where he was first treated or to make the doctors there available for questions.
Updates have instead come either from Trump himself or from Trump’s former White House doctor, Ronny Jackson, a staunch ally who who now represents Texas in Congress. Though Jackson has been treating Trump since the night of the attack, he has come under considerable scrutiny and is not Trump’s primary care physician.
The FBI’s apparent reluctance to immediately vouch for the former president’s version of events — along with the ire he and some supporters have directed at the bureau in the shooting’s aftermath — has also raised fresh tension between the Republican nominee and the nation’s premier federal law enforcement agency, which he could soon exert control over once again.
Trump and his supporters have repeatedly accused federal law enforcement of being weaponized against him.
Questions about the extent and nature of Trump’s wound began immediately after the attack, as his campaign and law enforcement officials declined to answer questions about his condition or the treatment he received after Trump narrowly escaped death in an attempted assassination by a gunman with a high-powered rifle.
Those questions have persisted despite photos showing the trace of a projectile speeding past Trump’s head, photographs that show Trump’s teleprompter glass intact after the shooting, and the account Trump himself gave in a Truth Social post within hours of the shooting saying he had been “shot with a bullet that pierced the upper part of my right ear.”
“I knew immediately that something was wrong in that I heard a whizzing sound, shots, and immediately felt the bullet ripping through the skin,” he wrote.
Days later, in a speech accepting the nomination at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Trump described the horrific scene in detail, while wearing a large, white, gauze bandage over his right ear.
“I heard a loud whizzing sound and felt something hit me really, really hard, on my right ear. I said to myself, ‘Wow, what was that? It can only be a bullet,’” he said.
“If I had not moved my head at that very last instant,” Trump said, “the assassin’s bullet would have perfectly hit its mark, and I would not be here tonight.”
But the first medical account of Trump’s condition didn’t come until a full week after the shooting, when Jackson released his first letter last Saturday evening. In that letter, he said the bullet that struck Trump had “produced a 2 cm wide wound that extended down to the cartilaginous surface of the ear.” He also revealed that Trump had received a CT scan at the hospital.
But federal law enforcement involved in the investigation, including the FBI and Secret Service, had declined to confirm that account. And Wray’s testimony offered apparently conflicting answers on the issue.
“There’s some question about whether or not it’s a bullet or shrapnel that hit his ear,” Wray testified, before he seemed to suggest it was indeed a bullet.
“I don’t know whether that bullet, in addition to causing the grazing, could have also landed somewhere else,” he said.
The following day, the FBI sought to clarify matters with a statement affirming that the shooting was an “attempted assassination of former President Trump which resulted in his injury, as well as the death of a heroic father and the injuries of several other victims.” The FBI also said Thursday that its Shooting Reconstruction Team continues to examine bullet fragments and other evidence from the scene.
Jackson, who has been treating the former president since the night of the July 13 shooting, told The Associated Press on Thursday that any suggestion Trump’s ear was bloodied by anything other than a bullet was reckless.
“It was a bullet wound,” said Jackson. “You can’t make statements like that. It leads to all these conspiracy theories.”
In his letter Friday, Jackson insisted “there is absolutely no evidence” Trump was struck by anything other than a bullet and said it was “wrong and inappropriate to suggest anything else.”
He wrote that at Butler Memorial Hospital, where the GOP nominee was rushed after the shooting, he was evaluated and treated for a “Gunshot Wound to the Right Ear.”
“Having served as an Emergency Medicine physician for over 20 years in the United States Navy, including as a combat physician on the battlefield in Iraq,” he wrote, “I have treated many gunshot wounds in my career. Based on my direct observations of the injury, my relevant clinical background, and my significant experience evaluating and treating patients with similar wounds, I completely concur with the initial assessment and treatment provided by the doctors at nurses at Butler Memorial Hospital on the day of the shooting.”
The FBI declined to comment on the Jackson letters.
Asked if the campaign would release those hospital records, or allow the doctors who treated him there to speak, Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung blasted the media for asking.
“The media has no shame in engaging in disgusting conspiracy theories,” he said. “The facts are the facts, and to question an abhorrent assassination attempt that ultimately cost a life and injured two others is beyond the pale.”
In emails last week, he told the AP that “medical readouts” had already been provided.
“It’s sad some people still don’t believe a shooting happened,” Cheung said, “even after one person was killed and others were injured.”
Anyone who believes the conspiracies, he added, “is either mentally deficient or willfully peddling falsehoods for political reasons.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a close Trump ally, also urged Wray to correct his testimony in a letter Friday to the FBI director, saying the fact Trump had been hit by a bullet “was made clear in briefings my office received and should not be a point of contention.”
“As head of the FBI, you should not be creating confusion about such matters, as it further undercuts the agency’s credibility with millions of Americans,” he wrote.
Trump also lashed out at Wray in a post on his Truth Social network, saying it was “No wonder the once storied FBI has lost the confidence of America!”
“No, it was, unfortunately, a bullet that hit my ear, and hit it hard. There was no glass, there was no shrapnel,” he wrote.
On Friday, he called Wray’s comments “so damaging to the Great People that work in the FBI.”
Jackson has faced significant scrutiny over the years.
After administering a physical to Trump in 2018, he drew headlines for suggesting that “if he had a healthier diet over the last 20 years, he might live to be 200 years old.”
He was reportedly demoted by the Navy after the Department of Defense inspector general released a scathing report on his conduct as a top White House physician that found Jackson had made “sexual and denigrating” comments about a female subordinates and took prescription-strength sleeping medication that prompted worries from his colleagues about his ability to provide proper medical care.
Trump appointed Wray in 2017 to replace the fired James Comey as director of the FBI. But the then-president swiftly soured on his hire as the bureau continued its investigation into the Russian election interference.
Trump flirted openly with the idea of firing Wray as his term drew to a close, and he lashed out anew after the FBI executed a search warrant at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida to recover boxes of classified documents from his presidency.
 


G20 financial chiefs flag global economic ‘soft landing’, warn of risks from war

G20 financial chiefs flag global economic ‘soft landing’, warn of risks from war
Updated 27 July 2024
Follow

G20 financial chiefs flag global economic ‘soft landing’, warn of risks from war

G20 financial chiefs flag global economic ‘soft landing’, warn of risks from war
  • Communique avoids mention of wars in Gaza and Ukraine, to sidestep disagreements between Russia and major Western nations
  • Communique avoids mention of wars in Gaza and Ukraine, to sidestep disagreements between Russia and major Western nations

RIO DE JANEIRO: G20 financial leaders said on Friday the global economy was likely heading for a “soft landing,” but warned wars and escalating conflicts could endanger this outlook, while more global cooperation could make growth stronger.
In a joint communique after a two-day meeting in Brazil, finance ministers and central bankers from the Group of 20 major economies also committed to resist protectionism in trade and stressed the need to reduce economic inequalities.
Last month, the World Bank forecast that the global economy would avoid a third consecutive decline in growth since a major post-pandemic jump in 2021, with 2024 growth stabilising at 2.6 percent, in line with 2023, but warned that overall output would remain well below pre-pandemic levels through 2026.
“We are encouraged by the increasing likelihood of a soft landing of the global economy, although multiple challenges remain,” the communique said. “Downside risks include wars and escalating conflicts,” it said.
By avoiding explicit mention of the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, diplomats have worked to sidestep the disagreements between Russia and major Western nations that derailed a consensus at the finance chiefs’ gathering in February.
To defuse the disagreement, Brazil drafted a chair statement on geopolitical issues, stressing that these matters will be addressed by G20 leaders in November.
“The G20 made a wise decision to put geopolitical issues in their place to allow the cooperation agenda to move forward,” Brazil Finance Minister Fernando Haddad told a news conference.
Haddad also hailed the group’s first-ever declaration calling for cooperation to effectively tax the world’s largest fortunes, although that separate joint statement papered over disagreements about the right forum to advance the agenda.
The G20 communique said economic activity had proved to be more resilient than expected in many parts of the world, but the recovery had been highly uneven across countries, contributing to the risk of economic divergence.

Balance of risks
The document flagged risks to the economic outlook that remain broadly balanced, with more economic cooperation, faster-than-expected disinflation and technological innovations, like the safe development of Artificial Intelligence (AI), cited among upside risks.
But at the same AI tech could also turn out to be a downside risk to growth, the document said, along with economic fragmentation and persistent inflation keeping interest rates higher for longer, extreme weather events, and excessive debt.
Climate change and significant loss of biodiversity were key topics of concern, the G20 financial leaders agreed, warning that if poorer nations had to shoulder more of the cost of fighting climate change, it would make global inequality worse.
“We reiterate the understanding that the cost of inaction is greater than the cost of action,” the communique said.
The document also stepped-up language calling for a reform of the International Monetary Fund, that would give emerging and developing economies a bigger say in the lender of last resort.
The G20 communique underlined the “urgency and importance of realignment in quota shares to better reflect members’ relative positions in the world economy.” G20


UK foreign secretary urged to listen to support for recognition of Somaliland

UK foreign secretary urged to listen to support for recognition of Somaliland
Updated 26 July 2024
Follow

UK foreign secretary urged to listen to support for recognition of Somaliland

UK foreign secretary urged to listen to support for recognition of Somaliland
  • David Lammy pressed by former defense secretary Gavin Williamson
  • Appeal comes after Liverpool calls on government to recognize East African state

LONDON: Britain’s former defense secretary Sir Gavin Williamson has urged Foreign Secretary David Lammy to listen to calls for the UK to recognize Somaliland as a sovereign nation, The Independent reported on Friday.
“This is an important symbolic step and I hope the foreign secretary listens to the growing cross-party voices on this matter and acts to move UK policy to recognize Somaliland, so recognizing the reality on the ground,” he said.
Lammy is being pushed to review UK foreign policy toward a potential key ally in the Red Sea conflict with the Iran-backed Houthis. The former British colony is not officially recognized by any international power despite functioning as an independent state since 1991 when it broke away from Somalia following a civil war.
Earlier this week, the Lord Mayor of Liverpool Richard Kemp said: “Liverpool council unanimously agreed a motion calling upon HMG (His Majesty’s Government) to recognize the former British Protectorate of Somaliland as an independent country free from Somalia. The Somaliland representative to the UK and local Somaliland residents were delighted.”


The Somaliland Diaspora Office wrote on X: “We deeply appreciate Liverpool City Council’s July 24, 2024 motion re-recognizing Somaliland’s independence. This milestone is a testament to the tireless efforts of the Somaliland community in Liverpool, the UK Mission, and advocates worldwide. We congratulate all involved!”
Williamson praised Liverpool’s decision and urged Lammy to take note.
Since the UK and US were forced to intervene against Houthi terrorists from Yemen in the Gulf of Aden — one of the world’s key shipping routes — pressure has increased to rethink recognition of Somaliland. Its port of Berbera has been described as a potential base for UK and US military operations.
Ethiopia last year became the first African country to agree any form of recognition with Somaliland with a deal that gave it access to the sea. The move infuriated Somalia which claims Somaliland as part of its territory and led to mass protests.