- China announced that they will impose tariffs on $60 billion worth of U.S. goods just days after the U.S. announced it will impose tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods.
- After months of trade negotiations between the U.S. and China, the U.S. escalated tensions once more, claiming that China was backing out of key parts of the trade deal.
- Many experts believe the increased U.S. tariffs will hurt U.S. consumers and the economy, despite President Trump’s claims that they will only hurt China.
China Bites Back
China announced Monday that they will raise tariffs on $60 billion worth of U.S. goods, a move that came as a response to the Trump administration’s decision Friday to impose tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods.
The Trump administration’s efforts targets existing tariffs by raising taxes on those $200 billion worth of Chinese goods from 10 percent to 25 percent. Though it has not been formally announced, President Donald Trump also plans on placing new tariffs on essentially all goods imported from China, according to a statement from U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer.
“The President also ordered us to begin the process of raising tariffs on essentially all remaining imports from China,” Lighthizer’s statement said, “Which are valued at approximately $300 billion.”
China responded to this by announcing that starting June 1, they will raise their tariffs as high as 25 percent on U.S. goods that used to be taxed at 10 percent. The tariffs will apply to nearly 5,000 U.S. goods, and the steepest tariffs will apply to animal products, seasonings, live plants, a range of fruits and vegetables, and more.
While the new tariffs appear to be somewhat of a numbers game on the surface, it begs the question: What does this mean for the bigger picture?
There are two main implications here. First, what these new tariffs mean for the ongoing trade war between the U.S. and China; And second, what impact the Chinee tariffs will have on the U.S. economy and U.S. consumers.
Trade War Implications
Trump has long accused the Chinese government of hurting off U.S. consumers and businesses by stealing intellectual property from the U.S, unfairly subsidizing domestic companies, and flooding international markets with cheap goods causing U.S. companies to go out of business.
Since January 2018, the two countries have seen an ongoing cycle of the U.S. imposing tariffs on Chinese goods, and China responding by doing the same. All of this has amounted to what is essentially a tit-for-tat trade war.
However, in December, the escalation seemed to slow when the two countries agreed to negotiate a trade deal. For months, it seemed like China and the U.S. could reach an agreement. Then, despite numerous claims from Trump and his administration that the talks were going well, Trump decided to raise the tariffs last week amid highly anticipated negotiations.
Trump has argued that U.S. and Chinese negotiators failed to reach a deal during trade talks last week because China had backed out of major parts of the deal. China denied these accusations, saying they just wanted to renegotiate parts of the deal that they believe infringe on Chinese sovereignty.
Despite the recent escalation, the deal is still not off the table. Neither the U.S. tariffs nor China’s go into effect immediately. As noted above, China’s tariffs go into place on June 1, and the Trump administration structured its tariff increase so that they will not go into effect for a few more weeks, giving both sides time to negotiate.
The question that remains then is whether or not they can reach an agreement. Numerous Chinese officials have said they wish to resume trade negotiations, a point that was reiterated in the Chinese Finance Ministry’s official statement announcing their retaliatory tariffs.
“The Chinese side hopes that the US will return to the correct track of bilateral economic and trade consultations and work together with China to move toward each other and strive to reach a mutually beneficial and win-win agreement on the basis of mutual respect,” the statement said.
Trump for his part expressed his desire to negotiate a deal, but also appeared to threaten China in a series of tweets Monday, writing “China will be hurt very badly if you don’t make a deal”
Impact on the U.S. Economy
Trump also tweeted Monday morning saying that there is “no reason for the U.S. Consumer to pay the Tariffs.”
“There will be nobody left in China to do business with. Very bad for China, very good for USA! […] China should not retaliate-will only get worse!” He continued in the same thread.
That brings us to the second implication these tariffs have, which is the impact on the U.S. economy. As he said in those tweets, Trump has repeatedly argued that the tariffs will hurt China and not U.S. consumers.
In the same thread of tweets, Trump said consumers could mitigate the financial hit caused by the tariffs by buying American-made products or products manufactured in countries that are not subject to the tariffs, like Vietnam.
However, both trade experts and business groups have said Trump often is wrong in his characterization of how tariffs work. Tariffs are taxes paid by U.S. companies to buy foreign products, which means those taxes are not paid by China, but companies like manufacturing firms and other producers that need Chinese products.
When taxes are imposed, it makes Chinese products more expensive. However, it does not lower demand for those products from U.S. companies that need those Chinese goods to operate, and now have to pay more.
This specifically includes U.S. agriculture companies, which have already been hit by the new penalties, prompting a $12 billion bailout from Trump last year. Trump has said he will seek an additional $15 billion in from U.S. taxpayers to give to farmers.
All of this to say that the tariffs imposed by the U.S, can end up hurting U.S. companies and economic growth in the U.S. as well as China. This was a point that was made by Trump’s National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow, who contradicted Trump last night in an interview with Chris Wallace, the host of Fox News Sunday.
“It’s not China that pays tariffs,” Wallace said. “It’s the American importers, the American companies that pay what, in effect, is a tax increase and oftentimes passes it on to U.S. consumers.”
“Fair enough,” Kudlow responded. “In fact, both sides will pay. Both sides will pay in these things.”
U.S. investors are also worried about the impact of the tariffs.
“The costs of U.S. tariffs have fallen entirely on U.S. businesses and households, with no clear reduction in the prices charged by Chinese exporters,” Goldman Sachs analysts wrote a note to investors on Monday. “The effects of the tariffs have spilled over noticeably to the prices charged by U.S. producers competing with tariff-affected goods.”
Investors clearly responded Monday when U.S. stocks fell by triple digits. The S&P 500 and the Dow saw their worst day since Jan. 3, while the Nasdaq had its biggest drop this year. Stocks closed with major market averages falling by over two percent.
See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (The Wall Street Journal) (Fox Business)
Qatar Apologizes for Strip-Searching and Forcibly Examining Female Airline Passengers After Finding Abandoned Newborn
- Qatari officials strip-searched and forcibly examined over a dozen women for signs of recent pregnancy after a newborn was found in the bathroom trash can at Doha airport.
- The decision is considered a violation of rights, as there were other ways of searching for the mother of the abandoned baby.
- Thirteen Australians were among those searched, prompting outrage from the Australian government and an apology from Qatar.
- Qatar explained that it wanted to ensure the perpetrator didn’t escape for attempting to kill a newborn but acknowledge its actions were too heavy-handed.
- Fortunately, the baby is alive and being taken care of by Qatari medical officials, although it’s unclear if the mother was ever found.
Newborn Found in Trash
Officials in Qatar have apologized after multiple female passengers at Doha airport were subjected to invasive examinations earlier this month.
The incident happened on October 2 after a newborn baby was found in an airport bathroom trashcan, wrapped in a bag.
Fortunately, the baby was still alive, and authorities quickly made efforts to find the mother. Those efforts involved getting the ten closest planes on the tarmac and stopping them, assuming she must be nearby.
Staff on the planes asked multiple women to deboard to speak with authorities. The exact number of women involved is unknown, but based on statements from both Qatar and Australian officials, at least 18 were questioned. The exact details of what happened next aren’t completely clear yet, but it is known that the detained women were subject to what’s been described as a “strip search” right on the tarmac.
They were then put into a waiting ambulance where they were forcibly checked for any signs of recent pregnancy and childbirth. Such procedures are considered invasive and a gross violation of rights.
Passengers on the planes report that some of the women returned crying or clearly in shock from the event.
Qatar Airways flight 908 was particularly affected by the incident. The flight was headed to Sydney and only stopped in Doha for a quick layover. While it was in Doha, 13 Australian citizens were among those who were forced to comply, prompting outrage from the Australian government.
In a statement on the morning of October 28, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison described the incident as “appalling” and “unacceptable.“
“As a father of daughters, I could only shudder at the thought that any woman, Australian or otherwise, would be subjected to that,” he said, “It is important that wherever travelers are traveling, that they are able to do so free of those types of incidents.”
Initially, Qatar said it conducted the searches in an attempt to check on the well-being of the mother. However, on Wednesday, Qatar apologized for what happened, writing in a statement, “…the State of Qatar regrets any distress or infringement on the personal freedoms of any traveler caused by this action.”
Still, the government defended its initial actions, writing. “This was the first instance of an abandoned infant being discovered in such a condition at [Doha Airport].”
“This egregious and life-threatening violation of the law triggered an immediate search for the parents, including on flights in the vicinity of where the newborn was found.”
Qatar didn’t want the perpetrators of this attempted murder to escape, but the country did concede that the situation could have been handled much better. It also said an investigation into the matter would be forthcoming, with its findings to be shared with Australia.
Why This Course of Action?
This entire situation has triggered questions over how to balance the rights of passengers with the need to urgently find someone who attempted to kill a newborn.
Still, there were likely other solutions available. For example, Doha airport is a modern facility presumably filled with cameras. Officials probably could have stopped flights from departing as they checked the footage to see who went in and out of the bathroom where the newborn was found.
It could have been possible to narrow down the list of suspects by checking with Qatar Airways, the airline that had the most flights checked by authorities.
Qatar Airways doesn’t allow expectant mothers to fly if they are 36 weeks along, while mothers 28 weeks into a pregnancy require a doctor’s note to fly. While it’s unclear how premature the baby was, it can be assumed that checking in with Qatari Airways for a list of expectant mothers with doctor’s notes on flights could have significantly narrowed down potential perpetrators.
Fortunately, the little girl is being cared for at a facility in Doha. As of now, it’s unclear if Qatari authorities ever managed to find the parents.
See What Others Are Saying: (CNN) (Fox News) (New York Times)
U.S.-Negotiated Ceasefire in Nagorno-Karabakh Ends in Bloodshed Just 4 Minutes After It Started
- A U.S.-backed ceasefire between Azerbaijan and Armenia that took effect Monday was broken only four minutes after it started.
- It’s unclear which side broke it, although evidence points to Azerbaijan, which has made substantial gains in the ongoing conflict.
- This is the third failed ceasefire, although neither side seems to have expected it to last very long. The last two were brokered by Russia.
- The combatants are supposed to meet Thursday for negotiations to resolve the conflict, but based on how things are going, that’s unlikely to happen.
Back to Square One
A ceasefire between Armenian and Azeri forces that was brokered by U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo fell apart on Monday just four minutes after it started.
The ceasefire was agreed to by both parties and was first announced by U.S. President Donald Trump.
“Congratulations to Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, who just agreed to adhere to a ceasefire effective at midnight,” Trump tweeted Sunday.
The two countries are fighting over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh, alongside a few neighboring regions with a heavy Armenian troop presence. The regions in question are internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan but features a majority ethnic Armenian population, who in ’92 formed a state called the Republic of Artsakh. Artsakh receives financial, commercial, developmental, and military ties with Armenia proper.
On September 27, tensions over the region broke out into open conflict after both sides accused the other of breaking a decades-long ceasefire. Major players in the region, like Turkey and Russia, each support different sides in the war. Turkey has provided material support to Azerbaijan, including drones and fighter jets. Russia provides Armenia with arms and anti-drone missile defense system; however, unlike Turkey Russia has consistently made efforts to negotiate a ceasefire.
Unfortunately, every Russian brokered ceasefire has similarly ended just minutes after starting, with each side blaming the other for breaking the agreement.
The U.S. brokered ceasefire seemed to have a good start, with Armenian President Nikol Pashinyan tweeting, “As agreed in Washington DC, with US mediation, the Armenian side will fully maintain the ceasefire starting from 8 a.m.”
U.S. Congressman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) also spoke on behalf of local Armenian groups, writing “My colleagues in the Armenian Caucus have consistently called for the US to take decisive action holding Azerbaijan and Turkey accountable and bring an end to the bloodshed. I’m thankful @SecPompeo negotiated a ceasefire that hopefully holds and leads to an independent Artsakh.”
Many Armenians were correctly doubtful about how successful the ceasefire would be because of how all past ceasefires ended. Some online wrote things like, “Pres. Trump, since this humanitarian ceasefire like the previous two will likely not be observed by Azerbaijan, hope the US government has follow-up plans. Turkey is the main reason why this war is taking place, so sanctioning them would be the single most important act for peace.”
For their part, the Azeri perspective could be easily summed up with a tweet by a user that reflects the longheld grudge against Armenia for allegedly pushing ethnic Azeris out of Nagorno-Karabakh.
“Your proud team has not been able to save 1 million people for more than 30 years,” the user wrote. “The brutality of the Armenian government drove 1 million Azerbaijanis from the Azerbaijani lands in Karabakh. Now they are returning home. The only team you can be proud of is the Azerbaijani Army.”
It’s important to note that, it’s officially unclear who broke the ceasefire, with each side blaming the other for targeting and bombing civilian centers in Nagorno-Karabakh and neighboring Ganja, respectively.
News of the failed ceasefire quickly gained traction after Azeri Foreign minister Hikmet Hajiyev said, “Since 08.04 armed forces of Armenia started shelling Tartar region and its villages in violation of humanitarian ceasefire. As reported by MOD Azerbaijan armed forces of Armenia with artillery and mine launchers attacking our forces since 08.05“
Armenia disputes this, claiming that they are trying to maintain the ceasefire even though Azerbaijan is the one shelling cities in Artsakh. This back and forth over who broke the ceasefires have continued the he-said-she-said narrative of the conflict. Virtually every event is disputed by either side, and restrictions on journalists make it hard to verify information.
Armenia does largely allow journalists to many spots in the warzone, although with some restrictions. Azerbaijan, however, heavily restricts journalists, and clear answers from their side of the front are hard to obtain.
Progress of the War
If a side stood to gain something from breaking a ceasefire, it’d probably be Azerbaijan. They have made huge gains towards gaining control of Nagorno-Karabakh. Even though both sides actively seek to play up their gains and diminish their losses, satellite images and alleged geolocation data show that Azeri forces are now in large parts of southern Nagorno-Karabakh.
Initial claims about geolocation date were disputed, however, on October 27, Armenian forces announced they were making strategic retreats from cities in southern Artsakh in an effort to consolidate forces and avoid unnecessary loses; however, they stressed these were minor setbacks.
This indeed may be a minor setback because other information indicates that while Azeri forces may have made some large gains, they also are having trouble holding the territory and may have suffered untenable losses for it.
Azeri losses are notoriously hard to confirm, but to date they have stated that 65 civillians have lost their lives in the conflict to date.
Armenia claims to have inflicted over 6,000 military casualties on Azeri forces since the conflict began. Officially, 900 soldiers and civilians have been killed on the Armenian side since the conflict began. Although doctors in Stepanakert, while speaking to The Daily Beast, say that over 1,000 soldiers have died, with an additional 300-400 civilian deaths.
Both sides are due to meet again on Thursday with members of the Minsk Group, which is co-chaired by the U.S., France, and Russia, in order to try and find a resolution to the conflict.
See What Others Are Saying: (The Hill) (ABC News) (The Daily Beast)
Thousands of Nigerians Continue to Protest for Widespread Police Reforms Following SARS Disbandment
- Nigerians are protesting against human rights abuses carried out by the Special Anti-Robbery Squad, a police unit commonly known as SARS.
- The police unit has been caught on video multiple times shooting, torturing, extorting, beating, robbing, and kidnapping Nigerians.
- A video of a SARS officer shooting a young man while confiscating the man’s Lexus on October 3 sparked outrage across the West African nation, leading to protests since October 8.
- Since then, the government has agreed to some demands and disbanded the unit for the fourth time, only to replace it with a SWAT unit.
- Still, Nigerians continue to protest, demanding wide-scale police reforms.
SARS Accused of Major Human Rights Abuses
Nigeria has been rocked by ongoing protests over police brutality stemming from the long time corruption and abuse by the Special Anti-Robbery Squad.
The squad, better known as SARS, has long been embroiled in controversy for engaging in torture, mock executions, robbery, extortion, kidnapping, harassment, and murder. For many Nigerians, the unit is just the worst example of many of the abuses that Nigerian police engage in and is part of a systemic problem.
The most recent anger was sparked by a video that went viral on October 3, which shows a SARS officer was seen shooting a young man in front of a hotel while taking away his Lexus SUV. Adding to the collective anger was news that the phone used to record the incident was quickly confiscated by SARS officers after the video went live.
Following days of simmering, the tensions boiled over on October 8, after activists and social media called for wide-scale protests to demand SARS be disbanded. Like many recent protests worldwide, the message was quickly spread and amplified with the help of social media, prompting tens of thousands of people across Nigeria to take to the streets and make #endSARS trend online.
Wide-Scale Protests Across Nigeria
Since October 8, the ongoing protests have been mainly peaceful, although there have been incidents of police interfering with heavy-handed tactics. Online, hundreds of videos can be found of police using water cannons and tear gas to disperse crowds. Others show them wildly shooting into crowds of protesters.
However, these actions often have the opposite of their intended effect and draw out more protesters daily. Additionally, the videos of violent police tactics amplify the message worldwide, especially as members of the Nigerian diaspora push the topic online.
Nigerian actor John Boyega has actively supported the movement on Twitter, calling out Nigerian police corruption. Similarly, Nigerian rapper Burna Boy made serious efforts to spread information about the protests to his global audience.
On October 10, he made a statement, promising to help fund any protester who is harmed and/or arrested by police during demonstrations. He also asked for donations to that fund and promised to make sure people are educated about the situation. To that end, he has been funding billboards with #ENDSARS and relevant information across the United Kingdom.
In North America, multiple artists have come out in support of the cause. Rapper Kanye West tweeted out, “I stand with my Nigerian brothers and sisters to end police brutality, the government must answer to the peoples cries #EndPoliceBrutalityinNigeria”
Meanwhile, fellow artist Drake highlighted a post about the situation on his Instagram story.
SARS Out, SWAT In
As the protests continued, the message and movement evolved. On Sunday, a list of demands began to be circulated on social media.
Beyond wanting SARS disbanded, the demands called for anyone arrested during the protests to be released. It also called for compensation for those killed by police brutality in Nigeria.
It’s unknown exactly how many have died as a result of the protests, but Human Rights Watch estimates that upwards of 10 people have been killed by police while protesting.
Demonstrators are also calling for an independent body be set up within 10 days to investigate and prosecute all reports of police misconduct, as well as psychological evaluations and retraining of SARS operatives before they were moved to other units.
Additionally, protesters want to ensure that Nigerian police are adequately paid, so they’re less willing to engage in corruption.
Protesters got a major victory on Sunday when the government announced that SARS would be disbanding and there would be investigations into the conduct of the officers. Until those investigations were complete, SARS officers would be placed into other units after a psychological evaluation, in line with protester demands.
However, for many protesters, this wasn’t enough. They want widespread police reforms, especially because disbanding SARS isn’t a new thing.
This will be the fourth time the unit has been disbanded, and each time it’s brought back, it faces the same accusations. It’s widely believed that the unit isn’t the problem and instead blame the mindset within Nigerian police that allows a unit like SARS to be so brutal and corrupt.
It wasn’t until Tuesday that police finally agreed to stop using force against protesters. At the same time, President Muhammadu Buhari gave a speech where he promised that widespread police reforms would come.
“I want to use this opportunity to address the recent genuine concerns and agitations by Nigerians about the excessive use of force, and in some cases extrajudicial killings and wrongful conduct, by men of the Nigerian police force,” he said.
“The disbanding of SARS is only the first step in our commitment to extensive police reform in order to ensure the primary of the police and other law enforcement agencies remain the protection of lives.” and added, “We will also ensure that all those responsible for misconduct or wrongful acts are brought to justice.”
Many Nigerians were bitterly disappointed when it was announced that SARS would be replaced with a group known as Special Weapons Assault Team, or SWAT.
With that, protests continued into Wednesday, and demands have been expanded to call for more fundamental changes to the police system. The calls are similar to ones made against police in countries like the U.S. and U.K. following the death of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and others.