Category: the

  • President Donald Trump is again loudly complaining that the US military bases in Asia are too costly for the US to bear.  As part of the new round of tariff negotiations with Japan and Korea, Trump is calling on Japan and Korea to pay for stationing the US troops.  Here’s a much better idea: close the bases and return the US servicemen to the US.

    Trump implies that the US is providing a great service to Japan and Korea by stationing 50,000 troops in Japan and nearly 30,000 in Korea.  Yet these countries do not need the US to defend themselves.  They are wealthy and can certainly provide their own defense.  Far more importantly, diplomacy can ensure the peace in northeast Asia far more effectively and far less expensively than US troops.

    The US acts as if Japan needs to be defended against China.  Let’s have a look.  During the past 1,000 years, during which time China was the region’s dominant power for all but the last 150 years, how many times did China attempt to invade Japan?  If you answered zero, you are correct.  China did not attempt to invade Japan on a single occasion.

    You might quibble.  What about the two attempts in 1274 and 1281, roughly 750 years ago? It’s true that when the Mongols temporarily ruled China between 1271 and 1368, the Mongols twice sent expeditionary fleets to invade Japan, and both times were defeated by a combination of typhoons (known in Japanese lore as the Kamikaze winds) and by Japanese coastal defenses.

    Japan, on the other hand, made several attempts to attack or conquer China.  In 1592, the arrogant and erratic Japanese military leader Toyotomi Hideyoshi launched an invasion of Korea with the goal of conquering Ming China.  He did not get far, dying in 1598 without even having subdued Korea.  In 1894-5, Japan invaded and defeated China in the Sino-Japanese war, taking Taiwan as a Japanese colony.  In 1931, Japan invaded northeast China (Manchuria) and created the Japanese colony of Manchukuo.  In 1937,  Japan invaded China, starting World War II in the Pacific region.

    Nobody thinks that Japan is going to invade China today, and there is no rhyme, reason, or historical precedent to believe that China is going to invade Japan.  Japan has no need for the US military bases to protect itself from China.

    The same is true of China and Korea.  During the past 1,000 years, China never invaded Korea, except on one occasion: when the US threatened China.  China entered the war in late 1950 on the side of North Korea to fight the US troops advancing northward towards the Chinese border.  At the time, US General Douglas MacArthur recklessly recommended attacking China with atomic bombs.  MacArthur also proposed to support Chinese nationalist forces, then based in Taiwan, to invade the Chinese mainland. President Harry Truman, thank God, rejected MacArthur’s recommendations.

    South Korea needs deterrence against North Korea, to be sure, but that would be achieved far more effectively and credibly through a regional security system including China, Japan, Russia, North Korea, South Korea, than through the presence of the US, which has repeatedly stoked North Korea’s nuclear arsenal and military build-up, not diminished it.

    In fact, the US military bases in East Asia are really for the US projection of power, not for the defense of Japan or Korea.  This is even more reason why they should be removed.  Though the US claims that its bases in East Asia are defensive, they are understandably viewed by China and North Korea as a direct threat – for example, by creating the possibility of a decapitation strike, and by dangerously lowering the response times for China and North Korea to a US provocation or some kind of misunderstanding.  Russia vociferously opposed NATO in Ukraine for the same justifiable reasons.  NATO has frequently intervened in US-backed regime-change operations and has placed missile systems dangerously close to Russia.

    Indeed, just as Russia feared, NATO has actively participated in the Ukraine War, providing armaments, strategy, intelligence, and even programming and tracking for missile strikes deep inside of Russia.

    Note that Trump is currently obsessed with two small port facilities in Panama owned by a Hong Kong company, claiming that China is threatening US security (!), and wants the facilities sold to an American buyer.  The US on the other hand surrounds China not with two tiny port facilities but with major US military bases in Japan, South Korea, Guam, the Philippines, and the Indian Ocean near to China’s international sea lanes.

    The best strategy for the superpowers is to stay out of each other’s lanes.  China and Russia should not open military bases in the Western Hemisphere, to put it mildly.  The last time that was tried, when the Soviet Union placed nuclear weapons in Cuba in 1962, the world nearly ended in nuclear annihilation.  (See Martin Sherwin’s remarkable book, Gambling with Armageddon for the shocking details on how close the world came to nuclear Armageddon).  Neither China nor Russia shows the slightest inclination to do so today, despite all of the provocations of facing US bases in their own neighborhoods.

    Trump is looking for ways to save money – an excellent idea given that the US federal budget is hemorrhaging $2 trillion dollars a year, more than 6% of US GDP.  Closing the US overseas military bases would be an excellent place to start.

    Trump even seemed to point that way at the start of his second term, but the Congressional Republicans have called for increases, not decreases, in military spending.  Yet with America’s 750 or so overseas military bases in around 80 countries, it’s high time to close these bases, pocket the saving, and return to diplomacy.  Getting the host countries to pay for something that doesn’t help them or the US is a huge drain of time, diplomacy, and resources, both for the US and the host countries.

    The US should make a basic deal with China, Russia, and other powers.  “You keep your military bases out of our neighborhood, and we’ll keep our military bases out of yours.” Basic reciprocity among the major powers would save trillions of dollars of military outlays over the coming decade and, more importantly, would push the Doomsday Clock back from 89 seconds to nuclear Armageddon.

    • First published at Other News.
    The post Close the US Military Bases in Asia first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Jeffrey Sachs.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on ProPublica and was authored by ProPublica.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Asia is mourning the passing of Pope Francis on Monday, who died aged 88 after a 12-year papacy. He had traveled extensively across Asia since becoming leader of the world’s 1.3 billion Catholics in 2013.

    During his visits, Francis drew large crowds in countries such as the Philippines, which is predominantly Catholic, but also Indonesia, Bangladesh and Thailand where Muslims and Buddhists were in the religious majority and Catholics were in the minority. He also visited South Korea, Japan, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Timor-Leste and Singapore.

    Here are moments captured during Pope Francis’s visits to Asia:

    Pope Francis shakes hands with Bhaddanta Kumarabhivasma, chairman of the state Sangha Maha Nayaka Committee, during a meeting with the Buddhist committee in Yangon, Myanmar Nov. 29, 2017.
    Pope Francis shakes hands with Bhaddanta Kumarabhivasma, chairman of the state Sangha Maha Nayaka Committee, during a meeting with the Buddhist committee in Yangon, Myanmar Nov. 29, 2017.
    (Max Rossi/Reuters)
    Devotees greet Pope Francis as he visits St. Peter's Parish church in the Sam Phran district of Nakhon Pathom Province, Nov. 22, 2019.
    Devotees greet Pope Francis as he visits St. Peter’s Parish church in the Sam Phran district of Nakhon Pathom Province, Nov. 22, 2019.
    (Soe Zeya Tun/Reuters)
    Pope Francis arrives to conduct a Holy Mass at the Assumption Cathedral in Bangkok, Nov. 22, 2019.
    Pope Francis arrives to conduct a Holy Mass at the Assumption Cathedral in Bangkok, Nov. 22, 2019.
    (Jorge Silva/Reuters)
    Pope Francis leaves after leading a holy mass at Tasitolu park in Dili, Timor-Leste, Sept. 10, 2024.
    Pope Francis leaves after leading a holy mass at Tasitolu park in Dili, Timor-Leste, Sept. 10, 2024.
    (Firdia Lisnawati/AP)
    Pope Francis greets Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle at Rizal Park, in Manila, Philippines, Jan. 18, 2015.
    Pope Francis greets Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle at Rizal Park, in Manila, Philippines, Jan. 18, 2015.
    (L’Osservatore Romano/AP)
    Pope Francis wears a traditional hat during a meeting with faithful in Vanimo, Papua New Guinea, Sept. 8, 2024.
    Pope Francis wears a traditional hat during a meeting with faithful in Vanimo, Papua New Guinea, Sept. 8, 2024.
    (Gregorio Borgia/AP)
    A Rohingya Muslim refugee from Myanmar, center left in white robe, leads a prayer with Pope Francis at an interfaith peace meeting in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Dec. 1, 2017.
    A Rohingya Muslim refugee from Myanmar, center left in white robe, leads a prayer with Pope Francis at an interfaith peace meeting in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Dec. 1, 2017.
    (Aijaz Rahi/AP)
    Students hold signs to welcome Pope Francis in Vanimo, Papua New Guinea, on Sept. 8, 2024.
    Students hold signs to welcome Pope Francis in Vanimo, Papua New Guinea, on Sept. 8, 2024.
    (Tiziana Fabi/AFP)
    Pope Francis meets Aung San Suu Kyi in Naypyidaw, Myanmar, Nov. 28, 2017.
    Pope Francis meets Aung San Suu Kyi in Naypyidaw, Myanmar, Nov. 28, 2017.
    (Max Rossi/AP)
    Pope Francis arrives to preside over a mass in the Mongolian capital Ulaanbaatar, Sept. 3, 2023.
    Pope Francis arrives to preside over a mass in the Mongolian capital Ulaanbaatar, Sept. 3, 2023.
    (Louise Delmotte/AP)


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Staff.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on The Grayzone and was authored by The Grayzone.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Thank you to all who joined our live-taping last Monday with senior advisors from Judge Susan Crawford’s team that defeated Elon Musk, who lost bigly even after handing out million dollar checks. 

    Patrick Guarasci, chief political strategist for Judge Crawford, and Sam Roecker, senior campaign advisor and communications lead, share how they pulled off a landmark win in Wisconsin’s pivotal Supreme Court race, offering a blueprint for reclaiming power in GOP-dominated states.

    In Wisconsin, the land of cheese, beer, and GOP ratf*cking, progressives scored a major victory. And they did it despite daunting odds, including opposition from none other than the world’s richest man/psychopath. When Musk is not launching cars into space or tweeting himself into SEC investigations, he has been throwing his weight, and giant checks, behind efforts to tilt the judiciary in his favor.

    Judge Crawford’s campaign wasn’t about crypto hype or culture war distractions; it was about qualifications, a smart strategy, and staying laser-focused on issues people actually care about: reproductive rights, fair electoral maps, and keeping the courts independent.

    This wasn’t just a Wisconsin win. It was a blueprint for how to beat big money with big people power. Students, first-time voters, and folks who typically only turn out for Packers games showed up in force. The lesson? When campaigns speak to real concerns and mobilize communities, they can overcome even the deepest pockets. Senator Ron Johnson, MAGA/Russia loyalist and 2028 re-election hopeful, might want to start updating his résumé.

    Want to enjoy Gaslit Nation ad-free? Join our community of listeners for bonus shows, ad-free episodes, exclusive Q&A sessions, our group chat, invites to live events like our Monday political salons at 4pm ET over Zoom, and more! Sign up at Patreon.com/Gaslit!

    EVENTS AT GASLIT NATION:

    • April 28 4pm ET – Book club discussion of Octavia Butler’s The Parable of the Sower  

    • Indiana-based listeners launched a Signal group for others in the state to join, available on Patreon. 

    • Florida-based listeners are going strong meeting in person. Be sure to join their Signal group, available on Patreon. 

    • Have you taken Gaslit Nation’s HyperNormalization Survey Yet?

    • Gaslit Nation Salons take place Mondays 4pm ET over Zoom and the first ~40 minutes are recorded and shared on Patreon.com/Gaslit for our community 

    This content originally appeared on Gaslit Nation and was authored by Andrea Chalupa.

  • Ralph talks about his new book, “Civic Self Respect” which reminds us that our civic lives have different primary roles—not only voter, but also worker, taxpayer, consumer, sometimes soldier and sometimes parent—and how each one offers special opportunities for people to organize to make change. Plus, we welcome back former commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, John Koskinen, who tells us exactly how the Trump/Musk cabal is both gutting and weaponizing the IRS.

    John Koskinen served as the IRS Commissioner from 2013 to 2017.

    This is not a how-to book. It starts at a much more elementary level and therefore should interest a much greater number of people. Because, as I say, if you can expand your civic dimension as a part of your daily role without disrupting the rhythms of your daily life (in fact, actually making them more gratifying and more interesting, less boring), you’re on your way.

    Ralph Nader author of Civic Self-Respect

    The people who really fight for justice in this country have to fight for recognition, they have to fight for media, they have to fight an onslaught. And the people who lie and cheat and say the most terrible things and do the most terrible things are really the best-known people in the country. I mean, if you say who are the best-known people in Congress? They’re the blowhards, the cruel and vicious people who’ve said things that are illegal, outrageous against innocent groups here and abroad.

    Ralph Nader

    I used to say to the Congress (trying to get appropriations) that the IRS is the only agency where if you give it money, it gives you more money back. Because the more you can actually audit people who aren’t paying the proper amount or aren’t filing at all, the better off you are. So no one has ever disagreed with that.

    John Koskinen

    Going back a thousand years, tax collectors have never been particularly popular. And so when you talk about the IRS, people say, “Oh, the poor old IRS.” In some ways, they don’t understand just the points you’re making about the impact on them, on the country, of an ineffective IRS going forward. And that’s why my thought is this move toward using the IRS to attack people ought to be a way for everyone to say, “You know, I may not love paying taxes, but I certainly don’t want the government and the president or the treasury secretary or somebody else ordering an audit of my taxes just because they don’t like my political position or what I’m teaching in my course.”

    John Koskinen

    Ralph Nader’s new book Civic Self-respect is available now from Seven Stories Press.

    News 4/16/25

    1. On Thursday April 17th, Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland departed for El Salvador in an effort to personally track down Maryland resident Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an immigrant who was arrested and deported to CECOT, the notorious Salvadoran prison camp, WUSA9 reports. Garcia was legally protected against deportation by a 2019 court order and a Trump administration official admitted in court that he “should never have been on that plane.” Last week, the Supreme Court unanimously ordered that he be returned to the U.S. Van Hollen is quoted saying “You go out, you get disappeared, they say they did it in error, but they’re not helping bring you back…it’s a very short road to tyranny.” Gracia has not been heard from since he was deported, raising concerns about his health and wellbeing. This comes after ICE Director Todd Lyons said he wanted to see a deportation process “like [Amazon] Prime, but with human beings,” per the Guardian. This episode is among the most chilling in American history and we are less than four months into a four-year term.

    2. Another gut-wrenching immigration story concerns Palestinian Columbia University student, Mohsen Mahdawi who was tricked, trapped, and abducted by ICE. The Intercept reports “Even before his friend and fellow Columbia activist Mahmoud Khalil was arrested by immigration authorities, Mahdawi asked university administrators to help him find a safe place to live so he would not be taken by ICE agents…The school did nothing.” Then, “After ICE abducted Khalil last month, Mahdawi sheltered in place for more than three weeks for fear of being picked up himself.” So, the immigration authorities apparently devised a scheme. “Instead of taking him off the street…immigration authorities scheduled the citizenship test at the Colchester USCIS office and took Mahdawi into custody when he arrived.” This action is clearly intended not only to capture Mahdawi but to frighten immigrants and discourage them from seeking citizenship through the legal immigration channels for fear of being deported. Not only that, Mahdawi will be sent back to Palestine, which continues to be the target of relentless Israeli bombing. Mahdawi is quoted saying, “It’s kind of a death sentence…my people are being killed unjustly in an indiscriminate way.”

    3. In more international news, CNN reports China has “halted” its deliveries of Boeing planes. According to President Trump, will “‘not take possession’ of fully committed to aircraft.” According to CNN, Boeing is particularly vulnerable in a trade war scenario because “Boeing builds all of its planes at US factories before sending nearly two-thirds of its commercial planes to customers outside the United States.” Boeing anticipated China purchasing 8,830 new planes over the next 20 years. The aircraft manufacturer’s stock value fell in the wake of this announcement and is unlikely to fully recover unless some accommodation is reached with China.

    4. On the other side of the trade war, the Trump administration is preparing to roll out steep sectoral tariffs in addition to the country-specific tariffs already announced, per the Washington Post’s Jeff Stein. Stein reports these will target imports of various “critical” products, including autos, steel and aluminum, copper, lumber and semiconductors. Yet, likely no sectoral tariff will bite American consumers more than the proposed tariff on pharmaceutical drugs. On April 8th, POLITICO reported that Trump told the RNC he is planning to impose “major” tariffs on pharmaceuticals. FIERCE, a healthcare news service, reports these could be as high as 25%. Coalition for a Prosperous America, an advocacy group opposed to free trade with China, reports that “Over 90% of all Generic Drugs [are] Dependent on Imports.”

    5. Turning to domestic matters, the Federal Trade Commission is proceeding with their anti-trust case against Facebook. According to the FTC, “The…Commission has sued Facebook, alleging that the company is illegally maintaining its personal social networking monopoly through a years-long course of anticompetitive conduct.” Further, “The complaint alleges that Facebook has engaged in a systematic strategy—including its 2012 acquisition of…Instagram, its 2014 acquisition…WhatsApp, and the imposition of anticompetitive conditions on software developers—to eliminate threats to its monopoly.” According to Ars Technica, “Daniel Matheson, the FTC’s lead litigator, [started the trial with a bang] flagg[ing] a “smoking gun”—a 2012 email where Mark Zuckerberg suggested that Facebook could buy Instagram to ‘neutralize a potential competitor.’” It is hard to see how the company could argue this was not anticompetitive corporate misbehavior.

    6. A dubious tech industry scheme is also underway at the highest levels of the federal government. WIRED reports that the Social Security Administration is shifting their communications exclusively to Elon Musk’s X app, formerly known as Twitter. Wired quotes SSA regional commissioner Linda Kerr-Davis, who said in a meeting with managers earlier this week, “We are no longer planning to issue press releases or…dear colleague letters to inform the media and public about programmatic and service changes…Instead, the agency will be using X to communicate to the press and the public … this will become our communication mechanism.” WIRED further reports that, “The regional [SSA] office workforce will soon be cut by roughly 87 percent,” going from an estimated 547 employees to 70. Musk has called Social Security “the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time,” per the AP.

    7. Over at the National Labor Relations Board, a whistleblower claims Elon Musk and his cronies at DOGE may have extracted data including “sensitive information on unions, ongoing legal cases and corporate secrets,” per NPR. If that wasn’t shady enough, “members of the DOGE team asked that their activities not be logged on the system and then appeared to try to cover their tracks…turning off monitoring tools and manually deleting records of their access.” This whistleblower took his concerns to Congress and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel – whistleblower activities that are protected by law – but faced retaliation in the form of someone, “’physically taping a threatening note’ to his door that included sensitive personal information and overhead photos of him walking his dog that appeared to be taken with a drone,” clear attempts to intimidate and silence this employee. The Trump administrations have been rife with leaks at every level and instead of responding by addressing the issues raised, the administration has launched a permanent inquisition to plug the leaks by any means.

    8. In better news, the Independent reports that DOGE itself is finally being subjected to an audit. The audit is being undertaken by the Government Accountability Office at the urging of Congressional leaders after “’alarming’ media reports of DOGE infiltrating federal systems,” according to a congressional aide. One DOGE worker has reportedly been identified by as “a 19-year-old high school graduate who was booted from an internship after leaking company information to a rival firm,” raising ever-deeper concerns about the purpose of the “fishing expeditions” DOGE is undergoing at every level of the federal government.

    9. Another uplifting story comes to us from New York City. In the latest round of public matching fund awards, Zohran Mamdani – the Democratic Socialist candidate surging from obscurity into second place in the polls – was granted nearly $4 million in public matching funds, “the largest single payment to any candidate in the 2025 Democratic mayoral primary race to date,” according to Gothamist. Meanwhile, former Governor Andrew Cuomo was awarded exactly $0. As Jeff Coltin of POLITICO New York explains, “Cuomo’s campaign [was] scrambling to get the necessary info from donors to get matched…sending…dire warning to [his] entire email list, rather than…targeted outreach to donors.” If he had collected the necessary information, Cuomo would have been awarded $2.5 million in matching funds, Coltin reports. Cuomo still leads in the polls; as it becomes increasingly clear that Zohran is the only viable alternative, there will be increased pressure on other candidates to throw their support behind him.

    10. Finally, let’s take a peek into the political climate’s effect on Hollywood. New York Magazine, in an extensive profile of Warner Brothers-Discovery mogul David Zaslav, includes a piece about Zaslav seeking to ingratiate himself with Trump. According to this report, “a company representative recently reached out to the Trump0 orbit seeking advice about how the company might advantageously interact with the Whitte House.” Their answer: “look at the example of…Jeff Bezos paying Melania Trump $40 million to participate in a documentary about herself. Don Jr. might like a hunting and fishing show on the Discovery Channel, they were told.” Just like the Ivy League universities and the big law firms, if given an inch Trump will take a mile and use it for nothing short of extortion. Hollywood would be wise to steer clear. But wisdom has never been their strength.

    This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven’t Heard.



    Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe


    This content originally appeared on Ralph Nader Radio Hour and was authored by Ralph Nader.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Comprehensive coverage of the day’s news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice.

    The post The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays – April 18, 2025 appeared first on KPFA.


    This content originally appeared on KPFA – The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by KPFA.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • New York, April 18, 2025—Taliban authorities must immediately release independent journalist Sayed Rashed Kashefi, who was detained April 14 by General Directorate of Intelligence (GDI) agents in the capital Kabul, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Friday.

    “Taliban intelligence must release journalist Sayed Rashed Kashefi immediately and unconditionally,” said CPJ Asia Program Coordinator Beh Lih Yi. “The continued detention of journalists like Kashefi is part of a ruthless campaign to silence independent reporting and intimidate the media into submission. This blatant assault on press freedom must end now.”

    Taliban intelligence agents detained Kashefi after he was summoned to the GDI’s Directorate of Media and Public Affairs under the pretext of retrieving his mobile phone, video recording camera, and voice recorder, which had been confiscated in mid-March by agents who suspected him of working with Afghan exiled media, according to a journalist who spoke to CPJ on condition of anonymity, for fear of reprisal.

    Kashefi, who was previously a journalist for the state-owned English-language newspaper, The Kabul Times, has been working as an independent reporter covering current affairs in Kabul.

    He has been detained by the Taliban before. In December 2021, a senior official and his bodyguards held Kashefi for six hours during his reporting in Kabul and beat him.

    Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid did not respond to CPJ’s request for comment sent via messaging app.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJ Staff.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • When I was a Uyghur child living in communist China in the 1970s, we had no way of knowing what was happening around the world, within China, or even to our own Uyghur people in our homeland of East Turkistan (also known as Xinjiang, China). For colonized people like us, living under a total information blackout and bombarded by communist propaganda 24/7, discovering the truth was not a luxury – it was a yearning, something we sometimes risked our lives for.

    I remember those days vividly. My father would gather us in the dead of night and begin tuning our old radio, searching for foreign broadcasts to find out what was happening in our homeland, where we lived. Due to the Chinese Communist Party’s strict media control and harsh punishment for those who sought outside information, this was an act of defiance.

    At the time, the only source of information for the Uyghur people was propaganda in the state-run media. Yet, despite the risks, we longed to hear the truth. In our home in the capital, Urumqi, we had a microwave-sized radio with glowing tubes inside. My father would carefully fine-tune it by hand each night. Sometimes the signal was clear; other times it was full of static. But it was the only source of free news from the outside world.

    He always told us to stay quiet and warned us never to mention to anyone that we listened to foreign broadcasts. “If the Chinese communists find out,” he said, “we will be severely punished.”

    We thought we were alone in this. But by the late 1980s, we learned that many Uyghur families were secretly doing the same – tuning in to foreign voices in the dark.

    When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, communist China not only survived but thrived, largely due to the failure of America and its Western allies to grasp the colossal threat this regime posed. Today, China has become a global superpower, and perhaps the most serious national security threat to the United States and the democratic world.

    Like all totalitarian regimes, communist China rules through brute force and carefully curated propaganda designed to suppress the truth. From the Tiananmen Square Massacre to the COVID-19 pandemic, China manipulates public perception and rewrites history. For the Chinese Communist Party, or CCP, information is both a weapon and a shield. Its total control over media ensures its rule remains unchallenged. But there is one thing the regime fears most: the truth.

    The CCP does not just use propaganda to brainwash its people. It weaponizes it against perceived enemies, foreign and domestic. The success of its rule over 1.4 billion people for more than 75 years lies in its ability to craft and control the narrative.

    Radio Free Asia (RFA) headquarters in Washington, March 18, 2025.
    Radio Free Asia (RFA) headquarters in Washington, March 18, 2025.
    (Gemunu Amarasinghe/RFA)

    That is why the establishment of the Uyghur Service at Radio Free Asia (RFA) in November 1998 was such a historic moment. At last, the long-suffering Uyghur people had a voice – one that could tell the world about the atrocities they had endured under communist Chinese rule since 1949. Uyghurs in the homeland rejoiced, seeing in America – the leader of the free world – a beacon of hope and justice. Unsurprisingly, China condemned this move, with its Foreign Ministry denouncing the creation of the first independent international Uyghur broadcasting service.

    Under China’s brutal rule, the Uyghur people have never been allowed an independent voice. Anyone who dared to speak out against the communist regime was quickly silenced – labeled a “separatist,” “extremist,” or “terrorist,” and disappeared.

    This has been especially true since 2017, when China began detaining an estimated 1.8 million Uyghurs in concentration camps and forcibly separating children from their parents to be sent to Chinese-run boarding schools. This systematic targeting of an entire ethnic group was eventually labeled as genocide and crimes against humanity by the first Trump administration. The European Parliament echoed this condemnation, and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights published a report stating that China’s actions may constitute crimes against humanity.

    Much of this international recognition was made possible by the groundbreaking reporting of the RFA Uyghur Service. Despite the threat of retaliation against their families in China, Uyghur journalists at RFA fearlessly investigated and exposed the Orwellian surveillance state Beijing had imposed on their people.

    The United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM) has recognized the tremendous contributions made by the brave RFA Uyghur journalists. USAGM states on its website:

    “Radio Free Asia’s Uyghur Service was the first to report on the implementation of a vast, high-tech security state in China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) and the mass arbitrary detentions there sweeping up the mostly Muslim Uyghur population and other ethnic groups in the region in early 2017, when much of the world was unaware of the situation. Since then, RFA Uyghur has diligently and tirelessly continued to break key stories that bring to light major events, aspects, and developments of a massive humanitarian crisis. This crisis has undoubtedly achieved global notice and notoriety, in large part because of RFA’s Uyghur Service’s courageous journalism, despite risks and threats. RFA’s Uyghur Service has risen above and beyond and continues to stay on top of one of the most difficult, complex, and important stories of our lifetimes.”

    The closure of the RFA Uyghur Service would be a tragedy. For a people still suffering under an ongoing genocide, it would extinguish a vital light of hope. China would seize the moment to tell Uyghurs: “You are forgotten. No country, not even America, cares anymore.” This would be a powerful psychological blow, not just to the Uyghurs, but to millions across China who have looked to the United States as a symbol of justice, democracy, and freedom.

    If America lets the RFA Uyghur Service disappear, it risks abandoning an entire people and ceding the information war to a regime that thrives on lies.

    The RFA Uyghur Service is worth saving – and worth every penny America has spent since its creation. Preserving it allows the U.S. to stand on moral high ground and push back against China’s disinformation campaigns. It ensures the truth can still be told about the genocide, the repression, and the resilience of a people who refuse to be erased.

    Dr. Rishat Abbas is a pharmaceutical scientist based in the United States and president of Uyghur Academy International. The academy is a a global network of Uyghur intellectuals who raise awareness about the Uyghur genocide, and seek to counter CCP influence abroad, and preserve Uyghur language, culture and identity. The views expressed in this commentary are Dr. Abbas’ own.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by commentator Rishat Abbas.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Laura Flanders & Friends and was authored by Laura Flanders & Friends.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Read RFA coverage of this topic in Burmese.

    Myanmar’s exiled civilian government held a meeting with the chair of the regional bloc ASEAN for the first time, amid mounting international pressure over the bloc’s engagement with the war-torn country’s military regime.

    The virtual talks between delegates from the National Unity Government, or NUG, and Anwar Ibrahim, the Malaysian Prime Minister who also serves as the bloc’s chair, focused on Myanmar’s worsening humanitarian crisis, compounded by ongoing civil conflict as well as a recent devastating earthquake, according to the NUG.

    “What we have said continuously is that we want ASEAN to simply recognize, accept and understand Myanmar’s reality. We think it’s a start,” Nay Bone Latt, the spokesperson for the NUG’s Prime Minister’s Office, told Radio Free Asia.

    “We hope that more than this, the Myanmar people will be better understood and from this, we can probably come to create a good situation.”

    Ibrahim also expressed hopeful views, calling the conversation “constructive.”

    “Trust-building remains essential, and it is vital that this continues to be an ASEAN-led effort,” he said on his X social media account. “We will continue to engage all parties in support of peace, reconciliation and the well-being of the people of Myanmar.”

    Ibrahim’s move is widely seen as an effort to balance or mitigate criticism following a separate in-person meeting on Thursday in Bangkok between him and junta chief Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing, which was also attended by Thailand’s former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

    The leaders discussed aid by ASEAN in the aftermath of last month’s earthquake that killed more than 3,700 people in Myanmar, the country’s state-run broadcaster MRTV reported.

    The ASEAN has played a frequent, though largely ineffective, role in trying to resolve Myanmar’s deepening civil war since the junta seized power in a 2021 coup.

    In the aftermath of the coup, ASEAN put forward the Five-Point Consensus – a peace framework calling for an immediate end to violence, the delivery of humanitarian aid, the release of political prisoners, and inclusive dialogue involving all parties.

    However, Myanmar’s junta has consistently defied these conditions while remaining a member of the bloc. As a result, ASEAN has barred the junta’s political representatives from its high-level summits but has stopped short of taking more forceful action.

    Critics say the bloc’s principle of non-interference has rendered it powerless to hold the junta accountable, allowing the regime to prolong the conflict without consequence. Human rights groups and pro-democracy advocates have also accused ASEAN of legitimizing the military by continuing to engage with it diplomatically.

    Several ceasefires – including China-brokered ones – have repeatedly collapsed, as fighting between the military and dozens of ethnic rebel groups and pro-democracy forces continues to rage across the country.

    ‘Step forward’

    For Myanmar’s opposition groups, the meeting marks a rare and significant step forward, said China-based analyst Hla Kyaw Zaw.

    “For ASEAN, this is the first time it has formally engaged with revolutionary forces,” she said. “Strangely, Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing accepted this time that the ASEAN chairperson would meet with the NUG.”

    Her remarks refer to Ibrahim’s statement that the junta did not object when he informed them of his plan to speak with representatives of the NUG – a shift in tone, given the junta’s previous stance.

    Since the 2021 coup, the military regime has labeled the NUG and its allies as “terrorists” and has consistently opposed any international recognition or engagement with them.

    Translated by Kiana Duncan. Edited by Taejun Kang.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Burmese.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Photograph by Nathaniel St. Clair

    All across the United States, people are rising up–refusing to be complicit in the slow-motion annihilation of democracy. They march against a regime that strips away public goods, criminalizes dissent, vanishes students, and hollows out the very institutions meant to protect civic life. But these assaults are not new; they are the culmination of what I once called the scorched-earth politics of America’s four fundamentalisms: market worship, ideological conformity, religious zealotry, and educational repression. These fundamentalisms have steadily laid the groundwork for a society governed by violence, cruelty, and unaccountable power–where the market is sacrosanct, history is erased, justice is inverted, and knowledge is policed.

    Today, these forces converge in a violent crescendo, a politics of cleansing intent on purging democracy of its ethical substance and moral vocabulary. The government is hollowed out, memory is criminalized, and the law is weaponized to serve the interests of those in power. Racialized others are marked for disappearance, as society sinks into a state of profound erasure. What remains is not merely authoritarian rule, but a theater of terror, where disposability becomes the guiding principle and silence is dangerously mistaken for peace.

    Politics has become the extension of crime itself, with governance morphing into organized barbarism. At every level of society, militarization and repression have taken root, directed not only at critics but at entire communities. This is a state-sponsored culture of fear aimed at immigrants, dissenters, and marginalized populations. It manifests in overt abductions of U.S. citizens, targeted because of their race, their dissent, or their opposition to Trump’s domestic and foreign policies. As the fabric of democratic life unravels, the groundwork is laid for the rise of authoritarian rule, where resistance is met with violence, and the very principles of freedom and justice are hollowed out.

    This is not governance in the democratic sense; it is the blueprint for authoritarian control disguised as order. The dismantling of public institutions, the suppression of historical memory, the dismantling of legal protections, the assault on higher education, the abduction of students, and the demonization of dissent all signal the emergence of a new mode of state terrorism. This machinery of domination no longer hides its contempt for democracy. It mimics, manipulates, and ultimately discards it. It channels the darkest moments of the past, echoing the brutality of slavery, the violence of the police state, and the horror of the camps. In this rising authoritarian landscape, the state no longer serves the people; it abandons them to a ruthless order in which solidarity is shattered, justice is privatized, and hope is exiled to the margins. This is fascism on steroids.

    Resistance is rising, fierce, luminous, and charged with hope. Across the nation, people are pushing back against a regime that robs them of the very essence of life: security, care, sustenance, and dignity. University faculty, students, and more and more administrators are calling for Academic Mutual Defense Compacts to defend themselves against Trump’s attacks From city streets to university campuses, this defiance grows stronger every day. Workers, educators, artists, federal employees, and students, among others, are rising up against the erosion of their rights, the violence inflicted upon their bodies, and the assault on their sense of justice and agency. As fears mount over the collapse of retirement funds, immigration status, police violence, and job security, the crushing weight of scarcity, poverty, and powerlessness takes a toll, both emotionally and physically. With food prices soaring and consumer goods becoming more elusive, the misery deepens. Yet, in the face of this darkness, resistance continues to grow, an act of bold defiance against what Rob Nixon calls the “slow violence” of policies that crush daily life, erase memory, and hollow out the very meaning of agency.

    This tide of defiance confronts a politics of cleansing and erasure, spreading like wildfire through the body of democracy: a state stripped to serve the market, memory razed and rewritten, dissent smothered beneath ideological obedience, law twisted into a weapon of vengeance, and racial others cast beyond the bounds of belonging. This is not mere policy, it is a war on the very idea of justice, equality, and freedom, and it must be named for what it is: a multi-front cleansing campaign that demands unrelenting mass resistance. These protests are not symbolic gestures; they are insurgent affirmations that the promise of a radical democracy is not dead, only endangered, and still worth fighting for. Yet, they unfold under an ominous horizon: a politics of cleansing, governmental, ideological, legal, racial, and historical that is intensifying in the U.S. and metastasizing globally, threatening to become the blueprint for a brutal new world order.

    Governmental Cleansing and the Death of Social Responsibility

    Governmental cleansing begins with a calculated assault on governance as an instrument of the public good. In Trump’s America, the state is no longer envisioned as a guardian of collective well-being. It no longer is seen as offering vital protections like Medicare, Social Security, affordable housing, and public education; instead it is viewed as an obstacle to unfettered capitalism. Neoliberalism provides the ideological scaffolding for this transformation. It redefines freedom as the absence of regulation, empties democracy of its social content, and reduces all human obligations to the cold calculus of profit and efficiency. In this worldview, there are no social problems only personal failures; no public goods, only private investments. This is a politics with closing horizons, one that undermines translating private troubles into larger systemic structural issues.

    Milton Friedman’s infamous assertion that “the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits” epitomizes a worldview where social justice is seen as heretical and public welfare is synonymous with socialism. Friedman’s contempt for collective responsibility and his sanctification of profit as moral imperative reveal the ideological foundation of this new horizon of barbarism and cruelty. He writes:

    But the doctrine of ‘social responsibility’ taken seriously would extend the scope of the political mechanism to every human activity… That is why, in my book Capitalism and Freedom, I called it a ‘fundamentally subversive doctrine’ in a free society, and have said that in such a society, ‘there is one and only one social responsibility of business to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud’… Talk about social responsibility by businessmen is nothing more than pure and unadulterated socialism. Businessmen who talk this way are unwitting puppets of the intellectual forces that have been undermining the basis of a free society these past decades.

    Friedman was not alone. Friedrich Hayek warned that even modest forms of state intervention would lead inevitably to tyranny. Margaret Thatcher took it further, famously declaring that “there is no such thing as society,” only individuals and their families. And Ronald Reagan, the affable face of neoliberal rollback, sealed the message when he proclaimed in his 1981 inaugural address, “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” With that, the ideological war on the social state was no longer whispered, it became national doctrine.

    In Trump’s authoritarian worldview, social responsibility is not a democratic obligation but a fatal weakness–a threat to market supremacy and a check on unchecked power. Any commitment to equality, inclusion, justice, or the common good is cast as a liability to be eliminated. Trump’s policies do not merely echo this neoliberal logic; they manipulate and weaponize it. Federal employees are purged, regulatory agencies dismantled, and essential public services auctioned off to private interests. What emerges is not a government of, by, and for the people, but a privatized state of exception where cruelty is policy, social needs are criminalized, and governance becomes the handmaiden of wealth and power.

    This is not merely the rollback of the state; it is a resurgence of market-driven authoritarianism. In this regime, democracy is gutted of its moral core, replaced by an apparatus of disposability built on raw power, profit, and the airbrushing of the unpalatable and the unfortunate.”  In Trump’s America, we are witnessing the rise of a criminalized regime of terror. How else can we explain Issie Lapowsky’s report in Vanity Fair, which reveals that Trump is “openly flirting with the prospect of deporting immigrants and green card holders deemed criminals to the cruel and dehumanizing mega-prison in El Salvador.” Noah Bullock, executive director of Cristosal, aptly calls the CECOT Prison a “judicial black hole.” David Levi Strauss adds some detail to Bullock’s comment noting that “CECOT can hold up to 40,000 prisoners, when they’re stacked up like cordwood. Those held there have no visitation rights, no recreation time, no exposure to the outside, no reading material, no bedding, and they will never leave the facility.”

    Memory Cleansing and the Plague of historical amnesia

    Across the country memory laws are emerging designed to ban critical renditions of history, narratives that challenge dominant renderings that whitewash, censor, and exclude the history of the oppressed, slavery, cruelty, war, and regressive notions of exceptionalism that give a voice to those written out of history. Historical amnesia has become a central pedagogical tool of Trump’s fascist politics and state terrorism. Drawing from the past has become dangerous in Trump’s America because history allows students and the larger public to draw parallels, recognize patterns, and learn how not to repeat the worse acts of oppression in history. Memory matters because it gives people the language not to overlook or dissolve as Timothy Snyder notes “the historical consequences of slavery, lynchings … voter suppression,” and other acts of injustice. Trump and his MAGA black shirts are doing more that producing what Hazel Carby calls “a national crusade to control historical knowledge,” they are turning history into a racist weapon.   History cleansing is part of a broader backlash against inclusive histories; it is a central element of authoritarian regimes that make people disappear by eliminating their histories, memories, institutions of learning, and in the end their dignity, agency, and collective identities.

    Historical cleansing, as Maximillian Alvarez aptly describes it, is a “twenty-first-century political warfare on long-term historical consciousness.” This war is unfolding in the United States, where books are banned, libraries are purged, and far-right politicians demand that public and higher education institutions sanitize the curriculum, erasing “the difficult parts of our past.” In this form of ideological cleansing, the brutality of racism is obscured. Facts like the brutal truth that “between 1877 and 1950, more than 4,000 Black men, women, and children were lynched in cities and towns across the country,” and that the lynching of Black men and boys continues, though no longer as public spectacles, are systematically erased. This racial terror has deep roots in history, yet it is now being deliberately erased from the historical record. In its place, a new spectacle has emerged—one defined by mass deportations and the rise of the prison as a central instrument of fear, lawlessness, and punishment. David Levi Strauss aptly characterizes this intensified focus on the punishing state as “carceral porn,” a powerful reflection of our times. His words are worth quoting at length:

    Carceral porn reached a new level of depravity on March 26, when Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem (aka ICE Barbie) channeled Kafka in the penal colony and Lynndie England at Abu Ghraib and shook her ass in front of rows of caged, bare-breasted tattooed prisoners in El Salvador’s CECOT prison. She was wearing a blue cap with a badge and an 18-karat gold Rolex Cosmograph Daytona watch worth about $50,000. Noem has made a cottage industry out of parading around in swat or combat gear in the midst of disasters, with a make-up person and hairstylist in tow. Of the above image, she said, ‘People need to see that image.’

     The spectacularizing of politics cannot be removed from the whitewashing history, another  potent form of depoliticization–n erasure in which the censorship of truth not only obliterates the struggles of the marginalized and oppressed but also dismantles critical thinking, the rule of law, and the very notion of justice. Under Trump, this deliberate politics of organized forgetting extends into the mechanisms of state violence, where those erased from the historical narrative are abandoned to detention centers, prisons, and the brutalities of a police state.

    Memory cleansing is not merely a distortion of history; it transforms politics into a lie, legitimizing the exclusionary acts that silence people’s voices and erase their histories, desires, and identities. Like all authoritarian regimes, the Trump administration seeks to turn the public into historical amnesiacs, obscuring the violence, corruption, and exploitation woven into the fabric of gangster capitalism and authoritarian power. It denies the lessons of the past that show us that what happened before need not happen again. Being attentive to history is not just an intellectual exercise; it is a moral imperative, directed at making people understand that learning from history teaches us to recognize how future crimes can be prevented by remembering the past in all its painful truth.

    Ideological Cleansing and the Rise of Indoctrination Factories

    Fascism endures not merely through brute force, but through the systematic erasure of memory, critical knowledge, and informed judgment. It intertwines historical amnesia with ideological cleansing, preventing the public from accessing past catastrophes so that, as Maria Pia Lara powerfully observes, they are unable to “exercise judgments whose results can give rise to disconcerting truths.” This process of historical cleansing inevitably leads to moral cleansing, which enacts the stage upon which other violent dramas can be produced. Fascism flourishes in a world where lies replace truth, spectacles drown out critical thought, and fear serves to justify and legitimize the apparatuses of indoctrination.

    Across the United States, universities and public institutions are increasingly transformed into ideological battlegrounds. Books that address racism, gender violence, and settler colonialism are being banned. Professors who challenge the Trump regime, tackle urgent social issues, or advocate for Palestinian freedom face harassment and, in many cases, dismissal. As Zane McNeill reports in Truthout, international students, too, are now increasingly vulnerable, subjected to government harassment simply for engaging in political discourse or dissent– targeted because they fail to meet the White House’s ideological litmus test for what constitutes a “patriotic” resident. Over 600 international students across more than a hundred institutions have had their visas revoked, with social media monitored by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for supposed “antisemitic content.” This pattern of ideological repression extends beyond the classroom, where entire academic departments, especially those focused on Middle Eastern Studies, are systematically dismantled, branded as havens of “ideological capture,” and accused of fueling “antisemitic harassment” through targeted legislation. Faculty members are being stripped of their jobs, their tenure, and their dignity, subjected to a surveillance state that calls to mind the darkest chapters of history echoing the purges of Hitler’s Germany and Augusto Pinochet’s Chile.

    Ron DeSantis, the self-proclaimed anti-woke governor of Florida, embodies this crackdown with frightening precision. In a brazen act of ideological surveillance, pedagogical repression, and an intricately planned assault against all levels of critical education, DeSantis issued an executive order  demanding that Florida’s colleges and universities submit detailed records of faculty research grants over the last six years, including lists of papers published by faculty. This sends a clear, chilling message to those faculty and others researching topics related to critical race theory, which Donald Trump has vilified as “a hateful Marxist doctrine that paints America as a wicked nation…rewrites American history…and teaches people to be ashamed of themselves and their country.”

    Columbia University’s shameful acquiescence to the Trump administration’s demands for ideological purification starkly underscores the failure of American higher education to defend justice, truth, and the rights of students. In her searing critique, Fatima Bhutto captures the spirit of Columbia University capitulation to authoritarianism. She writes:

    Trying to prove that they are a university the government can rely on, Columbia has …agreed to ban certain masks, empowering new campus security personnel to arrest students, and appointed someone to oversee the Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African studies department and the Palestine studies center of study. “Vichy on the Hudson,” Professor Rashid Khalidi called them recently, referring to France’s Vichy regime that collaborated with Nazi Germany.

    Ideological cleansing is not limited to public and higher education. Trump’s recent executive order targeting the Smithsonian for promoting “anti-American ideology” echoes the darkest chapters of history. In July 1937, Hitler organized the notorious Degenerate Art Exhibition to condemn any cultural expression that defied state doctrine. The intent then, as now, was to impose a singular, monolithic national narrative and criminalize complexity and artistic dissent. Fascism thrives on political theater that celebrates cruelty, militarism, manufactured ignorance, and a multitude of fundamentalisms, whether rooted in neoliberalism, religious tyranny, white supremacy, ultra-nationalism, or settler-colonialism. As Donalyn White and  Anthony Ballas rightly argue, ideological cleansing and historical amnesia are central to today’s capitulation to fascism. The politics of historical oblivion embrace not only ideas but also bodies, leading directly to concentration camps, prisons, and modern-day gulags.

     The White House’s deliberate erasure of history reaches its nadir with the removal of anti-slavery icon Harriet Tubman‘s image and biography from the U.S. Park Service website, an ideological lynching that seeks to wipe away the legacy of slavery while diminishing the profound contributions of African-Americans to the nation’s story. This isn’t an oversight; it’s a calculated assault on memory, a form of aesthetic assassination where icons like Tubman are disposed in to dustbin of history, alongside figures like Jackie Robinson, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, and the Tuskegee Airmen. In this act, the far-right not only rewrites history but attempts to re-imagine the very identity of America itself, one that can no longer acknowledge the brutal truths of its past or the resistance, courage, and brilliance of its Black citizens.

    This is the dangerous terrain upon which we now tread. To allow this cleansing to continue is to abandon the very essence of democratic life and the moral imperatives that should guide us. We must recognize that the erasure of history, both in the mind and in the body, is not a neutral act, it is an invitation to totalitarianism.

    Legal  Cleansing and the End of the Rule of Law   

    Legal cleansing refers to the systematic dismantling of the law as a democratic safeguard and its conversion into a tool of authoritarian rule. This pattern of legal cleansing replaces the rule of law with the law of rule. It is not about justice, but about domination, turning the law into an instrument of exclusion, vengeance, and authoritarian control. Under Trump, the law is no longer about protecting rights, it’s about enforcing loyalty. Federal employees are fired en masse to make room for partisan loyalists. Trump has threatened elite law firms, many of whom are capitulating to his demands–smeared judges who rule against him, and promised to pardon those convicted of political violence. He’s vowed to revoke Social Security numbers from immigrants and carry out mass deportations without due process, all done beyond the boundaries of the law. The Trump-aligned Congress is passing laws to restrict the independence of the courts and the power of judges. The Trump administration is relentless in its efforts to purge experienced, nonpartisan civil servants and replace them with political loyalists who will enforce his agenda without question. In the process, legal protections are dismantled, regulatory agencies are stripped of their power, and dissent is treated as a crime. Immigrants and students have been abducted off the street, thrown into unmarked vehicles, and disappeared into remote ICE detention centers, for little more than advocating pro-Palestinian views. No charges. No trial. No justice.

    The sheer horror of this form of organized barbarism was starkly revealed when El Salvador’s ruthless dictator, Nayib Bukele, met with Trump and callously refused to return Abrego Garcia to the United States, dismissing him as a “terrorist” he would not “smuggle” into the country. Garcia is not a terrorist, and the government itself admitted that he was mistakenly deported. Yet it gets worse. As Hafiz Rashid reports in The New Republic, despite the Supreme Court’s order for Garcia’s return to the U.S., “the Trump administration has stalled and refused, hiding behind semantics and technicalities. And with the backing of a dictator like Bukele, the White House seems content to let an innocent immigrant languish in a gulag,” showing a complete disregard for justice and due process.

    State terrorism extends beyond physical violence; it flourishes through the embrace of irrationality, with the state justifying acts of terror under the guise of national security. A striking example is the state-sponsored abduction of Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate student involved in anti-Israel protests. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in a memo, stated that while Khalil’s beliefs may be lawful, he invoked a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 granting the Secretary of State the authority to “personally determine” whether he should remain in the country based on his “expected beliefs.” This alarming statement, with its Nuremberg-like laws and Kafkaesque nightmares, exposes the essence of authoritarian regimes, where punishment extends beyond actions to preemptively target individuals for their very thoughts. It echoes the darkest chapters of totalitarian history, where freedom is not just stifled but eradicated at its roots. This is no mere legal overreach; it is a blatant assault on due process and liberty, a grotesque perversion of justice designed to strip away the most fundamental human rights.

    No one is immune from the looming terror unleashed by the Trump administration. When White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt casually claims that Trump was not joking about deporting U.S. citizens to the notorious El Salvador prison, this frightening threat demands our full attention.  It is not just rhetoric; it is a stark warning of the grave dangers this administration poses to our basic freedoms, and a harrowing glimpse into the shape fascism is taking in America. These threats are matched by what

    This is an American style fascism without apology, unhinged in its violation of rights, justice, and essential democratic freedoms. Such rhetoric transforms dissent into a criminal act before it even occurs, exemplifying the essence of legal and ideological cleansing that underpins fascist politics. It reveals the deeply irrational nature of authoritarian rule, where the state not only controls actions but seeks to control the very minds of its citizens, justifying state violence and terrorism against those deemed undesirable, whether for their beliefs, speech, or associations. This escalation into ideological terror is the hallmark of fascism, which thrives on the erasure of reason, the criminalization of free thought, and the normalization of state-sanctioned violence.

    It is worth emphasizing, this logic is already at work on the ground. Students demanding justice for Palestine face arrest, suspension, deportation. Protest is branded as terrorism. Solidarity is met with surveillance. And all of it unfolds under the shadow of a government preparing to use the full weight of the state, military included, to crush dissent. For the Trump administration to openly declare the power to abduct and imprison individuals not for what they have said or done, but for what they might think, secretly believe, or may come to believe, is a mind-numbing  manifestation of Orwellian terror. This, without question, stands as a glaring example of state-sanctioned brutality, nothing less than state terrorism.

     Trump’s purge of the military, targeting high-ranking commanders and inspector generals is not mere reshuffling, but a calculated attempt to replace constitutional loyalty with personal devotion. It echoes the most dangerous precedents in modern history: Hitler’s co-optation of the Wehrmacht, Pinochet’s military coup in Chile, and the deployment of armed forces under Videla in Argentina. This is the scaffolding of militarized authoritarianism, where the armed forces no longer protect the republic but enforce the will of a would-be strongman. If Trump turns the military against dissidents, demonstrators, or student protesters, as he has repeatedly threatened, the expectation is chillingly clear: they will obey.

    In this vision, the law is no longer tethered to justice; it becomes a tool for vengeance, exclusion, and raw domination. The silence and craven accommodation to fascism that follows is not peace, it is complicity. And what looms on the horizon is not order, but the slow, calculated unfolding of a coup already in motion.

    Racial Cleansing and the Scourge of White Supremacy

    State violence always has a target, and it is painfully evident that these targets are racialized. From the southern border to the voting booth, from campus protests to inner-city neighborhoods, racial cleansing is no longer a hidden strategy, it is a governing principle. Hundreds of immigrants are detained and deported without due process, sometimes sent to a mega-prisons in El Salvador or held indefinitely in ICE facilities where human rights are an afterthought. Under Nayib Bukele reign of terror, the concept of governing through crime is visible in the fact that “  84,000 people have been arrested and jailed, usually without a trial, hearing, or any other due process of law.” Black and brown communities are overpoliced, under protected, and routinely brutalized, caught in the crosshairs of a carceral state that sees them not as citizens but as threats. Police violence has become a normalized form of racial discipline and terrorism, while white supremacist militias are emboldened and often protected.

    Stephen Miller stands as one of the most influential architects behind Trump’s racist policies. Infamous for championing the cruel separation of thousands of children from their parents during Trump’s first administration, Miller has long aligned himself with far-right media and figures. His outspoken opposition to DACA and calls to end Temporary Protected Status for predominantly non-white populations further underscore his deeply entrenched racism. This bigotry is so well-known that even his own family members have publicly denounced him.

    Racial cleansing manifests through a cascade of reactionary policies. The right to vote is under siege, restricted through gerrymandering, voter roll purges, intimidation at polling stations, and laws designed to disenfranchise communities of color. DEI programs are being dismantled under the pretense of purging racist policies, when in truth they are targeted precisely because they seek to redress systemic racism. In schools and universities, anti-racist pedagogy is vilified, books are censored; books by authors of color are banned, and any effort to center marginalized voices is cast as indoctrination.

    Muslim communities are relentlessly surveilled, their lives scrutinized under policies that disproportionately target them. Latinx neighborhoods are raided. Indigenous sovereignty is ignored. And students who protest these injustices, especially those who defend Palestinian rights are labeled as extremists and enemies of the state.

    Conclusion

    In an age when fascism no longer hides in the shadows, we must learn to see clearly the architecture of cleansing now hollowing out and already weakened democracy–socially, ideologically, legally, and racially. This is not merely about isolated policies, but the totality of a system, a mode of neoliberal fascism, that feeds on amnesia, fear, and disposability. To resist, the American public needs to become historically conscious, attuned to how power operates both in the bloodstream of everyday life and in plain sight.

    As the late sociologist, Pierre Bourdieu reminds us, gangster capitalism or its updated version of neoliberal fascism thrives not only through repression but through the death of imagination, the dismantling of critical thought, informed judgment, and the very institutions that nurture them. It is essential to challenge the formation of oppressive identities, agency, and subjectivity, while equally vital is the cultivation of cultural and educational forces that can undo them. Just as we must confront the economic, financial, and institutional structures of neoliberal fascism, both nationally and globally, it is equally crucial to recognize that domination operates on an intellectual and pedagogical level, shaping minds and ideas as much as markets and policies. What’s needed now is not just understanding and outrage, but organized defiance. Education must be reclaimed as a vehicle of liberation, capable of producing critical, informed, and courageous citizens. This is not the time for silence or spectatorship. It is a time to act in defense of freedom, justice, equality, and the fragile dream of a democracy not yet fully realized.

    The post The Politics of Cleansing appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


    This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Henry Giroux.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Comprehensive coverage of the day’s news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice.

    The post The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays – April 17, 2025 appeared first on KPFA.

    This content originally appeared on KPFA – The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by KPFA.

  • The Committee to Protect Journalists today released a safety advisory covering a wide range of digital, physical, and legal tips aimed at journalists and media workers who plan to visit the United States.

    Under a draft plan being considered by the Trump administration, more than 40 countries could face full or partial travel restrictions to the United States. Reports of device searches and additional scrutiny at the U.S. border are also on the rise.

    “CPJ has seen a spike in concern among journalists whose work entails travelling to the United States or crossing the border,” said Catalina Cortes, CPJ’s Interim Chief Emergencies Officer. “Our safety advisory helps journalists proactively manage these risks, making them feel prepared and confident while planning their reporting.”

    CPJ safety experts urge reporters to complete a risk assessment, identify emergency contacts, develop a check-in procedure and keep those contacts on paper in case devices are confiscated. Journalists should also prepare for possible additional screening. Failure to comply with a request from a border guard could result in devices being seized and, depending on the journalist’s immigration status, delays or refusal of entry.

    Journalists who are at high risk of being detained at the border should consider leaving their personal and/or work devices at home and instead carry separate devices and a new SIM card. These devices should only have the information needed for your trip and not be linked to your personal or work accounts. Be prepared for border guards’ questions about why you are crossing a border without your personal or work devices.

    For more detailed information, read the full safety advisory.

    ###

    About the Committee to Protect Journalists
    The Committee to Protect Journalists is an independent, nonprofit organization that promotes press freedom worldwide. We defend the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal.

    Note to journalists needing advice:
    Journalists seeking emergency assistance or safety advice can email CPJ at emergencies@cpj.org. They will be asked to provide information about their circumstances, needs, and work as a journalist. All information is confidential but may be shared with a small network of trusted partners for vetting purposes. Due to the high volume of requests, CPJ is unable to respond to everyone. CPJ gives priority to emergency situations.

    Media contact: press@cpj.org


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • A stated policy goal of the Trump administration is to significantly change U.S. travel and immigration policies. Foreign nationals whose countries do not meet U.S. vetting standards may be barred entry. Journalists will not be exempt and should anticipate potential restrictions or questioning when traveling to or from the United States.

    Under a draft Trump administration proposal, more than 40 countries, including Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and several African countries, are being considered for full or partially restricted travel to the U.S. The policy is based on a travel ban Trump enacted during his first term, which the Supreme Court upheld.

    Whilst the new travel ban has been postponed, it could be introduced quickly with little warning. Already, news reports indicate that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials are scrutinizing visitors’ travel documentation with heightened vigilance. 

    So far, CPJ is not aware of any journalist being directly affected since the travel ban was announced. However, increased border control, inconsistent enforcement, and broad discretionary authority among border agents suggest an unpredictable environment which warrants proactive preparation, including the following safety measures.

    What are the risks?

    If there is a chance that you are affected by the travel restrictions, consider whether travel is essential or if reporting can be conducted remotely. Journalists should assess the probability of the following risks and their own risk tolerance.

    Prolonged questioning at U.S. borders
    • Anticipate increased questioning by border agents regarding political affiliations, work history, and coverage of sensitive topics.
    • If your work covers politically sensitive issues that the U.S. administration may view as critical or hostile, border agents may question you.
    • If you are traveling to or from a country affected by the U.S. travel ban or have dual nationality, ancestry, or other links to these countries, you may face additional scrutiny.
    Device searches
    • The U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency (CBP) has the authority to search electronic devices without a warrant or probable cause.
    • Border agents may request access to your electronic devices, including passwords and social media details. 
    • Complying means sensitive data could be copied and stored, risking the exposure of contacts, sourcing, and reporting material.
    • Refusing device access can raise suspicions and may lead to extended detention, device seizure, or further questioning. In some cases, refusal may prompt additional visa or residency status scrutiny, which can lead to potential delays or issues with future re-entry processing.
    Denied entry
    • While legal challenges have led to partial reversals or modifications of past travel bans, border agents retain broad discretion to allow or deny entry, even in routine cases.
    • U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, green card holders, generally cannot be denied entry to the United States, but declining to answer questions may result in delay or further inspection.
    • Non-citizen visa holders or tourists can be denied entry if they do not answer an officer’s questions and should comply with their directives.
    Citizenship status and entry risks
    • Dual nationals: Journalists holding dual citizenship (e.g., French-Syrian or British-Iranian) may face additional screening, visa delays, or entry denials. Using a passport from a restricted country increases these risks. Journalists with dual citizenship should carefully consider which passport they use for entry.
    • Lawful Permanent Residents (LPRs): LPRs who refuse to provide access to their devices may be subject to complex legal inquiries. Non-compliance can lead to delays or complications with future re-entry.
    • U.S. citizens: Although citizens cannot be denied entry, they may be held for questioning or have their devices confiscated if they refuse to comply with access requests.

    Prepare before travel

    Journalists – whether freelance or employed – should take proactive steps to mitigate the risks posed by the travel ban. Consider the following measures:

    Complete a thorough risk assessment
    • Consider how your immigration status, country of origin or destination, and prior travel history put you at risk of being stopped at the border.
    • Review the data being carried on devices and see if any data could put you or others at risk if your devices are seized or searched.
    • Identify and keep a list of emergency contacts, such as trusted legal advisors and press freedom groups who can assist if issues arise. 
    • Develop check-in procedures with agreed-upon key contacts prior to travel. Ensure they know your travel plans and can provide support if needed.
    • Keep emergency contact information on paper in case your devices are confiscated.
    Prepare for increased screening
    • Ensure that passports do not expire within the next six months.
    • Carry valid visas or an Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA).
    • Plan in advance what you will do and say should a border guard stop you or ask you to unlock your phone or laptop.
    Know your rights
    • Know your legal rights regarding access to or the confiscation of your devices. Be aware that failure to comply with a request from a border guard could result in devices being seized and, depending on the journalist’s immigration status, delays or refusal of entry.
    • Educate yourself on border security protocols and learn about your rights when encountering law enforcement at border crossings.
    Explore available resources
    • Journalists working for a media outlet should speak to their employer and see what IT support and best practice guidance are offered regarding crossing the border with devices.
    • Consult with a lawyer or press freedom organization to understand your rights and any legal risks associated with your reporting.

    Digital safety checklist

    Journalists travelling across the U.S. border should consider taking the following steps before entering or exiting the United States:

    Journalists who are at high risk of being detained at the border should consider leaving their personal and/or work devices at home and instead carry separate devices and a new SIM card. These devices should only have the information needed for your trip and not be linked to your personal or work accounts. Be prepared for border guards’ questions about why you are crossing a border without your personal or work devices.

    • Backup, delete, or remove access to any information you would not want others to obtain. If you need to access data while traveling, consider backing it up to a cloud account not linked to your devices. Do not hide data on your devices; border guards could view this as illegal.
    • Log out of any accounts and browsers and delete any apps you would not want a border guard to access. Review your browsing history and delete any accounts or sites you would not want others to see.
    • Review the content of any messaging apps or social media on your devices to ensure there is no data that could compromise you or others.
    • Practice good basic digital security practices by ensuring you have two-factor authentication (2FA) turned on and use an app, such as the Google Authenticator app, instead of SMS as your form of 2FA. Ensure you have the backup codes for each online account with 2FA turned on. If you are using a password manager with a travel mode feature, ensure it is enabled.
    • Be aware that border guards may ask for social media handles to check publicly viewable content. Journalists may wish to make their social media accounts private before travelling.
    • Look through your contact list and remove any details that could put you or others at risk. Be aware that contact details may be stored in multiple places on a phone, including the cloud, apps, and the device itself.
    • Turn on full-disk encryption for all devices. iPhone users should ensure they have enabled Apple’s end-to-end encryption known as Advanced Data Protection.
    • Turn off biometric access to your phones and laptops. To secure your devices, use the longest PIN possible.
    • Before crossing the border, power down all your devices and leave them off until the crossing is complete. Be aware that you may be asked to turn on and open a device.
    What to Do If Stopped at the Border
    • Stay calm and respectful. Do not lie to agents, as lying can be a crime.
    • Identify yourself as a journalist and, if possible, present your credentials.
    • Politely decline device searches if sensitive information is stored, but be prepared for possible escalation.
    • Contact legal counsel. According to the ACLU, you should “have the telephone number of an attorney or legal services organization with you and ask to contact them if you feel your rights are being violated or if you have been detained for an unusually long period. For anyone attempting to enter the United States, if a customs officer or border agent informs you that you are under arrest, or if it becomes clear that he or she suspects you have committed a crime, you should ask to speak to a lawyer before answering any further questions — and if you wish to exercise your right to remain silent, you should say so out loud.” Border agents may or may not permit immediate access to counsel.

    While in the U.S.

    Remaining vigilant and being informed about these risks can help journalists navigate their time in the U.S. more safely. Journalists working in the U.S. should be aware of the following risks:

    • Sensitive reporting: Reporting on politically sensitive topics, including government policies or national security issues, may draw scrutiny from authorities. Assess potential risks before publication or broadcast.
    • Covering protests and civil unrest: Protests and riots can be unpredictable. Assess the risk of detention, injury, or equipment confiscation, especially if law enforcement perceives you as participants rather than observers of the protest.
    • Social media scrutiny: Criticism of government policies or people in government may attract unwanted attention. Be mindful of how your online presence could be interpreted by authorities or impact your visa status.
    • Visa restrictions and revocations: The U.S. government may introduce sudden changes to visa policies. Regularly monitor State Department announcements for updates on visa restrictions or revocations affecting certain nationalities.
    • Entry denials and detentions at the border: Reports of non-U.S. citizens being denied entry or detained by CBP officials highlight evolving risks. Stay informed about these cases to anticipate potential challenges when re-entering the country.
    • Patterns of increased border enforcement: Certain U.S. entry points may see higher rates of detentions or refusals than others. Monitor emerging patterns to plan travel routes and reduce the risk of delays or denials.

    For additional assistance, to speak directly with CPJ’s Emergencies team, or enquire about safety training for you or your news organization, please email us at emergencies@cpj.org. Additional physical, digital, and mental health safety resources can be found on the CPJ Emergencies homepage.

    US journalist safety kit


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Seg sudan emi

    Sudan is facing the world’s largest humanitarian crisis after two years of war between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, or RSF. Thousands have died, and some 13 million have been forcibly displaced. There are also widespread reports of sexual and ethnically motivated violence and a worsening hunger crisis. Emtithal Mahmoud, a Darfurian refugee and humanitarian activist, describes how the violence has impacted her own family, including in a recent RSF attack on the Zamzam refugee camp where fighters killed and tortured many civilians. “They kidnapped 58 of the girls in my extended family, and we are still searching for them,” says Mahmoud. “We need the world to pay attention.” Unlike the Darfur crisis of the early 2000s, when it was on the agenda of many world leaders, the current conflict is being largely ignored by the international community, says Jan Egeland, secretary general of the Norwegian Refugee Council. “It is by far the worst displacement crisis in the world,” notes Egeland.


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Seg trump vince

    Vince Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, joins us as President Trump’s defiance of the courts is pushing the United States toward a constitutional crisis, with multiple judges weighing whether to open contempt proceedings against his administration for ignoring court orders. On Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg criticized officials for continuing to stonewall his inquiry into why planes full of Venezuelan immigrants were sent to El Salvador last month even after he ordered the flights halted or turned around midair. Boasberg noted in his order that Trump officials have since “failed to rectify or explain their actions,” giving the administration until April 23 to respond. This comes as Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen traveled to El Salvador but was blocked from seeing or speaking to Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland father who was sent to CECOT on the March flights in what the Department of Homeland Security has admitted was an “administrative error.” Both the Trump administration and the government of Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele have refused to release and return Abrego Garcia. This week, federal Judge Paula Xinis said the administration had made no effort to comply with the order, and said she could begin contempt proceedings. “The government is providing no information, not even the most basic factual information about what’s been happening,” says Warren.


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Part of a multimedia series on four RFA staff members who look back on life under the Khmer Rouge fifty years later

    Poly Sam was 11-years-old when the Khmer Rouge marched into Phnom Penh on the same day as the traditional Khmer New Year holiday.

    “It was meant to be a day of celebration, but it turned out to be a very, very bad day, and the beginning of a very bad time for many Cambodians,” he recalled recently.

    April 17 marks the 50th anniversary of the Khmer Rouge’s victorious arrival in Cambodia’s capital. For Cambodians, it’s a day remembered for its horrific beginnings.

    Within a handful of years, as many as 2 million people would be dead at the hands of the Pol Pot-led regime.

    “You know, for me, there’s a lot of negative memories,” Poly said. “But it’s a memory that I can share with people because we don’t want anyone to go through this again.”

    For Poly Sam, surviving the Khmer Rouge was just the first challenge.

    From Khmer Rouge survivor to a Thai refugee camp, and later as a teenage migrant to the United States, Poly encountered more than most people over five decades.

    He witnessed unspeakable acts and extreme deprivation. And he survived when so many others did not.

    “I’m lucky,” he said. “A lucky son of bitch.”

    Before the Khmer Rouge, Poly’s brother, Sien Sam, was a school teacher who later became a soldier for Cambodia’s short-lived Lon Nol regime – the military dictatorship that was ousted in 1975.

    Sien was one of the first to die as the Khmer Rouge forced everyone to walk out of Phnom Penh and into the countryside, Poly said.

    Outside of the city, Khmer Rouge soldiers marched Sien away to be “re-educated.” Only later as the “disappeared” grew in number, never to return, did people begin to understand what was happening, according to Poly.

    “He was probably killed in the first or second week. But we don’t know; nothing could be verified,” he said. “Until this day, we still don’t know where he died.”

    Poly Sam, right, and his childhood friend in 1982 at the Kamput Refugee Camp in Thailand.
    Poly Sam, right, and his childhood friend in 1982 at the Kamput Refugee Camp in Thailand.
    (Courtesy Poly Sam)

    Tricks for survival

    Today, Poly lists why he is lucky: Lucky to have only lost four or five members of his family. Lucky to have never been tortured. And lucky to have endured.

    “It’s very fortunate for a kid. You are in the field all the time, so you are able to scavenge a lot of things,” he said.

    “You learn a lot of tricks on how to survive. For example, you catch the fish, you wrap the leaf around the fish, and you put it under the ground and you burn a fire on top. When nobody is around you pull it out and eat it.”

    Surviving the Khmer Rouge was one thing, but escaping from Cambodia to Thailand was another.

    He begged his mother to allow him to try to flee his country. She had lost her oldest son to the Khmer Rouge. Her two other sons were already living in the United States, and now she feared she was about to lose her last born.

    Khmer Rouge forces post armored vehicles at the National Olympic Stadium in Phnom Penh, April 17, 1975.
    Khmer Rouge forces post armored vehicles at the National Olympic Stadium in Phnom Penh, April 17, 1975.
    (DC-CAM)

    Poly risked his life to flee the country, carefully making his way across Cambodia from one internally displaced person’s camp to another.

    The last hurdle was the greatest: sneaking into a refugee camp on the Thai border that was tightly controlled by Thai soldiers authorized to shoot anyone on site.

    The only way in was under the cover of darkness. Poly described his most dangerous moment and the lengths and depths of what it took to survive as a teenager.

    The first hurdle was slipping under the barbed wire fences without being noticed by the Thai soldiers. Once inside the camp, the next challenge was to hide out of sight until United Nations workers took over control of the camp during daylight hours.

    Poly hid in the one spot that no one would look: the communal pit latrine. He threw himself into it and waited for hours until it was safe to emerge.

    ‘Nobody can undo it’

    After four years in the camp. Poly was brought to the United States in 1983. More than 100,000 Cambodians settled in the United States between 1979 and 1990. A total of more than 1 million fled Cambodia during the years of civil war and turmoil.

    An American family informally adopted Poly, sent him to high school, and later helped him obtain a social worker degree at college.

    He worked at that for seven years before joining Radio Free Asia’s Khmer service in 1997. He now leads the Khmer service as its director.

    Can he forgive?

    “Whatever happened in the past, nobody can undo it. We have to look to the future, so I will forgive,” he said.

    “I have forgiven the Khmer Rouge. Some of them were victims themselves. So there’s no need to hold grudges against them.”

    But he says it is a different story for former Khmer Rouge cadres who continue to hold and abuse power in Cambodia today: “It is very difficult to forgive them.”

    Edited by Matt Reed

    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Ginny Stein for RFA.

  • In Part 2 of our interview with award-winning author and journalist Omar El Akkad, he discusses the roots of his new book about the war on Gaza, One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This, and how he draws hope from people engaged in “active resistance.”


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! Audio and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Human Rights Watch and was authored by Human Rights Watch.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.