The children of families who were affected by the massive earthquake which devastated large parts of south-west Haiti in August this year are receiving free hot meals at school as part of an initiative by the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP) to support the recovery of the country’s most vulnerable communities.
Protests against renewed Covid-19 restrictions turned violent in The Hague. The unrest comes a day after several demonstrators in another Dutch city, Rotterdam, were injured amid police gunfire.
Seven people were arrested after fierce clashes broke out between law enforcement and anti-lockdown demonstrators in The Hague, the seat of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), on Saturday.
A video shared on social media shows protesters lighting firecrackers that sparked multiple fires, causing the skies in the city to glow an eerie red.
The Hague burns🔥, home of international court of justice, the seat of Dutch cabinet and 3rd largest city in Netherlands pic.twitter.com/8gjqu2sE60
Dutch police reported that five of its officers were injured in the showdown with rioters. One officer was taken to hospital with a knee injury and concussion. Two others “suffered hearing damage,” while another two suffered injuries to their hands.
The chaotic scenes in the Netherlands’ third-largest city unfolded a day after a protest against reimposed Covid-19 restrictions in Rotterdam was marred by violence. Over 50 people were arrested in the city and three were injured after police opened fire in a bid to quell the unrest. Police later claimed that officers were “compelled to shoot at targets” to protect themselves. The three injured protesters remain in hospital, and their condition is unknown.
Protests have swept through a number of Dutch cities after the Netherlands became the first country in Western Europe since summer to go into a partial lockdown last week. Tensions soared further after the government banned New Year’s Eve fireworks displays and the Dutch parliament backed the introduction of the so-called 2G system, which would bar the unvaccinated and those who have not recently recovered from the virus from a long list of public places if introduced.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
For the first time since the start of the pandemic, the number of new daily Covid cases in Germany has exceeded 60,000, according to the country’s disease control and prevention agency, the Robert Koch Institute.
Authorities fear that in reality the figure is even higher, as not all cases are immediately reported or detected. Just a week ago, the number of daily infections across Germany surpassed the 50,000 mark.
Among the country’s Covid hotspots are Thuringia, Saxony and Bavaria. In the latter region, hospitals are so overwhelmed with Covid patients that they have had to put off any non-emergency surgery.
Against this grim backdrop, lawmakers in the Bundestag on Thursday backed a new set of measures aimed at containing the spread of the disease. The package was proposed by Germany’s Social Democrats, the Green and Free Democratic parties, which are expected to form a new coalition government as early as next week.
If passed by the upper house, the rules would include mandatory daily Covid testing for employees of, and visitors to, care homes, regardless of vaccination status. Germans would also be required to show proof of full vaccination, recovery or a fresh negative Covid test in order to enter their workplace or use public transport.
On top of that, those caught selling and forging fake certificates and tests could face up to five years behind bars. Just like the Covid regulations currently in place, the new plan gives some leeway to regional authorities in terms of restrictions so that, for instance, the banning of recreational, cultural, and sporting events will be at their discretion. However, things like travel bans, curfews and massive closures of businesses would now be off-limits to local government.
Australia’s government could be forced to spend tens of millions in payouts after receiving more than 10,000 compensation claims from people who suffered side effects and loss of income due to Covid-19 vaccines.
Under its no-fault indemnity scheme, eligible claimants can apply for compensation amounts between AU$5,000 (US$3,646) to AU$20,000 (US$14,585) to cover medical costs and lost wages as a result of being hospitalized after getting the shot. The scheme’s online portal is scheduled to be launched next month.
Official figures suggest, however, that over 10,000 people have already indicated their intention to make a claim since registration opened on the health department’s website in September. If each claim was approved, the government could face a bill of at least AU$50 million (US$36.46 million).
There were around 78,880 adverse events to Covid-related vaccination in Australia as of November 7, according to the Therapeutic Goods Administration, which regulates national health products. The majority of side effects were minor, including headaches, nausea, and arm soreness.
Only people who experienced a moderate to significant adverse reaction that resulted in a hospital stay of at least one night are eligible for coverage under the government’s scheme. Those seeking $20,000 or less have to provide proof their claims are vaccine-related – although there has been no information as yet on exactly what evidence would be acceptable.
“Adverse events, even though they happen to a tiny proportion of people, for the people it does impact it’s really quite devastating,” Clare Eves, the head of medical negligence at injury compensation firm Shine Lawyers, told the Sydney Morning Herald.
Among the adverse reactions covered are the blood clotting disorder “thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS)” linked to the AstraZeneca vaccine and the “myocarditis and pericarditis” heart conditions associated with the Pfizer vaccine. Other reportedly accepted side effects are Guillain-Barré syndrome, a rare neurological condition, and immune thrombocytopenia (excessive bleeding due to low platelet levels).
Claims for over $20,000, including those for vaccine-related deaths, will be assessed by an independent legal panel of legal experts and compensation paid on its recommendations. Nine people have reportedly died after an adverse reaction to one of the three vaccines in the country.
Eves told the Morning Herald that her firm was representing a number of litigants over the vaccine side effects, including several who are not eligible for the scheme.
Despite COVID-19 lockdowns and restrictions, some 650,000 women and girls were provided with gender-based violence services through a joint UN and European Union (EU) programme working to stamp out what is arguably one of the most prevalent human rights violations.
Libyan military commander Khalifa Haftar is set to challenge Gaddafi’s son for the top job, announcing his presidential bid. The election will take place on December 24.
“I declare my candidacy for the presidential election, not because I am chasing power but because I want to lead our people towards glory, progress and prosperity,” the de facto leader of Eastern Libya said in a televised speech.
Haftar added that the election is the only way out of the severe crisis the country has been plunged into.
The announcement was expected; in September, Haftar announced that he was temporarily stepping down as head of the force known as the Libyan National Army, fulfilling the requirement for presidential hopefuls to suspend public work three months before an election.
Haftar will run against the son of former leader Muammar Gaddafi, Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, who represents the Popular Front for the Liberation of Libya.
Haftar’s presidential bid is likely to anger many who consider him a war criminal responsible for the indiscriminate killing of civilians during his military campaign. A number of civil lawsuits have been filed against him in a US federal court for alleged war crimes. Haftar has both US and Libyan citizenship, and owns property in Virginia.
Following years of civil war and political chaos after the NATO-backed intervention that saw Muammar Gaddafi deposed and brutally murdered, the upcoming election is widely viewed as an opportunity for political settlement and the long-awaited unification of the country, divided now between Haftar’s forces and the Tripoli-based Government of National Accord. However, there is still no consensus on the legal grounds for the election, which could become an obstacle for the peace process.
UK Home Secretary Priti Patel has acted to proscribe the Palestinian group Hamas “in its entirety,” stating that it has significant capacity to carry out terrorist acts and has facilities to train attackers.
In a tweet on Friday, Patel stated that she had banned the Palestinian group Hamas and designated it a terrorist organization, as she reiterated the British government’s commitment to “tackling extremism and terrorism wherever it occurs.”
“Hamas has significant terrorist capability, including access to extensive and sophisticated weaponry, as well as terrorist training facilities,” she wrote.
The home secretary’s tweet came during her visit to Washington and followed speculation on Friday morning that she was soon to outlaw the group.
Pre-empting Patel’s announcement, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett welcomed Britain’s “intention” on Twitter.
“Hamas is a radical Islamic group that targets innocent Israelis & seeks Israel’s destruction. I welcome the UK’s intention to declare Hamas a terrorist organization in its entirety – because that’s exactly what it is,” Bennett wrote, thanking the leadership of Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
Yair Lapid, Israel’s foreign minister, also hailed the expected move against Hamas, saying it was “part of strengthening ties with Britain.”
Until now, only Hamas’ military wing, the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, had been outlawed by the British government. The EU and the US have already proscribed all of Hamas.
Hamas political official Sami Abu Zuhri rejected Britain’s move, claiming it showed “absolute bias toward the Israeli occupation and is a submission to Israeli blackmail and dictations.”
In a separate statement, the group claimed it had a right to resist occupation by all available means, “including armed resistance.”
Hamas seized total control of Gaza in 2007, on the back of an election victory in 2006.
Cipher Brief Expert Rob Dannenbergis a 24-year veteran of the CIA, where he served in several senior leadership positions, including chief of operations for the Counterterrorism Center, chief of the Central Eurasia Division and chief of the CIA’s Information Operations Center. Dannenberg is a member of the Board of Advisors to the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center and is a senior fellow at the GWU Center for Cyber and Homeland Security. He is now an independent consultant on geopolitical and security risk, after serving as the managing director and head of the Office of Global Security for Goldman Sachs, and director of International Security Affairs at BP.
EXPERT PERSPECTIVE — The images from Kabul are demoralizing and depressing—unless you are sitting in the Kremlin, where they are certainly being viewed in a quite different light. Probably something close to giddiness and glee.
From Russian President Vladimir Putin’s perspective, this likely reinforces his view that President Joe Biden and his national security team are weak and naïve. ‘This is Obama’s third term’, Putin must be thinking. And of course, the images of US helicopters desperately trying to evacuate thousands from Kabul also resonate in Kiev, Tbilisi, and probably Tallinn, Riga, and Vilnius and beyond—think Taipei. The appalling mismanagement of the withdrawal from Afghanistan will have consequences that will affect American credibility globally and linger well beyond the end of Biden’s presidency.
A first order consequence concerns Russia.
It is highly likely there was practical cooperation between the Kremlin and the Taliban in the preparation for the American withdrawal and this may have included direct support to Taliban forces. We don’t need to revisit the narrative of Russian bounties for dead American soldiers in Afghanistan, but the evidence of Russian energetic engagement with the Taliban in recent months is manifest and the fact the Russian embassy in Kabul is currently protected by Taliban fighters is significant.
For both Russia and the Taliban there was a clear shared strategic objective: Get the Americans and their allies out of Afghanistan and ideally in the most humiliating fashion possible. The Russian-Taliban honeymoon may not last long, but for the moment it has served both sides well.
For over a decade and a half of his tenure as Russia’s president, Putin has been preaching the gospel that you can’t trust the Americans to back you in the long run or when the chips are down, but you can count on the Russia he leads (think the Russian intervention in Syria and support for Assad or their intervention—whether acknowledged or not—in Libya on the side of Khalifa Haftar among other examples). This messaging is important in current times and reinforces Putin’s narrative about the decline of the West and the waning relevance of western liberal systems of governance.
In recent years, Chinese President Xi Jinping has picked up the trumpet to echo this message that American power is in decline and that American security guarantees cannot be relied on in East Asia and beyond.
Putin has been Russia’s Czar for over two decades without meaningful interruption and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. He has seen US Presidents come and go and he has been quick to size them up and adjust his moves accordingly. He was genuinely scared of what George W. Bush might do in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 and the speed and efficacy of the US response made a deep impression on him. He adjusted his approach to the US to one of partner and ally against Islamic extremism (Putin was also busy consolidating his control over the Russian Federation in the immediate post-Yeltsin period).
Putin also sized up then-President Barack Obama after Obama’s failure to act when Syrian President Bashar al-Assad blithely crossed the “no use of chemical weapons” red line. That opened the door for the annexation of Crimea as well as the Russian military intervention in Syria (and later Libya). Joe Biden was Vice President at the time. Putin likely has a very good book on Joe Biden and was quite confident of what the end result for the US in Afghanistan would look like. Putin may even have a better feel for Joe Biden than many realize, if any of the Hunter Biden material is true. One leader’s assessment of another, matters in geopolitical relations. Putin has a high level of confidence in his ability to read his international opposition.
As recently as July 2021 President Biden said, “There’s going to be no circumstance where you see people being lifted off the roof of the US embassy in Afghanistan.” He went on to add, “The likelihood there’s going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely.” President Biden made these statements knowing perfectly or should have known—from intelligence briefings and expert commentary—as well as historical precedent—that when the US announces a withdrawal of forces with a hard deadline, in this case 9/11, our adversaries use the time to prepare for their offensive military action. Our Afghan allies knew this as well and prepared accordingly. Now the Taliban will celebrate the twentieth anniversary of the September 11 attacks in the US embassy in Kabul, probably with their ISIS and Al Qaeda friends as honored guests. If you think the videos from Afghanistan have been troubling to this point, just wait for the anniversary celebrations.
Perhaps of more near term geopolitical significance, Putin will use the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan to support a narrative that Russia needs to defend its interests from the spread of Islamic extremism from Afghanistan by strengthening “security and counterterrorism” cooperation with Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan. Does anyone want an excuse to get – and keep – those pesky Americans out of Central Asia and start rebuilding that corner of the Soviet Union?
Putin’s use of terrorism risk as justification for military action is well-rehearsed and goes back to the Moscow apartment bombings (which the FSB almost certainly organized) in September 1999, which Putin used both to consolidate political power and to justify the brutal military campaign in Chechnya. Putin is acutely aware of the risks of Islamic extremism spreading from Afghanistan to Central Asia, the Caucasus, and into the Russian Federation. In fact, Russian, Uzbek, and Tajik troops conducted exercises in July, which appear to have been designed to prepare to respond to cross border incursions from Afghanistan. This is only the first step in his plan for consolidation of Russian power and influence in Central Asia and the Caucasus.
The Cipher Brief hosts private briefings with the world’s most experienced national and global security experts. Become a member today.
Some might ask – given the risk of the spread of Islamic extremism from Afghanistan to the Russian Federation – why would Putin would want to partner with the Taliban? Those who ask this question are misunderstanding the depth of Putin’s enmity toward the United States and the West and everything for which we stand. Putin views the world as a “zero sum” game. What hurts the US must serve Russia’s interests. The debacle in Afghanistan clearly qualifies. A short-term deal with the Taliban is a risk with taking in Putin’s mind. Putin plays on the superpower chessboard using the only tools he has at hand, military power, cyber and disinformation capability and US ineptitude and lack of strategic thought. He has taken clever advantage of President Trump’s four years of thoughtless estrangement of US allies around the world.
Beyond the propaganda value and regional leverage our withdrawal has given adversaries like Russia and China, there is the impact of our withdrawal on the many nations among our allies who contributed to the Afghanistan mission. The images of Afghans clinging to a departing US Air Force C-17 and falling to their deaths will not fade easily. How easy will it be to assemble their support when we inevitably have to go in again to deal with a resurgent Al Qaeda, a globally ambitious Taliban, or an even more dangerous embedded ISIS in the hills of Afghanistan?
We should also consider the impact on Pakistan. Pakistan has nurtured Islamic extremism in Afghanistan for decades. While a part of the Pakistani security establishment partnered with the US effectively after 9/11, other parts simultaneously were nurturing relations with extremists including the Taliban. The “Great Game” is still being played in that part of the world, and neither the Pakistanis, nor the Indians or Chinese have forgotten it.
Pakistan also still certainly chafes from the US raid to kill bin Ladin in Abbottabad a little over ten years ago. One wonders if the waning of US influence in Islamabad has opened the door for Islamic extremists to enter the security establishment there. Pakistan is a nuclear power and has in recent years, increased its development of tactical nuclear weapons. Does the Taliban now have a path to nuclear weapons? This is an important question and it’s answer casts a shadow over our withdrawal from Afghanistan.
The Biden Administration, for all its vaunted claims of “return to competence” in Washington, has fallen flat in its first serious challenge. One could argue that Biden’s capitulation on Nord Stream 2 and Putin’s mocking rejection in Geneva of charges of US election interference and cyberattacks on the US, foretold the debacle in Afghanistan. The challenge for the US now will be to manage the airlift of those Afghans who were willing to partner with the US and carefully look for opportunities to rebuild the credibility of US security guarantees around the world.
Taiwan and South Korea would seem good places to start.
At the same time, we need to recognize that Afghanistan will once again become the training ground for those who hope to replicate 9/11 attacks on the US. A strong and robust intelligence capability will be essential in mitigating that risk.
Read more expert-driven national security insight, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
The number of musk deer in Mongolia has plummeted by some 83 per cent since the 1970s, landing them on the country’s red list of critically endangered species. A UN-supported biodiversity initiative is helping to stop the deer from disappearing altogether.
After vowing to retaliate against Lithuania’s move to allow Taiwan open a “representative office” in Vilnius, Beijing has announced it is downgrading diplomatic relations with the Baltic state.
In a statement on Sunday, the Chinese foreign ministry said that China’s diplomatic relations with Lithuania will be formally lowered to the level of charge d’affaires, while blasting Vilnius for setting a “bad international precedent” by giving the island the green light to open its mission in the Lithuanian capital.
The ministry went on to accuse Vilnius of undermining the One China principle and the principle of neutrality in bilateral relations, explaining its decision to demote relations by citing the need to “safeguard its sovereignty and the basic norms of international relations.”
“The Lithuanian government must bear all the consequences arising from this,” the ministry said, while calling on Vilnius to “correct its mistakes immediately.”
“No matter how the ‘Taiwan independence’ forces distort facts and reverse black and white, they cannot change the historical fact that the mainland and Taiwan belong to the same China,” the ministry asserted.
The move comes just two days after Beijing went on a verbal offensive against the Baltic country, warning that pushback for its cozying up to Taiwan would be imminent. “As to what necessary measures China will take, you may wait and see,” it said at the time.
Lithuania and China have been embroiled in a diplomatic row and have not maintained relations at ambassadorial level since September. After the Baltic state revealed that it would be opening a de facto Taiwanese embassy, China withdrew its ambassador from the country in August. Vilnius followed suit the following month.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
