Author

admin

Browsing

Marathoner Rebecca Cheptegei ran in the Paris Olympics last month. This week, her boyfriend doused her with gasoline and set her ablaze, police said — the third horrific killing of an Olympian in Kenya in recent years.

In the past three years, two other female Olympians have been killed in Iten, Kenya, about 70 miles away from where Cheptegei died. The women were killed by their significant others, authorities said, bringing international attention to a pattern of domestic violence against female athletes who live and train in Kenya’s Rift Valley region, home to some of the world’s most elite runners.

In October 2021, the body of Agnes Tirop, a rising star in distance running, was found inside her home with numerous stab wounds. She was in her running gear — a black sports bra and shorts — and likely going to a training session when her husband attacked her, authorities said.

About six months later, marathoner Damaris Mutua’s boyfriend allegedly strangled her and left a pillow over her face. He fled the country after the attack and has been a fugitive ever since, according to police.

Tirop’s husband was arrested in the coastal city of Mombasa as he allegedly tried to leave the country, the Kenyan Directorate of Criminal Investigations said at the time. He’s free on bail and his case is ongoing. He pleaded not guilty to murder but admitted to killing Tirop in an affidavit requesting bail, according to court documents.

And as yet another killing stuns the nation’s running community, activists and officials are calling for more action and resources in the ongoing fight against domestic violence.

“We must do more to combat gender-based violence in our society, which in recent years has reared its ugly head in elite sporting circles,” Kenya’s sports minister Kipchumba Murkomen said in a statement.

Deaths of female athletes spark outrage and calls for action

Cheptegei ran for Uganda, but trained in Kenya. Her father told local media that she bought land in Trans Nzoia and built a house to be near the hub of long distance training. His daughter and her boyfriend were fighting over the land shortly before the attack, Joseph Cheptegei said.

Her boyfriend, who was also burned, is being treated at a hospital in the city of Eldoret.

The deaths of the female athletes have sparked outrage and reignited calls for more action against domestic abuse. In 2022, a group of female athletes in the region formed Tirop’s Angels to educate runners about gender-based violence and engage Kenyan men and leaders on prevention efforts.

“We started Tirop’s Angels out of emotions, we were heartbroken,” Chelimo said. “We realized that female athletes are suffering, and they’re silent. They needed to know they’re not alone, and they have rights, too.”

After Cheptegei’s death, Tirop’s Angels said it was devastated to mourn yet another loss in the running community.

“Another talented athlete taken from us by the menace of gender-based violence,” the group said in a statement Thursday. “This ongoing violence must not be ignored.”

Wealth and fame make young female runners more vulnerable

All three women were working to make a mark as elite runners.

Cheptegei finished 44th in the women’s marathon at the Paris Olympics. Tirop had just returned from a race in Switzerland and had broken the women’s 10km record in Germany a month before she was killed. Mutua, who had just placed third at a half marathon in Angola days before her death, was a bronze medalist at the 2010 Singapore Youth Olympics.

Iten and its surrounding regions are revered training grounds for long-distance runners due to their crisp air and high altitude. Success in races overseas can mean brand sponsorships, stipends, performance bonuses and sometimes paid travel expenses for races — resources that allow runners to participate in international competitions.

This makes domestic violence especially prevalent in running communities in the region, said Chelimo, a long-distance runner who also trains in the area.

A mix of (potential) wealth, fame and a patriarchal culture — where a man is expected to be the breadwinner — leaves young, ambitious women either prey to unscrupulous men trying to get their hands on their future earnings or vulnerable to intimate partners who wish to control them, she said.

Tirop was 25, Mutua was 28 and Cheptegei was 33.

“We (society) don’t protect these young women … we don’t even give them training (to advocate for themselves) … we just expect them to run and break records. Where is the outrage? Where is the anger?” said Njeri Migwi, founder of Usikimye, an organization that provides refuge to victims of sexual- and gender-based violence across Kenya.

As part of its education efforts, Tirop’s Angels brings in experts to help young runners live well-rounded lives and provides them with tips on financial literacy, investments and relationship red flags.

But it acknowledges that a major cultural shift is needed in the region for real change to happen. The group said it’s working with local schools to educate children on forms of abuse and ensure that future generations of runners learn crucial lessons at a young age.

Domestic abuse in the region is rooted in patriarchy, an expert says

The root cause of sexual and gender-based violence in Kenya is the country’s entrenched patriarchy, which is more dominant in remote rural regions, Migwi said.

In Kenya, according to government data from 2022, more than one-third of women ages 15 to 49 have experienced physical violence by a husband, intimate partner or someone else. Married women are much more likely to have been victims of violence than those who have never been married (41% versus 20%), according to the survey.

But domestic violence is a worldwide problem.

A review of data from 2000 to 2018, covering girls and women aged 15 to 49 in 161 countries, found that 27% of ever-partnered women have experienced domestic violence.

In the United States, one in four women have experienced severe violence by a domestic partner, according to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Advocacy groups have described the murder of US women by men they know as “a silent epidemic.”

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Brazil’s Center for Research and Prevention of Aeronautical Accidents (Cenipa) said on Friday that a preliminary report into the August crash of a Voepass airliner showed icing detectors had been activated on the ATR aircraft.

According to a Cenipa official, the plane’s airframe icing button was activated at least three times during the flight, while cockpit recordings showed the copilot said there was “a lot of icing.”

The ATR-72 aircraft from local carrier Voepass swirled out of control before plunging to the ground on Aug. 9, killing all 62 on board.

Cenipa said that the copilot’s comment indicated that the plane’s de-icing system might have failed, but said that still needed to be confirmed.

According to Cenipa, investigations into the crash will probably last for over a year.

The preliminary report on the crash confirmed that the pilots had repeatedly turned the airframe de-icing system on and off.

The report gives a timeline of the flight but does not present clear causes.

“That is consistent with the flight crew being aware of airframe icing and them trying to deal with it using systems on board the aircraft,” said Anthony Brickhouse, a U.S. aviation safety expert.

The turboprop, bound for Sao Paulo’s international airport, had taken off from Cascavel, in the state of Parana and crashed in the town of Vinhedo, some 80 km (50 miles) northwest of Sao Paulo.

In-flight icing can “distort the flow of air over the wing and adversely affect handling qualities,” according to Federal Aviation Administration documents, triggering an airplane to “roll or pitch uncontrollably, and recovery may be impossible.”

This is a developing story and will be updated.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Xi Jinping had a clear aim as he hosted delegates from more than 50 African countries for a major summit in Beijing this week: proving beyond doubt that China is the continent’s premier foreign partner.

The Chinese leader made his case with ceremony on Thursday when, flanked by dozens of African leaders and the UN secretary general in the Great Hall of the People, he vowed to elevate ties between China and the continent to an “all-weather community with a shared future” – a status that Beijing reserves for its staunchest diplomatic allies.

He also made a raft of promises to the continent, to be fulfilled over the next three years: more than $50 billion in financial support; the creation of one million jobs; tens of millions in food and military aid – while vowing to “deepen cooperation with Africa in industry, agriculture, infrastructure, trade and investment.”

Leaders including South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa, Kenya’s William Ruto and Nigeria’s Bola Tinubu assembled in the Chinese capital this week for the three-day forum that Beijing hailed as its largest diplomatic gathering in years.

Xi’s bid to African governments comes as China appears to be reining in its previously free-flowing funding for Africa’s development – amid its own economic slowdown and criticism its lending there had helped to saddle countries with unsustainable debt.

Now, other powers like the United States are ramping up their own efforts to boost ties with the resource-rich continent, as they seek to counter China’s political influence and secure access to critical resources key to powering the green energy transition.

The three-yearly forum on China-Africa cooperation, which wrapped Friday, was a key opportunity for Xi and his officials to telegraph their commitment to the continent, whose backing has only grown in importance for Beijing in the face of its mounting friction with the West.

Here are the main takeaways from Xi’s pitch to the continent this week.

End of the infrastructure drive?

Xi and Chinese officials appeared keen to show that Chinese investment, including in African infrastructure, was not over – even as data show Chinese lending for Africa’s development and big-ticket infrastructure has fallen substantially in recent years.

The Chinese leader announced a commitment to back 30 infrastructure connectivity projects across unspecified countries and ambitions for “a network of land-sea links.” He said China would launch 30 clean energy projects, seen as part of a push from Beijing to make Africa’s market a destination for its green tech like solar panels and electric vehicles that now face tariffs in the US and Europe.

Deals cut in a procession of bilateral meetings this week also included infrastructure. China, Zambia and Tanzania inked a memorandum of understanding to “revitalize” the existing Tanzania-Zambia Railway Authority line on Wednesday, and Nigeria and China referenced developing the West African country’s “transportation, ports and free trade zones,” in a joint statement.

However, such projects and China’s overall pledge of roughly $50 billion in financial support for the continent, while heftier than that of the last forum in 2021, was still less robust than those of the previous decade, observers said.

“It is not insignificant, but if you look at the details, it is not as striking as it used to be,” said Yun Sun, director of the China program at the Stimson Center think tank in Washington, noting that this amount would be spread across many countries and a number of areas of cooperation from health to green technology.

“It also means the funding for hard infrastructure will be reduced across the board. There might be a few major projects, but the more funding they take, the less there will be for other things,” she said.

African country leaders had arrived in China seeking seeking investment, trade, and support industrializing their raw commodity sectors to create jobs. They are expected to be closely watching for follow-through on Beijing’s wide-ranging promises in the coming years, with analysts saying fulfillment of past commitments have been difficult to track.

A debt crisis loomed large

This year’s gathering also played out under the shadow of a debt crisis across a number of African countries, which have struggled under heavy foreign debt, including from Chinese loans, in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic – and raised questions about China’s role in fueling the issue.

Analysts have largely debunked earlier “debt trap” claims that Beijing was purposefully seeking to indebt countries in order to gain leverage over their assets, as it lent toward the construction of highways, rail lines and power plants across Africa under Xi’s flagship Belt and Road Initiative.

African leaders have also pushed back on the premise while in Beijing, with South Africa’s Ramaphosa rejecting the “notion that when China (invests), it is with an intention of, in the end, ensuring that those countries end up in a debt trap or in a debt crisis” in comments to reporters.

China is also not seen by observers to be the main cause of African debt distress in most cases, with debt to its lenders making up a comparatively small portion of the continent’s overall public debt.

But the influx of Chinese loans increased the debt burden, and while Beijing has defended its lending practices and its efforts to ease debt repayment, observers suggest it has moved too slowly or been inflexible in cases helping countries that are heavily indebted to it get relief.

These realities – along with China’s own economic slowdown – are seen to have reduced its appetite for such lending. Even before the pandemic, Chinese lenders had already been slashing funding for the big-scale infrastructure projects and touting a transition to so-called “small yet beautiful” investments, with smaller budgets and environmental or social impact.

Xi highlighted such projects while laying out Beijing’s plan for supporting the region in the coming years, but did not address the debt shouldered by countries in his public remarks.

Competing visions

Instead, the Chinese leader reached back into history to paint the West as the driver of challenges both for China and for Africa – part of what observers say is Beijing’s effort to portray the continent as firmly on its side when it comes to its broader geopolitical rivalry with the US.

China, Africa and other developing nations have for decades “been endeavoring to redress the historical injustices” of Western modernization, Xi told visiting delegations, in an apparent allusion to colonialism and exploitative practices in centuries past.

Now, Xi predicted, China would, along with African countries, “set off a wave of modernization in the Global South.”

Analysts say Beijing sees the continent’s backing as crucial to Xi’s aim of positioning China as a champion of the Global South – and an alternative global leader to the US.

Playing up that backing was also a likely motivation behind China’s elevation of diplomatic ties with attending African countries to a “strategic” level and its designation of the “all-weather China-Africa community with a shared future for the new era,” observers say.

The US and its Group of Seven (G7) allies have launched their own effort to fund infrastructure in developing countries, with US officials saying African countries should have “choices” when it comes to their partnerships.

Noting that “more countries” were increasing attention on ties with African nations, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Thursday said Beijing “welcomes” such support for the continent – as long as it’s not done with a “condescending approach.”

Visiting leaders at the summit also rebuffed the idea of competition defining the relationship. Speaking on the summit’s sidelines, Senegal’s Foreign Minister Yassine Fall said that there would always be global competition, but noted that “Africans today are saying that China is on our side.”

African country leaders, however, are unlikely to be willing to choose between Washington and Beijing.

“Overall (at the forum), the African side created the impression that China remains pivotal,” said Paul Nantulya, a senior China specialist at the Africa Center for Strategic Studies in Washington.

“But this does not mean that they will ditch the US and others. They clearly do not want to isolate themselves from opportunities and multiple engagements and partnerships,” he said.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Ukraine appears to be calling on a fleet of fire-spewing “dragon drones” in its war with Russian invaders, putting a modern twist on a munition used to horrific effect in both world wars.

A series of videos posted on social media, including on Telegram from the Ukrainian Defense Ministry on Wednesday, show the low-flying drones dropping torrents of fire – actually molten metal – onto Russian-held positions in tree lines.

The white-hot mixture of aluminum powder and iron oxide, called thermite, burns at temperatures up to 4,000 degrees Fahrenheit (2,200 degrees Celsius). It can quickly burn off trees and vegetation giving cover to Russian troops, if not killing or disabling the troops outright.

As it falls from the drone, the thermite resembles the fire coming from the mouth of the mythical dragon, giving the drones their nickname.

“Strike Drones are our wings of vengeance, bringing fire straight from the sky!” a social media post from Ukraine’s 60th Mechanized Brigade said.

“They become a real threat to the enemy, burning his positions with an accuracy that no other weapon can achieve,” the post continued.

“When our ‘Vidar’ works – the Russian woman will never sleep,” it added. Vidar is the Norse god of vengeance.

Creating that kind of fear is likely the main effect of Ukraine’s thermite drones, according to Nicholas Drummond, a defense industry analyst specializing in land warfare and a former British Army officer.

“I understand that Ukraine only possesses a limited capacity to deliver a thermite effect, so this is a niche capability rather than new mainstream weapon,” he said.

But he acknowledges the terror thermite can create.

“I would not have liked to have been on the receiving end,” Drummond said.

Incendiary weapons in war

Thermite can easily burn through almost anything, including metal, so there’s little protection from it.

It was discovered by a German chemist is the 1890s and was originally used to weld railroad tracks.

But its military potency soon became apparent, with the Germans dropping it from zeppelins as bombs over Britain in World War I, according to a history from McGill University in Montreal.

Both Germany and the Allies used thermite aerial bombs in World War II, and they also utilized it to disable captured artillery pieces, putting thermite into the breech and melting the weapon shut from the inside.

According to Action on Armed Violence (AOAV), a British anti-war advocacy group, Ukraine has previously used thermite dropped from drones to permanently disable Russian tanks.

The thermite is dropped “directly through the hatches, where the intense heat quickly ignites and destroys everything inside,” an AOAV report says.

“This precision, combined with the drone’s ability to bypass traditional defenses, makes thermite bombs a highly effective tool in modern warfare,” it says.

Thermite is just one type of incendiary weapon, with others including napalm and white phosphorus.

The United Nations Office for Disarmament says incendiary weapons can cause massive destruction and environmental damage.

“The fires produced by the weapon itself or ignited by it are difficult to predict and to contain. Therefore, incendiary weapons are often described as ‘area weapons’ due to their impact over a broad area,” it says on its website.

The United States used napalm to burn much of Japan’s capital to the ground in World War II’s infamous Tokyo fire raids. US forces also used it extensively in Vietnam.

The US military has also used thermite in grenades, with the US Army’s Pine Bluff Arsenal producing the weapons from the 1960s through 2014 and then resuming production again in 2023.

What thermite does to humans

Under international law, thermite is not banned for military combat, but its use on civilian targets is prohibited because of the horrible effects it can have on the human body.

In a 2022 report on incendiary weapons, such as thermite, Human Rights Watch called them “notorious for their horrific human cost,” including inflicting fourth- or fifth-degree burns.

“They can cause damage to muscles, ligaments, tendons, nerves, blood vessels, and even bones,” HRW said.

Treatment can last months and require daily attention. If victims survive, they are left with physical and psychological scars, HRW said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Moscow’s initial push into Ukraine was stopped far short of capturing the capital of Kyiv, and the sides have fought over much of the same territory for most of the war.

Ukraine’s forces, outnumbered and outgunned by Russia, have proven adept at innovating with small drones to hammer Moscow’s troops and equipment.

A Ukrainian incursion into Russian territory near Kursk in August surprised Putin and has boosted Ukrainian confidence that it can prevail in the war.

Kyiv has accused Russian forces of using unspecified incendiary munitions on civilian targets earlier in the war, including on a village outside of Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, in May 2022.

Ukrainian officers also accused Russia of using incendiaries in attacks on the city of Bakhmut last year.

Those uses of incendiaries haven’t led to quick victory for Russia, and Drummond doesn’t think they are a battlefield game changer for Ukraine either.

“If Ukraine wants to achieve real impact, it needs sufficient mass to force a proper breakthrough as it has in Kursk. This is what victory looks like,” Drummond said.

But thermite does give Russian troops another reason to be fearful of Ukrainian drones, he said.

“We have seen instances where Russian forces attacked by multiple drones have deserted their positions. The more Ukraine can instill a fear of drones the better its chances of success,” he said.

“Thermite keeps up the pressure.”

This post appeared first on cnn.com

In southern Israel’s Negev desert, residents of the Bedouin village of Khirbet Karkur live in tents and metal-clad makeshift homes. Not far from the border with Gaza, they hear the sounds of the war unfolding next door.

There are some 300,000 Arab Bedouins living in the Negev. As Muslim-Arab citizens of Israel, many are still struggling to find their place in Israeli society 75 years after the Jewish state was established, despite many of them serving in the military.

The war with Hamas has only deepened that sense of uncertainty. Bedouins living near the Gaza border feel they have been doubly victimized: first by being within striking distance of Hamas rockets with minimal protection, and second by state marginalization that has only grown worse since Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel.

The village of Khirbet Karkur is not recognized by the Israeli state. Residents live a semi-nomadic life, in an open desert area and in dwellings that aren’t connected to the Israeli electricity grid or water supply. Like many other unrecognized villages, it has no schools or hospitals, and residents say that women have been forced to give birth in cars on the way to hospital because ambulances struggle to reach the town.

Villagers say the rest of the country had all but forgotten them – until last week, when a swarm of journalists travelled along dirt roads to the dusty village to mark the release of 52-year-old Farhan Al-Qadi from Hamas captivity. Khirbet Karkur is his hometown.

Al-Qadi was abducted along with 250 others by Hamas-led militants on October 7. He was taken from Kibbutz Magen, where he was working as a security guard, and was rescued last week from a tunnel in Gaza by Israeli security forces, the Israeli military said.

Speaking to reporters the day after his rescue, Al-Qadi said he wishes “that the war ends for all Palestinian and Israeli families.”

Israeli officials have said that Al-Qadi’s kidnapping and release shows that all its citizens – Jews and Muslims alike – are equally vulnerable to terrorism, adding that the state is committed to securing the freedom of every citizen.

Israel’s Bedouin community is considered a subset of the country’s Arab population, which makes up about 20% of the total population in the country of 10 million.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Al-Qadi the day he was released, and according to a transcript supplied by the Prime Minister’s Office, said: “I want you to know that we do not forget anyone, just as we did not forget you. We are committed to returning everyone, without exception.”

In November, the prime minister visited the IDF’s so-called Bedouin battalion in the Negev, a unit mostly made up of Muslim Bedouin soldiers, saying that “Jewish and Bedouin commanders are standing shoulder-to-shoulder,” and that “our partnership is the future of us all against these savages.”

But some Bedouin leaders and residents of Al-Qadi’s village say the state is celebrating his rescue without taking proper action to address the community’s decades-long needs.

Waleed Alhwashla, a Bedouin member of Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, said that while Netanyahu and his coalition portray Israeli Arabs as equal to Jewish citizens, the reality on the ground is starkly different.

‘Displacement and segregation’

The semi-nomadic Bedouin group is predominantly tribal, with family trees that extend into Gaza and Egypt’s northern Sinai. Many identify distinctly as Bedouin Israelis, while others see themselves as Palestinian citizens of Israel.

Unlike most Jewish Israelis, Bedouins are not required to serve in the Israeli military, though some choose to do so anyway, often in specialized units operating in the Negev desert.

Bedouins who join the military receive support from the state to complete high school studies, Hebrew courses and driving lessons. Some also join up to protect the land they live in, Israeli media reported, especially after October 7.

Most Bedouins live in the 4,700-square-mile Negev, which before Israel’s founding in 1948 was home to some 92,000 Bedouins. Only 11,000 remained after the Arab-Israeli war that followed.

Today, over 300,000 Bedouin citizens of Israel live in the Negev, including more than 80,000 who reside in unrecognized Bedouin villages, according to Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel. Many of those settlements predate Israel’s founding.

These villages are often situated next to waste dumps, with little access to water and electricity, said Fayez Sohaiban, a relative of Al-Qadi and former mayor of the nearby Bedouin city of Rahat.

“People are suffocating,” he said.

Residents of unrecognized villages regularly face demolition orders for their buildings due to lack of building permits, they say.

Demolitions have occurred on a “weekly” basis this year, according to the rights group Negev Coexistence Forum for Civil Equality (NCF). In the first half of 2024 alone, 2,007 Bedouin structures were demolished by the state despite a temporary halt in the early months of the war, the group said, up from 1,767 demolitions during the same period of the previous year.

Bedouin residents and leaders say their plight has worsened since the war started.

In May, Amnesty International said that Israel had demolished 47 homes in the unrecognized village of Wadi al-Khalil “without proper consultation or compensation,” adding that Israeli authorities have over the years “employed numerous pretexts to push for the displacement and segregation of the Bedouin community in the Negev,”  from expanding highways and industrial zones, to establishing forests for the Jewish National Fund and the designation of military zones. A report by the NCF said in the case of Wadi al-Khalil, the demolition was justified by the Israeli state as necessary for the extension of Highway 6, “a project not yet scheduled for construction nor budgeted by the state, despite the humanitarian crisis it caused.”

Bedouin-Israeli communities are also among the poorest in the country, with close to 80% of Bedouin children living below the poverty line, NCF said, citing data from Israel’s National Insurance Institute.

Some villagers are afraid to criticize the government, citing fear of retribution by the authorities, which they say has increased since October 7. Villagers say authorities closely monitor their social media for any signs of support for Palestinians in Gaza, or criticism of Israel’s conduct in the war.

United Nations officials have repeatedly called on Israel to stop demolishing homes and property belonging to the Bedouin community.

Victims of October 7

When Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 22 Bedouins were killed, seven of them by rocket fire that fell onto unrecognized villages, according to Alhwashla. A total of eight Bedouins were kidnapped, according to the Hostage Families Forum. Three have been freed, one is believed to be dead in Gaza, one was killed by IDF fire while attempting to flee, and three remain in Hamas captivity, according to the forum.

In April, when Israel and Iran traded direct fire for the first time, a 7-year-old Bedouin girl in the Negev was severely wounded by shrapnel from an intercepted missile, according to Israeli officials.

Last week, residents of unrecognized Bedouin villages filed a petition with the High Court of Justice “demanding that the state provide protective measures against rocket and missile fire,” according to the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, a partner to the petitioners.

“Approximately 85,000 residents of these unrecognized villages lack any means of protection against rocket, missile, or drone attacks,” the association said, adding that residents have since October 7 been forced to rely on “makeshift protective measures, such as sheltering under bridges, digging trenches, or finding narrow crevices in the ground.”

“These villages are without sirens, Iron Dome coverage, or any formal state-regulated protection, due to their unrecognized status,” the association said, citing the petition.

Still, Bedouin communities feel that such efforts have done little to alleviate their longstanding hardships.

Despite their Israeli citizenship, they feel underrepresented, neglected and that their plight has even worsened as the war grinds on.

“We hold the Israeli passport and Israeli ID card. We live in this country and respect the law, so we must be treated the same way Jews are treated,” he said.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden is preparing to announce that he will formally block Nippon Steel’s proposed $14.9 billion acquisition of U.S. Steel, two people familiar with the matter confirmed to NBC News.

The storied American firm announced in December that it had agreed to be purchased by the Japanese-owned conglomerate, saying it was necessary for U.S. Steel’s evolution in an increasingly competitive and globalized marketplace.

But the agreement was immediately opposed by the Biden administration as not only a historic blow to U.S. manufacturing capacity, but also as a national security threat.

A water tower at the US Steel Corp. Edgar Thomson Works steel mill in Braddock, Pennsylvania, US, on April 6, 2024. Justin Merriman / Bloomberg via Getty Images

“U.S. Steel has been an iconic American company for more than a century and it should remain a totally American company,” Biden later said in April. “American-owned, American-operated by American union steelworkers, the best in the world. And that’s going to happen. I promise you.” 

A White House official said the Treasury committee charged with reviewing foreign investments into the U.S. hasn’t sent Biden a recommendation. It was not clear when such a recommendation would be made.

U.S. Steel executives have said that the deal’s failure would put the fate of thousands of union jobs — as well as its longtime Pittsburgh headquarters — in doubt. Pennsylvania is poised to be one of the most critical swing states in the fall election — meaning the potential loss of thousands of jobs there could have reverberating political repercussions.

“We want elected leaders and other key decision makers to recognize the benefits of the deal as well as the unavoidable consequences if the deal fails,” U.S. Steel CEO David Burritt said in a release. 

Once one of the largest companies in America, U.S. Steel today employs approximately 20,000 workers, down from about 340,000 at its height in 1943, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

U.S. Steel’s market value was at about $7 billion as of Thursday morning. Its approximately $15 billion valuation by Nippon would make it worth about as much as Snap (formerly Snapchat) and Hyatt Hotels.

Shares of U.S. Steel climbed slightly Wednesday after initially declining on early reports from the Washington Post and New York Times that Biden was preparing to block the deal.

The U.S. Steel Edgar Thomson Works steel mill in Braddock, Pa. Justin Merriman / Bloomberg via Getty Images

In a statement, Nippon said that it had not received any update on the process, but that it opposed any effort to scupper the agreement.

‘Since the outset of the regulatory review process, we have been clear with the administration that we do not believe this transaction creates any national security concerns,’ it said. ‘U.S. Steel and the entire American steel industry will be on much stronger footing because of Nippon Steel’s investment in U.S. Steel — an investment that Nippon Steel is the only willing and able party to do so.’

The deal is still officially being reviewed by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, an ostensibly nonpartisan arm of the U.S. Treasury that reviews national security implications of overseas entries into U.S. businesses. Its most recent high-profile case involved TikTok.

“We are very alarmed by any attempts to politicize the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) review process on the sale of the U.S. Steel to Nippon Steel Corporation, which should be conducted objectively based on fair rules and processes,’ a spokesperson for the Japan-U.S. Business Council said.

Nippon Steel also has its roots in firms more than a century old. Today, it is one of the largest producers of crude steel in the world and is worth more than $21 billion, but has been facing increasing competition from China.

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has previously stated he would block the deal ‘instantaneously’ if elected. In a new statement, the former president said that he would ensure U.S. Steel’s ‘facilities will remain under American ownership’ under a second Trump administration.

‘Kamala Harris is the one in the White House — if she wants to protect these American jobs she has the power to do it right now,’ a Trump campaign spokesperson said.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

A month after losing a landmark antitrust case brought by the Department of Justice, Google is headed back to court to face off for a second time against federal prosecutors.

In August, a judge ruled that Google has held a monopoly in internet search, marking the biggest antitrust ruling in the tech industry since the case against Microsoft more than 20 years ago. This time, Google is defending itself against claims that its advertising business has acted as a monopoly that’s led to higher ad prices for customers.

The trial begins in Alexandria, Virginia, on Monday and will likely last for at least several weeks. It represents the first tech antitrust trial from a case brought by the Biden administration. The department’s earlier lawsuit was first filed in October 2020, when Donald Trump was in the White House.

While U.S. officials have spent the past several years going after Big Tech, only Google has so far has ended up in federal court. The DOJ sued Apple in March, saying its iPhone ecosystem is a monopoly that drove its “astronomical valuation” at the expense of consumers, developers and rival phone makers.

In late 2020, the Federal Trade Commission filed an antitrust suit against Facebook (now Meta), claiming the company had built a monopoly through acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp. Earlier this year, Meta asked a court to dismiss the suit. In 2023, the FTC and 17 states sued Amazon for allegedly wielding its “monopoly power” to inflate prices, degrade quality for shoppers and unlawfully exclude rivals, undermining competition.

For Google, the focus turns to its ad tools, which are part of the company’s $200 billion digital ad business.

The government claims Google is in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, which prohibit anticompetitive behavior. The DOJ will argue that Google locked in publishers and advertisers to its products and that websites had to develop workarounds in response. A coalition of states, including California, Colorado, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Tennessee, joined the case.

Google’s ad business has drawn numerous critics over the years because the platform operates on multiple sides of the market — buying, selling and an ad exchange — giving the company unique insights and potential leverage. In its initial lawsuit, the DOJ cited internal communication from a Google ad executive, who said owning multiple sides of the ad-selling process is like “if Goldman or Citibank owned the NYSE,” referring to the New York Stock Exchange.

At stake is how Google is allowed to operate its portfolio of ad products. The DOJ, if successful, seeks the divestiture of, at minimum, the Google Ad Manager suite (GAM), the marketplace that gives brands the ability to create and manage ad units and track ad campaigns and lets publishers sell ad inventory.

That’s different from Google’s flagship platform — Google Ads — which is primarily for businesses looking to advertise their products or services across search, websites, YouTube and other partner sites. 

In the most recent quarter, Google parent Alphabet reported ad revenue of $64.6 billion, accounting for over three-quarters of total sales. Of that amount, $48.5 billion came from search and other businesses like Gmail and Maps, and $8.7 billion came from YouTube.

The GAM suite is part of the Google Network business, which generated $7.4 billion in second-quarter revenue, or about 11% of total ad sales.

In addition to a potential partial breakup, Google could see a flood of litigation from advertisers seeking monetary rewards if the DOJ is successful. Bernstein analysts said Google could face up to $100 billion in such lawsuits.

In the first antitrust case, the court found that Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act, which outlaws monopolies. Judge Amit Mehta of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia agreed with the DOJ, which argued that Google has kept its share of the general search market by creating strong barriers to entry and a feedback loop that sustained its dominance.

“Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Mehta wrote.

Google now awaits its punishment for that case. The DOJ is asking for an extended time frame, until February, to offer remedies, followed by a hearing in April. Google says the DOJ should have already done its homework and should be prepared to offer its proposal in October.

In the second case, the DOJ plans to show that Google has cobbled together unrivaled power through the acquisitions of companies like DoubleClick in 2008, and by building services that let ad buyers target users across the internet.

The company’s M&A strategy “set the stage for Google’s later exclusionary conduct across the ad tech industry,” the Justice Department alleges. The agency claims Google controls 91% of the market for ad servers, the space used by publishers to sell ads, and takes advantage of its power by unfairly raising ad prices.

The DOJ plans to call YouTube CEO Neal Mohan in for live testimony. Mohan, was previously vice president at DoubleClick before the acquisition. After being rolled into Google’s ad tech stack, DoubleClick’s technology allowed Google to require publishers, in some instances, to use all of its tools to gain access to any of them, meaning they couldn’t use rival services for parts of the online ad-buying process, the agency alleges.

“Website creators earn less, and advertisers pay more, than they would in a market where unfettered competitive pressure could discipline prices and lead to more innovative ad tech tools that would ultimately result in higher quality and lower cost transactions for market participants,” the DOJ says.

Some publishers have been forced to turn to alternative models like subscriptions to fund their operations, the government says, while others have gone out of business.

Google has long fought back against claims that it dominates online ads, pointing to the market share of competitors including Meta. It will argue that buyers and sellers have many options especially as the online ad market has evolved.

Google will also argue that the DOJ’s pursuits would slow innovation, raise advertising fees, and make it harder for thousands of small businesses and publishers to grow.

The company says that its ad tools adapt to handle the billions of ad auctions taking place on the internet each day, and that the DOJ doesn’t have an accurate picture of the ad space. Google will also tell the court that it’s always offered competitive rates for customers, who often mix and match advertising platforms.

As it relates to deal-making, Google will claim that DoubleClick and AdMeld weren’t killer acquisitions at the time and that regulators signed off on them.

In trying to prove its case, the DOJ has listed potential testimony from Jerry Dischler, formerly vice president of Google’s ad platform who currently leads the company’s cloud applications. It’s also noted the potential to call on several Google product managers.

Also on the DOJ’s list is Google AI executive Sissie Hsiao, who was formerly a director of global display, video and mobile app advertising, and Scott Sheffer, who is listed as vice president of Google partnerships. The government plans to include evidence from internal Google communications, testimony from publishers, advertisers and companies that tried to compete with Google as well as experts and professors from Stanford and Harvard, filings show.

Google also noted it may call on Nitish Korula, engineering director for Google assistant who was formerly senior technical advisor to search head Prabhakar Raghavan. It also requested testimony from Simon Whitcombe, a vice president at Meta, and suggested depositions from executives at BuzzFeed and The New York Times.

Though the DOJ and Google submitted a list of executives named for potential testimony or deposition, those individuals won’t necessarily be called.

Google declined to comment for this article.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Police in a Denver suburb are disputing claims by some Republicans, including former president Donald Trump, that a Venezuelan gang has taken over an apartment complex there, the latest political flash point in the immigration debate.

Trump has repeatedly raised the issue in recent appearances and social media posts, seeking to tie Vice President Kamala Harris to the situation at times.

“If you look at Aurora, Colorado, they’re taking over the place; they took over buildings,” Trump said Friday during a news conference in New York. “This is just the beginning.”

The Aurora Police Department has stressed that it takes the gang seriously, but it also pushed back against suggestions that gang members have gained control of the complex.

“I’m not saying that there’s not gang members that don’t live in this community, but what we’re learning out here is that gang members have not taken over this complex,” Heather Morris, the interim police chief in Aurora, said in a recent video taped outside the complex.

The video was one of several efforts the city has made to address concerns — and try to clear up misinformation — about the local presence of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua.

Much of the firestorm goes back to a viral video that purported to show gang members, armed with weapons, storming through the complex, the Edge at Lowry Apartments. The Republican mayor of Aurora, Mike Coffman, posted a screenshot of the video on Facebook and announced the city would be seeking an emergency court order to clear the buildings by declaring them a “criminal nuisance.”

Around the same time, the city said in a statement that “there is a small Tren de Aragua (TdA) presence in Aurora and we have been taking it seriously.” But it also lamented the media attention that was being paid to the situation, saying people have “mischaracterized our city based on isolated incidents.”

Some tenants held a news conference this week and disputed the notion that the gang has taken over the complex. Instead, they said, the problem is that the apartment block has fallen into disrepair and is infested with bedbugs, cockroaches and rats.

Coffman has since dialed back his rhetoric on the complex after touring it and talking with tenants.

“Not sure where the truth is in all of this, but I’ll continue to work on it to find out,” Coffman said in a Facebook post Wednesday.

Trump has nonetheless continued to echo the claims that the gang has gained control of the complex. He has made at least two posts on his Truth Social platform alluding to the events in Aurora, one of which featured an image of scowling, tattooed men and said, “Your new apartment managers if Kamala’s re-elected.”

During a speech Thursday in New York, Trump said that a group of “rough ones” from Venezuela “took over large sections of a town, large sections of an area of Colorado.”

“Aurora — has anyone been there?” Trump said. “I think you’d better stay away for a little while.”

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

Having first attempted to make his case in a court of law, former president Donald Trump on Friday afternoon turned to the court of public opinion.

Earlier in the day, he had joined his legal team as they sought to overturn the verdict in the civil trial that found him liable for sexually assaulting writer E. Jean Carroll, an attack Carroll documented in a book excerpted by New York magazine. Their case made, however effectively, the group migrated north to Trump Tower, where Trump unloaded on the case and on Carroll in front of cameras.

Trump came prepared, in his way. As he walked through various components of the case, including similar allegations from other women who have claimed that Trump had assaulted them, he referred to notes written on cards emblazoned with the logo of his 2024 presidential campaign. “No police report,” one said in Trump’s distinctive black-marker scrawl. “No witnesses.”

Eventually he got to one of the most telling elements of Carroll’s case, the one that not only proved the two had met before the assault but that also eventually undercut Trump’s perverse insistences that he wouldn’t have found Carroll attractive in the first place.

The photo was included in the 2019 New York magazine article, showing a laughing Carroll face-to-face with Trump and his then-wife at an event in the late 1980s. The photo’s original caption described the image as showing “Carroll, Donald and Ivana Trump, and Carroll’s then-husband, television-news anchor John Johnson, at an NBC party around 1987.”

But Trump is never one to accept documentation as convincing. After The Washington Post published the “Access Hollywood” tape in which Trump described assaulting women in a manner similar to what Carroll alleged, he told some allies that the audio was not authentic (despite having admitted to making the comments when they were first revealed). When Vice President Kamala Harris had large crowds at an event in Michigan, Trump falsely claimed that images of the event were generated by artificial intelligence.

That’s what he said about the Carroll photo on Friday, too.

“They have a picture from, they say, about 40 years ago, a picture,” Trump said. “And the picture depicts her and her husband on a celebrity line where I was the celebrity. I was — been a celebrity for a long time. And they were shaking my hands along with hundreds of other people. Nobody even knows where it is.”

As the caption indicated, it was apparently at an NBC party.

“All I can say is that I never met the woman other than this picture, which could have been AI-generated, I don’t know,” Trump said later. “Showed up out of nowhere, but it’s just fine. Nice picture with her, her husband and lots of other people are on line. It’s a celebrity line.” He then again reiterated that he was famous at the time.

There is no way that the image was generated by artificial intelligence. For one thing, there’s no reason to believe that it is, that Trump — who was a fixture in the New York social scene at the time — wouldn’t have been in the presence of a local television star and his writer wife. There’s no reason to believe that Carroll, eager to make her case in her book and to the magazine, took out her supercomputer and created a convincing simulation of such an encounter.

Particularly since, when the New York excerpt was published, the technology to make convincing photos was not yet available. By now, we’re all familiar enough with the technology to have it feel as though it’s been around for a long time, but it hasn’t been. It wasn’t until years after the book came out that even the first rudimentary AI models were available. Even today, generating an image with the clarity and accuracy of that photo would be tricky.

Of course, Trump hasn’t always viewed the photo as all that clear. When he was being deposed as part of Carroll’s lawsuit, he was shown a copy of the image and referred to it as “blurry” — perhaps a manifestation of his aversion to wearing corrective lenses in public. He had been shown the picture to see if he could identify the woman standing in front of him; that is, Carroll.

He did identify her, albeit incorrectly. He said that the photo showed not Carroll but Marla Maples, the woman with whom he carried on an affair before divorcing his first wife, Ivana. So much for the bizarre excuse — jaw-droppingly reiterated on Friday — that he wouldn’t have found Carroll attractive.

But this was how the whole news conference went. Those notes on the campaign stationery were part of a broad, scattershot effort to raise whatever doubt he could. It seems safe to say that his campaign team would probably have preferred he not say anything at all.

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

NEW YORK — A judge on Friday delayed Donald Trump’s hush money sentencing until after the November election, which means voters will cast ballots without knowing whether the Republican nominee could face jail time for his conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records.

Prosecutors did not object to a request from Trump’s attorneys to delay the sentencing, which had been scheduled for Sept. 18.

New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan changed the date to Nov. 26, noting the extraordinary nature and timing of the first-ever sentencing of a former U.S. president — a defendant who, in this case, in again running for the highest office in the land.

“This matter is one that stands alone, in a unique place in this Nation’s history, and this Court has presided over it since its inception — from arraignment to jury verdict and a plenitude of motions and other matters in-between,” Merchan wrote.

He called sentencing “one of the most critical and difficult decisions a trial court judge faces — the sentencing of a defendant found guilty of crimes by a unanimous jury of his peers.”

As a result of the date change, Trump will probably face that moment either as a just-defeated candidate or as president-elect.

Trump was found guilty in May of trying to cover up the nature of a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels, which was made weeks before the 2016 election to keep her quiet about an alleged sexual encounter with Trump a decade earlier. A Manhattan jury found that Trump broke the law when he schemed to misclassify his reimbursements for the payment as routine legal fees in an effort to hide the information from the public.

Trump faces up to four years in prison, but as a first-time offender he could receive a sentence that does not involve incarceration.

He is seeking to toss the guilty verdict altogether, based in part on a July 1 Supreme Court decision giving presidents broad protection for conduct carried out while in office.

The case is one of four criminal indictments brought against Trump as he makes his third run for the White House. His legal strategy in all four cases has been to try every possible way to delay the trials until after the presidential election. He has succeeded in postponing the other cases through a variety of appeals; only the New York case has gone to trial, and the others will be delayed at least into 2025, if they happen at all.

While the Supreme Court immunity ruling stemmed from defense claims in Trump’s federal election obstruction case in D.C., his lawyers were quick to argue that it also applied to his case in New York state court. They said the decision meant some evidence should have been excluded from the trial and from the grand jury presentation.

Trump’s legal team has said it will also appeal the conviction on more traditional grounds, calling the verdict the result of flawed testimony from a chronic liar recruited by an overly zealous prosecutor. There is generally a high bar for overturning any jury’s findings.

In agreeing to delay the sentencing, Merchan underscored the importance of adhering to the jury’s verdict as proscribed by law, but also said Trump has legal rights that tipped the scale in favor of a delay.

“The members of this jury served diligently on this case, and their verdict must be respected and addressed in a manner that is not diluted by the enormity of the upcoming presidential election,” the judge wrote. “Likewise, if one is necessary, the Defendant has the right to a sentencing hearing that respects and protects his constitutional rights.”

This is a developing story. It will be updated.

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com