From the author: North Korea is now concentrating on dealing with the coronavirus. This may be the main reason for its quietness. If the coronavirus situation gets better, North Korea may move forward according to its own timetable. Before that, the United States and South Korea need to think about what kind of policies they can take to bring North Korea back to the negotiation table.

Would Kim Jong-un welcome Joe Bidens victory in the U.S. presidential election?

It is not clear whom Kim prefers between Donald Trump and Biden, but he seems to have his own timetable, irrespective of whoever becomes U.S. president. Biden may adopt the policy of strategic patience toward North Korea like Barack Obama did or give diplomacy another chance like Trump. Of course, South Koreas Moon Jae-in government would like to see Biden to resume diplomacy with North Korea.

However, whatever policy the Biden administration puts in place, Kim Jong-un seems to have his own timetable. In fact, the inter-Korean and U.S.-North Korean summits began with Kim Jong-uns 2018 New Years address. In 2017, North Korea conducted its sixth nuclear test and launched the Hwasong-15 rocket, raising the crisis on the Korean Peninsula. President Trump expressed his famous phrase fire and fury and the U.S. policy toward North Korea was maximum pressure. The South Korean government also criticized the North Korean provocations and warned of military response. However, Kim Jong-uns New Years address led to North Koreas participation in the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics and inter-Korean contacts. After that, Trumps fire and fury turned into the love letters.

Even with Biden now poised to become U.S. president, North Korea is not likely to respond to the U.S. leadership change in a different way. North Korea has already declared its head-on breakthrough strategy at the 5th Plenary Meeting of 7th Central Committee of the Workers Party of Korea in December 2019. North Korea decided to seek a long-term survival strategy against the United States. The North Korean perception was that the United States had no intention of lifting economic sanctions even with North Koreas promise to abandon the Yongbyon nuclear facilities at Hanoi summit, so that they needed to bypass and overcome the sanctions to win the long-term confrontation. They concluded that the U.S. hostile policy against North Korea would not be abolished in a short period of time. As a result, North Korea made it clear that it would not resume the nuclear negotiations in the way the United States wants. Kim Yo-jong, who is Kim Jong-uns younger sister and also deputy director of the Korean Workers Party, insisted that North Korea would not be involved again in the nuclear dialogue unless the United States changes its negotiation strategy.

In the end, North Koreas declaration of head-on breakthrough implies that the Biden administrations negotiations with North Korea is not easy. Moreover, Bidens return to Obamas strategic patience makes it more difficult to persuade North Korea to come back to the negotiation table. In this case, there is a high possibility that tensions between North Korea and the United States will rise again, and that Kim Jong-un will no longer observe his self-imposed moratorium on nuclear and long-range missile testing.

North Korea is now concentrating on dealing with the coronavirus. This may be the main reason for its quietness. If the coronavirus situation gets better, North Korea may move forward according to its own timetable. Before that, the United States and South Korea need to think about what kind of policies they can take to bring North Korea back to the negotiation table.

Jihwan Hwang is professor in the Department of International Relations at the University of Seoul and a member of the South Korean Presidents Commission on Policy Planning.

Image: Reuters

The National Interest

Mike Nova’s favorite articles on Inoreader

Stars and Stripes

Mike Nova’s favorite articles on Inoreader

The far-left House Democrats known as “the Squad” and other newly elected progressives, however, have said otherwise.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) argued that slashing $1 billion from the NYPD’s budget didn’t go far enough.

“Defunding police means defunding police,” she said in a statement. “If these reports are accurate, then these proposed cuts’ to the NYPD budget are a disingenuous illusion. This is not a victory. The fight to defund policing continues.”

Fellow “Squad” member Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.) backed the Minneapolis City Council’s vow to abolish its city’s police department.

“We can’t go about creating a different process with the same infrastructure in place,” Omar said in June. “And so dismantling it, and then looking at what funding priorities should look like as we imagine a new way forward, is what needs to happen.”

Another “Squad” member, Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D., Mass.), used the #DefundPolice hashtag in a June tweet and has called for removing police officers from schools.

Congresswoman-elect Cori Bush (D., Mo.) also committed to police defunding in a tweet just weeks before the election.

“We’re going to defund the police and refund our social services,” Bush tweeted. “Don’t like this idea? Well, we don’t like dead Black & Brown bodies & broken families at the hands of those sworn to protect us. The police have failed at fixing themselvesso we’re going to do it.”

We’re going to defund the police and refund our social services.

Dont like this idea? Well, we dont like dead Black & Brown bodies & broken families at the hands of those sworn to protect us.

The police have failed at fixing themselvesso we’re going to do it.

Cori Bush (@CoriBush) October 19, 2020

Congressman-elect Jamaal Bowman (D., N.Y.) has also voiced support for defunding the police, which he likened to defunding “the occupation of black bodies and the militarization of our communities.”

How traumatizing is this for these kids? Will they receive an apology? Compensation? Mental health supports? No. They just have to go on being black in America.

Defund the police means defund the occupation of black bodies and the militarization of our communities. https://t.co/8D5oZ2d23f

Jamaal Bowman (@JamaalBowmanNY) August 10, 2020

Sanders’s statements follow House Democrats’ heated post-election conversation in which more moderate party members blamed leftist messaging, such as defunding the police, for several losses and near losses in this election. Anti-police activists began calling for local governments to reform and defund the police in May following the death of George Floyd.

The post Sanders Claims Nobody He Knows Supports Defunding Police appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

Washington Free Beacon

Mike Nova’s favorite articles on Inoreader

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict may yet provide America an opening for an indirect approach to Turkey, while also pushing back against Russian expansionism.

The Russian brokered agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia concerning Nagorno-Karabakh has put a temporary end to the round of fighting that erupted on Sept. 27. One can only welcome a cessation of violence and the immediate threat to civilians. However, reports of a wave of ethnic Armenians fleeing the disputed region and heading toward Yerevan indicate that the underlying causes of the conflict have hardly been resolved. This may prove to be a fragile peace that depends on the presence of 1,950 Russian peace-keeping forces whose role, as per the agreement, is subject to a five-year time limit. That calendar overlaps with the time frame of the incoming administration. The United States may soon find itself under pressure to become involved, so it is important to evaluate the situation by determining the advantages and disadvantages of the agreement in order to identify opportunities for American foreign policy.

The primary strategic benefit for the United States involves the outcome for Azerbaijan. It has secured a corridor to the west which can facilitate the flow of Caspian Sea energy resources via a pipeline through Georgia to the Black Sea. This is the sole east-west energy route from Central Asia to world markets that does not traverse either Russia or Iran. In light of the importance that both the Obama and Trump administrations placed on the threat of Russian energy blackmail associated with the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, the Azeri energy route takes on considerable importance in terms of global energy politics.

A further positive outcome for the United States involves the Iranian dimension. Despite Teherans consistent efforts to pursue regional hegemony, it surprisingly refrained from intervening in the conflict. Not only did Iran prove powerless to exercise influence in its immediate neighborhood, but Azerbaijans campaign to solidify control over Nagorno-Karabakh also resonated positively with the large Azeri minority inside northern Iran. Intra-Iranian ethnic tensions or even the prospect of Azeri irredentism may have constrained Iranian foreign policy: southern Azeri solidarity with Azerbaijan, with its very public ties to Israel, stood in the way of Iran doing much at all.

Yet despite these silver linings–the energy corridor and the sidelining of Iranthe net effect of the outcome of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict must be considered negative from the standpoint of American strategic interests. Theoretically the United States, France and Russia chair the Minsk Process, established in 1992, with the responsibility to oversee a resolution of the dispute. However, the current agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia was fashioned by Moscow alone: western diplomacy has been marginalized.

Moreover, the enforcement of the agreement involves the deployment of Russian troops into the disputed territory. Russia has reasserted its clout in the Southern Caucasus, just as it has done in Syria and Libya, not to mention Crimea and eastern Ukraine. While it does not generally have the power or resources to establish the conditions for permanent peace, Russia has repeatedly acted as a decisive player in post-Soviet space and far beyond. In the great-power competition between the United States and Russia, Nagorno-Karabakh amounts to one more step in the expansion of Russian influence and Vladimir Putin’s effort to regain the influence that Russia lost at the end of the Cold War.

Russia has also gained ground in Armenia. The government of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan came to power democratically in Yerevan in 2018 with the hope of building stronger ties with the West. Yet the military defeat by Azerbaijan forced Pashinyan to concede, effectively ceding Armenian claims in Nagorno-Karabakh. He now faces an irate public. Whether he can retain power remains to be seen, yet the dynamic is unmistakable. The pro-western leader Pashinyan bears the blame and is weakened, while Russian power expands. We are witnessing a new Brezhnev doctrine: where Russia once was, there shall she return.

The West has also lost ground with regard to Turkey, which backed Azerbaijan as part of President Recep Erdogans ambitions for a greater regional role. A particularly sharp conflict has developed between Ankara and Paris, where French president Emmanuel Macron criticized Turkeys role, at the same time as he launched a renewed debate over Islamism, in the wake of terrorist attacks in Paris and Nice. Erdogan seized the opportunity to portray Macron as the enemy of Islam. Although this is a war of words only, it is bitterly dividing two key NATO alliesthe nuclear power France and Turkey, the size of whose military is second only to the U.S. within the alliance. The ultimate decision over borders in the South Caucusus may not seem a matter of great importance in Washington, but this internal dispute within NATO has the potential to erode a key institution of Americas international security architecture. Chalk this up as another Russian win.

While the agreement involves Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, it also inevitably establishes the grounds for interaction between Russia and Turkey. Erdogan in fact has announced that Turkish forces will play a role in overseeing the peace, although the details remain unclear. To the extent that Russian-Turkish cooperation emerges, a further deterioration of relations between Washington and Ankara will result. It is however also possible that Russian-Turkish proximity in Nagorno-Karabakh becomes the source of tension and conflict between them, which could push Turkey back toward the West. U.S. diplomacy could explore this prospect.

A primary goal of American foreign policy should be mending the damage done to relations with Turkey. There have been missteps on both sides, but most egregiously the Obama administrations ill-considered decision to ally with those Kurdish forces that Ankara regards as a terrorist threat. Matters have grown worse since then. Washington should therefore look for opportunities to repair the damage. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict may yet provide America an opening for an indirect approach to Turkey, while also pushing back against Russian expansionism.

Russell A. Berman is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution where he co-directs the Working Group on the Middle East and the Islamic World.

Image: Reuters

The National Interest

Mike Nova’s favorite articles on Inoreader

Stars and Stripes

Mike Nova’s favorite articles on Inoreader

Stars and Stripes

Mike Nova’s favorite articles on Inoreader

Cuba now has four COVID-specific vaccine candidates under clinical trial. The fact that a small Caribbean island can achieve such a remarkable feat is testimony to its state-owned biotech sector, which is directed towards public health demands and integrated into its healthcare and education systems. After years of being told that only the market can lead to efficiency and innovation, Cubas socialist planned economy demonstrates what is possible when there is political will, good coordination, organization and the priority of social welfare.

However, Cuban immunization developments are being seriously hamstrung by the actions of the U.S. government, primarily due to the decades-long blockade on the island, something which the Cuban government estimates has cost it over 750 billion U.S. dollars.

As Reuters reported, cash-strapped Cuba cannot afford to buy the raw materials necessary to upscale its vaccine development to help other countries. Hospitals face huge obstacles importing lifesaving equipment from abroad due to the blockade, while the sanctions force the country, which imports the large majority of its staples, to spend far more on food than other nations. As a result, almost one third of young children suffer from anemia due to the monotonous and sub-par nutrition available, according to the World Food Program.

The blockade also forces Cuba to continually repair its crumbling infrastructure and halt the importation of vehicles, even leading to a return of horse-drawn carriages on the island. Food production is hampered; with little petroleum available for agriculture, the country instead went back to relying on human or animal labor. The blockade also led to the forced development of a domestic pharmaceutical and biotechnology sector, which has grown to become among the most advanced in the world.

Last November, the United Nations voted 187-3 in favor of ending the blockade (with the U.S., Israel, and Brazil voting no). Almost two-thirds of Americans support an end to the action as well. Despite this, the Trump administration has, in fact, intensified the pressure on Cuba, as Yaffe explained:

Cuba has been subject to an additional 46 sanctions and new measures to tighten the blockade, to scare off foreign investors, to create scarcity, to create difficulty for Cuba to access raw materials, including for its biotech sector and for its pharmaceutical industry.

One example of this, Yaffe notes in her new documentary, Cuba and COVID-19: Public Health, Science and Solidarity is that the island can no longer purchase ventilators or parts for existing machines because the Swiss company it dealt with was purchased by an American one and fearing potential reprisals, it halted any contact with Havana.

A more positive, but nevertheless difficult, challenge the Cuban government faces in testing its new vaccines is the lack of COVID-19 patients on the island, which has the highest proportion of medical professionals per capita anywhere in the world. To date, the country has recorded only 7,639 cases and 131 deaths. U.S.-backed conservative neighbors such as Brazil, Ecuador, and (until last week) Bolivia, that had expelled Cuban doctors working inside their borders, have fared far worse.

Under Trump, the U.S. also led the world in the theft of medical equipment and personal protective gear, confiscating shipments, and diverting supplies away from other countries to keep for itself. And at the height of the outbreak in Iran, the government was unable to buy or import lifesaving gear due to American sanctions, as no nation was willing to risk the wrath of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who threatened harsh sanctions on anyone willing to do business with Iran. Finally, the World Health Organization directly intervened, gifting Iran supplies, sparking the Trump administration to leave the WHO among other reasons.

The U.S., along with other wealthy nations, has also been quietly buying up the majority of any future supply of vaccines, cornering the market, and leaving little hope for developing nations to secure their own supply of vaccines. The for-profit corporations conducting the research have made it clear that they intend to withhold production secrets in order to cash in. Furthermore, they do not have the capacity to immunize the entire world. U.S./German company Pfizer, for example, predicts that it could supply enough for only around 650 million people by the end of 2021. This is why the development of treatments outside the for-profit model is so important.

Today, Pfizer announced that its own trial, featuring over 43,000 people in six countries was a success, with a 90% immunization rate and only 94 people contracting the virus from the vaccine. Massachusetts-based Moderna claims that its vaccine is even more effective, with a 94% immunization rate, and does not have to be stored at -80°C temperature like Pfizers offering.

The first country to announce a potential vaccine was Russia, however, the government sharing the news in September, with researchers claiming Sputnik V was 90% effective and that Russia could produce 500 million doses annually. The Russian and American offerings appear to be based upon the same scientific logic and have produced broadly similar results. However, the Russian vaccine has been near-universally panned in the Western press, while the American ones heralded as a historic achievement. Thus, Sky News headline described Pfizers breakthrough as a great day for science and humanity while casting doubt on the validity of Sputnik V, claiming the Russians secretive approach is a throwback to its spirit in the Cold War.

Regardless if any or all of the treatments work, the world will need a sustained and coordinated international effort to immunize itself against COVID-19, as no one company can possibly supply the entire planet. By continuing the blockade against Cuba, the U.S. government might be condemning much of the world to living months longer under a deadly pandemic that has claimed the lives of over 1.32 million people.

Feature photo | A Cuban health worker collects a sample for a COVID-19 test from a baby who arrived in a flight from Mexico at the Jose Marti International Airport in Havana, Cuba, Nov. 15, 2020. Ramon Espinosa | AP

Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.

The post Cuba Could be on the Brink of a Revolutionary COVID Vaccine, But US Sanctions Are Slowing It Down appeared first on MintPress News.

MintPress News

Mike Nova’s favorite articles on Inoreader

Mike Nova’s favorite articles on Inoreader

itnnews’s YouTube Videos

Mike Nova’s favorite articles on Inoreader

PBSNewsHour’s YouTube Videos

Mike Nova’s favorite articles on Inoreader