Day: December 16, 2019

A U.S. judge on Monday flatly rejected a last-ditch bid by President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn to get the criminal charges to which he already pleaded guilty dropped, brushing aside his claims of misconduct by prosecutors and the FBI.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered Flynn to appear for sentencing on Jan. 28, concluding that the retired Army lieutenant general had failed to prove a “single” violation by the prosecution or FBI officials of withholding evidence that could exonerate him.

Sullivan’s 92-page ruling represented a major blow to Flynn, who has tried to backpedal since he pleaded guilty in 2017 to lying to the FBI about his conversations with then-Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Flynn’s sworn statements in his plea agreement “belie his new claims of innocence,” Sullivan wrote.

“It is undisputed that Mr. Flynn not only made those false statements to the FBI agents, but he also made the same false statements to the Vice President (Mike Pence) and senior White House officials, who, in turn, repeated Mr. Flynn’s false statements to the American people on national television,” the judge wrote.

Flynn was one of several former Trump aides to plead guilty or be convicted at trial in then-Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation that detailed Moscow’s interference in the 2016 U.S. election to boost Trump’s candidacy as well as numerous contacts between Trump’s campaign and Russia.

Sentencing delayed

Flynn was previously supposed to have been sentenced by Sullivan in December 2018, but Sullivan fiercely criticized Flynn and accused him of selling out his country.

At the time, Sullivan appeared poised to sentence Flynn to prison. But then Sullivan instead gave Flynn the option of delaying the sentencing so the former national security adviser could fully cooperate with any pending investigations, including testifying in the Virginia trial of his former business partner Bijan Rafiekian on charges of illegally lobbying for Turkey.

The plans for him to testify, however, later evaporated.

Flynn, who Trump fired just weeks after taking office, dismissed his former lawyers on the case and tapped Sidney Powell, a frequent Fox News guest who has often expressed hostility toward the FBI and Mueller.

Her combative and aggressive approach led to a falling out with prosecutors, who ultimately decided not to call Flynn as a witness in the Rafiekian trial after Powell contended that Flynn would not testify to “knowingly” submitting false statements to the Justice Department when he retroactively registered as a lobbyist for Turkey.

Rafiekian verdict overturned

A federal judge in September overturned a jury verdict convicting Rafiekian.

Powell has filed a flurry of requests with the court to try to force the Justice Department to turn over troves of records that she said would show the FBI conducted an “ambush” interview of Flynn and withheld evidence that could exonerate him.

“The court summarily disposes of Mr. Flynn’s arguments that the FBI conducted an ambush interview for the purpose of trapping him into making false statements and that the government pressured him to enter a guilty plea,” Sullivan wrote in the ruling. “The record proves otherwise.”

Sullivan took aim at Powell in his ruling as well, saying one of the lawyer’s legal briefs had plagiarized another source by lifting “verbatim portions from a source without attribution” and noted that such conduct violates the District of Columbia’s rules for attorneys.

FBI has support of judge 

The judge’s ruling bolstered the FBI’s handling of the Flynn

investigation a week after the agency was criticized by the Justice Department’s inspector general for the manner in which it handled its applications to a specialized court to obtain a 2016 wiretap of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

Sullivan’s ruling came a day before another judge is scheduled to sentence Trump’s former deputy campaign chairman Rick Gates, who also pleaded guilty to charges brought by Mueller. Gates cooperated extensively with prosecutors.

…

Police in Central Sulawesi say they are continuing their hunt for members of a militant group suspected of attacking local police officers last week.

Authorities in the Indonesian province said Sunday the attack that killed one police officer was carried out by a group known as the East Indonesia Mujahideen (MIT).  

Five gunmen ambushed villagers and held them and police officers hostage. The officers had just returned from Friday prayers at a small mosque near a police station in Central Sulawesi’s Salubanga village, according to local police.

Local officials said the attackers immediately fled from the vicinity.

“Our members who were in the bulkhead post had a chance to fight back and ask for help from the closest post. As a result … one of our personnel on duty at the post by the name of Muhamad Saepul Muhdori has died,” said Sugeng Lestari, Central Sulawesi’s police commissioner.

The hostages reportedly managed to escape the scene as the militants exchanged gunfire with police.

What is MIT?

MIT, a U.N.-designated terrorist group, is mostly active in Indonesia’s Java and Sulawesi province, with some presence in eastern provinces.

While it is unclear how many fighters are in MIT, the group reportedly has ties with other terrorist groups in the country and abroad.

MIT has pledged allegiance to Islamic State, and some of its members have traveled to Syria to join the extremist group.

Since 2012, MIT has targeted Indonesian government officials and security forces, while also killing civilians in multiple attacks. It has become increasingly bold in its attacks on security forces, which include beheadings and the use of explosives and shootings, according to the United Nations.

Indonesian officials say there are currently about 10 active militants affiliated with the MIT, especially after its former leader, Abu Wardah Santoso, was killed in a counterterrorism operation by the Indonesian military in 2016. Nearly 30 members of the group were reportedly captured or killed in the same operation.

Law enforcement officials in Indonesia believe MIT may have recruited new members in recent months.

Counterterrorism efforts

Indonesia, home to 230 million Muslims, has been targeted by terrorist groups in recent years.

Since the bombings on the tourist island of Bali in 2002 that killed 202 people, most of them foreigners, the Indonesian government has stepped up its crackdown on Islamic militants, who were blamed for the Bali attack.

New threats have emerged in recent years from IS-inspired extremists who have targeted security forces and locals.

Last month, a suicide bomber blew himself up at the Medan city police station, wounding at least six people. That attack came as Indonesia’s counterterrorism forces were cracking down on suspected Islamic militants, following the assault by a knife-wielding couple who wounded Indonesia’s top security minister in October.

U.S. cooperation

The U.S. has been working with Indonesian authorities to expand mutual cooperation in counterterrorism efforts in the region.

In September 2018, the U.S. and Indonesia signed a memorandum of understanding to strengthen and expand cooperation on counterterrorism, including the exchange of information on terrorist and militant groups.

In its October 2018 “Country Reports on Terrorism,” the U.S. State Department said Indonesia has been able to deny terrorist groups safe haven.
 
“Indonesia applied sustained pressure to detect, disrupt, and degrade terrorist groups operating within its borders and deny them a safe haven,” the report said.

Some of the information in this report came from The Associated Press.
 

…

A Mexican foreign ministry undersecretary says he did not negotiate a trade deal that would allow up to five U.S. labor inspectors into Mexico.

Jesus Seade posted in several tweets that there is a simple reason labor inspectors would not be allowed into Mexico.  Mexican law prohibits it, Seade said.

Last Tuesday, Mexico, the U.S., and Canada signed a revised United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA. Mexico’s Senate ratified the new deal two days later.

When legislation to implement the trade deal was introduced in the U.S. Congress, it contained language proposing the posting of up to five labor attaches to monitor Mexican labor reforms.

Seade quickly objected with “surprise and concern” and announced a trip to Washington.

His Mexican critics said that he and others in President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador’s administration had overlooked something in the new deal and had approved the pact too hastily.

But Seade said there was nothing in the ratified trade package that authorized the posting of U.S. labor inspectors in Mexico.  “It is a very good agreement for Mexico,” Seade said.  “That’s why the U.S. needs ‘extras’ to sell it internally that were not part of the package.” 

…

Police fired tear gas against protesters in Hong Kong before meetings Monday between the territory’s leader and Communist Party officials in Beijing, ending a lull in what have become regular clashes between riot squads and demonstrators.

Police said they fired the choking gas after unrest erupted Sunday night in the Mongkok district of Kowloon.

Protesters threw bricks at officers and tossed traffic cones at a police vehicle, police said. They also set fires, blocked roads and smashed traffic lights with hammers.

Video footage showed truncheon-wielding riot officers squirting pepper spray at a man in a group of journalists and ganging up to beat and manhandle him.

The violence and scattered confrontations in shopping malls earlier Sunday, where police also squirted pepper spray and made several arrests, ended what had been a lull of a couple of weeks in clashes between police and protesters.

The uptick in tension came as Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam was in Beijing on Monday to brief President Xi Jinping on the situation in the semi-autonomous Chinese territory.

Hong Kong’s protest movement erupted in June against now-scrapped legislation that would have allowed criminal suspects to be extradited for trial in Communist Party-controlled courts in mainland China.

It has snowballed into a full-blow challenge to the government and Communist leaders in Beijing, with an array of demands, including that Hong Kong’s leader and legislators all be fully elected.

…

The top US representative in talks with North Korea on Monday slammed Pyongyang’s demands as hostile and unnecessary as its end-of-year deadline approaches, but held open the door for fresh negotiations.

North Korea has insisted that Washington offer it new concessions by the end of 2019 with the process largely deadlocked since the collapse of a summit in Hanoi in February.

Pyongyang has issued a series of increasingly strident declarations in recent weeks, and US special representative Stephen Biegun told reporters in Seoul: “We have heard them all.”

“It is regrettable that the tone of these statements towards the United States, the Republic of Korea, Japan and our friends in Europe have been so hostile and negative and so unnecessary,” he said.

“The US does not have a deadline, we have a goal.”

Pyongyang has said that if Washington fails to make it an acceptable offer, it will adopt a so-far-unspecified “new way.”

It has also carried out a series of static tests at its Sohae rocket facility this month, after a number of weapons launches in recent weeks, some of them described as ballistic missiles by Japan and others — which Pyongyang is banned from testing under UN sanctions.

Biegun added that the US was “fully aware of the strong potential for North Korea to conduct a major provocation in the days ahead.”

“To say the least, such an action will be most unhelpful in achieving lasting peace on the Korean peninsula,” he added.

Directly addressing “our counterparts in North Korea”, he went on: “It is time for us to do our jobs. Let’s get this done. We are here and you know how to reach us.”

…

Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement is gaining support among South Korean college students, who see some overlap with their country’s own struggle for democracy in the 1980s.

In recent months, Seoul has seen regular rallies with hundreds of students, many wearing black in solidarity with the Hong Kong protesters and carrying signs reading “Stand for Freedom, Stand with Hong Kong” and “Stop Police Brutality.”

“South Korea experienced political oppression in the 1980s and so does Hong Kong in recent years,” says Ahn Ji-sun, a junior political science major at Sogang University in Seoul, who organized a group to support Hong Kong’s democratization.

The protests have led to conflicts between South Korean students and those from mainland China, who view the Hong Kong pro-democracy protesters as violent radicals.

At many universities in Seoul, mainland Chinese students have vandalized “Lennon Walls,” which contain messages of support for the Hong Kong protesters.

In some cases, Chinese students have attacked their South Korean classmates and accused them of interfering in China’s internal affairs.

“Many posters got damaged, and we also discovered that the personal profiles of protesters are spread over the private chat rooms of Chinese students,” Ahn said.

In other cases, Chinese diplomatic officials have demanded South Korean universities cancel events with Hong Kong pro-democracy activists, according to some activists.

The controversy underscores global concerns about Chinese attempts to control overseas conversations on Beijing’s policies. The problem is especially acute in countries like South Korea, which host large numbers of mainland Chinese students.

“Beijing’s ‘patriotic education’ discourages mainland Chinese students from debating the issue,” says Phil Robertson, Deputy Asia Director at Human Rights Watch. “Instead, the students take blunt steps, such as tearing down or defacing posters to repress freedom of speech.”

Why South Koreans support Hong Kong

The Hong Kong protests started six months ago in opposition to a controversial extradition proposal that could have resulted in Hong Kongers being sent to stand trial in mainland China. From the beginning, Hong Kong authorities condemned the protests as riots, violently cracking down on even peaceful demonstrations.

For many South Koreans, that crackdown is reminiscent of the 1980s, when university students protested against South Korea’s brutal military dictatorship. South Korea’s struggle for democracy faced similarly long odds and took years to achieve success.

In the southeastern city of Gwangju, South Korea’s military regime carried out a bloody crackdown, killing as many as 600 people in 1980. The protest movement eventually spread nationwide, and South Korea held its first democratic election in 1987.

“The situation in Hong Kong and South Korea in the past are not precisely the same, but students who watch the violence feel they need to support Hong Kong and find common grounds in their history,” says Steve Chung, an assistant lecturer at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Common themes

Some online videos have also helped spur South Korean sympathy for Hong Kong.

In early June, a video of Hong Kong protesters singing ‘March for our Beloved’ in Cantonese went viral on Korean social media.

An icon of South Korea’s democracy movement, the song was written in commemoration of a South Korean activist who died in the Gwangju massacre. It was also sung by Koreans in 2017 during protests against former President Park Geun-hye, who was later impeached.

Some Hong Kongers have also been inspired by movies detailing South Korea’s democratization, leading to a further sense of kinship, says Ryu Yeong-ha, a Chinese language professor at Baekseok University.

In particular, Hong Kongers have latched onto films such as 1987: When the Day Comes, which is based on events surrounding South Korea’s June Democratic Uprising, and Taxi Driver, which deals with the Gwangju Massacre, Ryu says.

“This kind of cultural exchange encourages South Korean students to pay more attention to Hong Kong than other global issues,” Ryu says.

Clashes with Chinese students

But that solidarity has not been welcomed by mainland Chinese students in South Korea, who have frequently confronted their South Korean classmates over the protests. In some cases, authorities have had to intervene.

Last month, police booked a local and a Chinese student for physically attacking each other at a Lennon Wall at Seoul’s Myongji University.

A week later, Seoul police booked five Chinese students for damaging private property – posters and banners in support of Hong Kong’s protesters. Police are considering filing charges against the students.

In a statement, the Chinese embassy in South Korea said it is “natural and reasonable” for Chinese students to express their resentment and oppose actions that “undermine China’s sovereignty and distort facts.”

Moreover, South Korean activists say that pressure from the Chinese consulate in Gwangju resulted in the Chonnam National University canceling a campus event with a Hong Kong pro-democracy activist. The school denies being pressured, though it did cancel the event.

A widespread problem

According to a 2019 Human Rights Watch report, Chinese government authorities have grown bolder in recent years in trying to shape global perceptions of China on campuses and in academic institutions outside China.

“These authorities have sought to influence academic discussions, monitor overseas students from China, censor scholarly inquiry, or otherwise interfere with academic freedom,” the report said.

It is especially a problem in countries like South Korea, where Chinese students make up an especially large portion of the foreign student population.

According to South Korea’s Ministry of Education, there are more than 71,000 Chinese students in South Korean advanced educational institutions, or 44 percent of total international students.

“Opinions of Chinese students are already a major one to be reckoned with,” Ryu said.

Lecturers who have international students are required to filter politically sensitive topics to avoid backlashes, he said.

“During my lecture, some Chinese students try to correct my speech, insisting that I call it the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, not Hong Kong, or denying the Republic of China (Taiwan)” Ryu added.

Free expression

Amid a deepening conflict between Korean and Chinese students in November, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (HUFS) authorities removed some posters in support of the Hong Kong protests. The school also said it would ban all unauthorized posters, to avoid confusion caused by “irresponsible expression of opinions.”

Choong-Ang University also banned both pro and anti-Hong Kong protest posters on campus to protect the school from “disorder.”

Because of those steps, the dispute is now not only about Hong Kong, but also whether South Korean students will be allowed to speak freely at their own schools, Chung said.

“More people will engage themselves with pro-democracy activities to protect free speech,” he says. “Since they see the recent situation on campus harming their rights.” 

…

The leader of a prominent rights group in Pakistan has welcomed the United States’ decision this week to sanction a former Pakistani law enforcement official for human rights violations.

Manzoor Pashteen, the leader of Pakistan’s Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) , which advocates for Pashtun rights and an end to military in Pashtun-populated regions in the country, told VOA that his movement welcomes the decision and looks up to the U.S. for “upholding justice.”

“The decision by U.S. Treasury Department to blacklist Rao Anwar and place economic sanctions on him was a good step. Pashtuns feel that America will take steps to uphold justice,” Pashteen told VOA.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) last week took action against 18 individuals from six countries, sanctioning them for their roles in human rights abuses.

Sanctioned

Among those sanctioned was Anwar, a retired Pakistani police officer.

“Rao Anwar is designated for being responsible for or complicit in or having directly or indirectly engaged in serious human rights abuse,” the U.S. Treasury said in a statement released on International Human Rights Day, December 10.

In reaction to Anwar’s designation, Pakistan’s Foreign Office (FO) said this week that he is under trial.

“Given the scope of Global Magnitsky’s act we are surprised that the treasury department failed to hold anyone responsible for the most egregious, extensively reported and independently verified human rights violations and abuses being perpetrated in an occupied Jammu and Kashmir by Indian occupation forces,” Mohammad Faisal told VOA during a press conference last week, accusing the U.S of not going after India.

Members of PTM credit their movement for the action against Rao.

Mohsin Dawar, a member of Pakistan’s National Assembly and a prominent leader of PTM, said their advocacy group played a key role in raising awareness about human rights abuses by security forces in Pakistan.

“The sanctions placed on Rao Anwar by the U.S. Department of Treasury are a validation, a type of recognition of PTM’s stance,” Dawar told VOA.

“If we did not pressurize investigation, he would still be serving as a police officer and instead of killing 400 people, he would have killed hundreds more,” he added.

Fake encounters

Anwar has been accused of staging numerous fake police encounters in Karachi, in which hundreds of individuals have been allegedly killed.

The most high-profile case that led to the emergence of PTM was the killing of Naqeebullah Mehsud, a 27-year-old shopkeeper-turned-model, during an encounter with police in Karachi.

Anwar, who was the senior superintendent of police (SSP) in the Malir District of Karachi at the time, was in charge the operation that led to Mehsud’s death.

Police said at the time that Mehsud had been killed in a shootout with members of the Pakistani Taliban, a U.S.-designated terror group operating in Pakistan.

But an internal inquiry cast doubt on that claim, saying Mehsud had no evident link to any militant group.

The killing sparked days of protests and a weekslong march in Pashtun-dominated northwestern Pakistan last year, and led to the establishment of the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement, also known as the Pashtun Protection Movement, that has since held dozens of rallies across the country demanding basic rights for ethnic Pashtuns.

The movement demands an end to extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, removal of military checkpoints, and the establishment of a truth and reconciliation commission.

The PTM charges that Mehsud was one of several hundred Pashtun men racially profiled and killed by Arwan in Karachi.

“It was not until we raised our voices about Naqeeb (Mehsud) that an investigation finally took place and the other encounters were revealed,” Dawar, of PTM, said.

The U.S Treasury Department told VOA the blacklisting is not merely a motion of condemnation, but has serious consequences.

“As a result of Treasury’s designation, all of the property and interests in property of Rao Anwar Khan, and of any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more by Rao Anwar Khan, individually, or with other designated persons, that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons, are blocked and must be reported to OFAC,” the U.S. Treasury told VOA last week in response to an inquiry.

“Accordingly, even when designated individuals do not have bank accounts in the United States, our sanctions often disrupt their ability to do international banking or business,” the Treasury said.

Powerful officials

PTM leaders accuse Pakistani security officials of abusing their power and getting away with rights violations.

“Rao Anwar and many generals, who abuse their power like him, leave this country and settle abroad after committing or are party to crimes in Pakistan,” Pashteen told VOA.

Some Pakistani analysts, such as retired Pakistani General Talat Masood, acknowledge that Anwar was treated differently by the government.

“Rao was given VIP treatment,” he said.

“He may have been used by political parties and the establishment in Pakistan, it’s unknown. What is known is that he exercised a lot of power … power beyond his ranking,” he added.

Hussain Haqqani, a former Pakistani ambassador to the U.S. and current director for South and Central Asia at Hudson Institute, said he thinks Anwar’s designation is a “warning shot to Pakistan.”

“Pakistan could shrug off the U.S. sanctions against Rao Anwar as it has ignored similar sanctions against various jihadi leaders, but eventually it has to recognize the limitations of its current policies,” Haqqani said.

Accusations

PTM accuses the Pakistani military of forcing evictions of Pashtuns from the tribal region that borders Afghanistan, and accuses the military of extra judicial killings and forced disapprences of ethnic Pashtuns.

Pakistan’s government denies the charges and accuses PTM of receiving support from outside the country.

“On the PTM website, they have got a number that states the amount of funds they have collected from Pashtuns around the world. But tell us how much money did you get from the NDS [Afghanistan’s National Directorate of Security] to run your campaign? How much money did RAW [India’s Research and Analysis Wing] give you for the first dharna [sit-in protest] in Islamabad?” Major General Asif Ghafoor, spokesperson for the military, said in May of this year.

In reaction to Pakistan’s Foreign Office’s comments on linking Anwar to what is happening in Kashmir, former ambassador Haqqani said the two are unrelated issues.

“It does not reflect well on the Imran Khan government that it has to defend Rao Anwar by invoking the Kashmir issue even though Rao Anwar’s murderous actions have nothing to do with anything happening in Jammu and Kashmir,” he said.

VOA’s Rabia Pir and Mudassir Shah contributed to this report from Pakistan.
 

…