Connect with us

International

Denmark To Limit ‘Non-Western’ Residents in So-Called ‘Ghettos’

Published

on

  • Denmark introduced plans Wednesday that would limit the population of foreign-born residents in 15 impoverished neighborhoods to 30% as part of an amendment to current legislation meant to improve these areas.
  • These neighborhoods are currently classified as “ghettos,” a label the amendment also plans to remove after public backlash.
  • Under the center-left Social Democratic government’s proposal, large amounts of public housing will be converted to private residences in the hopes of attracting middle-class families.
  • However, critics note that thousands of immigrants and their descendants will be evicted under the plan, while those that remain face harsher punishments if they commit crimes in these areas thanks to existing legislation.

Impoverished Neighborhoods Targeted

Denmark is facing international pushback after proposing legislation that would limit “non-Western” residents to just 30% of certain poor neighborhoods, called “ghettos.”

Although this same proposal would scrap that term, the category would still exist. The category was introduced in 2010 and according to Danish law, it constitutes any neighborhood with over 1,000 residents that also meets two of the following four criteria:

  • More than 40% of residents are unemployed.
  • More than 60% of 39-50 year-olds do not have an upper secondary education. 
  • Crime rates are three times higher than the national average.
  • Residents have a gross income 55% lower than the regional average.

Currently, Denmark has 15 neighborhoods classified as “ghettos,” and over 20-more that are at risk of falling into the category.

These neighborhoods exist for a variety of reasons, but many trace their origins back to the ’60s when the government built public housing for blue-collar workers. Since then, the housing hasn’t been well maintained. Many blue-collar workers have also left or bought private properties, leaving the housing largely for impoverished families who are often immigrants. Nearly all the public housing was built in concentrated neighborhoods, leading to a cycle of poverty where poor people were put in these neighborhoods and then sent to underfunded and overcrowded schools, which further entrenched the poverty.

To combat this, multiple governments across the political spectrum crafted a plan that finally began on Jan. 1, 2020, in an attempt to improve these neighborhoods. The plan includes limiting public housing to just 40% of these neighborhoods by 2030 and converting the rest to privately-owned residences. Thousands will be evicted, although they will be sent to different areas and put in other public housing options that are spread through neighborhoods of every socioeconomic status.

However, the plan also includes other measures that have sparked outrage, such as misdemeanors carrying double penalties when done in these neighborhoods. Additionally, there is collective punishment — via evictions — for the families of anyone caught committing a crime in a household.

What Does “Non-Western” Even Mean?

Still, Wednesday’s proposal is among the most controversial. The center-left Social Democratic government’s plan to limit “non-Western” immigrant residents to 30% of any poor-classified neighborhood has been seen as crossing an ethical line, particularly because people who are first and second-generation children of immigrants count for the 30% quota.

According to Danish government statistics, about 510,000 immigrants and their descendants would be impacted by the policy.

Many online were confused about what “non-Western” even means, considering the idea of a Western nation is nebulous and has roots in the 20th Century’s Cold War. For the Danish government, a Western person is anyone who is from one of the 28 EU countries or Andorra, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Norway, San Marino, Switzerland, Vatican State, Canada, the U.S., Australia, and New Zealand.

Interior Minister Kaare Dybvad Bek said in a statement on Wednesday that too many non-Western foreigners in one area “increases the risk of an emergence of religious and cultural parallel societies.”

See what others are saying: (NZ Herald) (TRT World) (The Guardian)

International

India Pedestrian Bridge Collapsed 4 Days After Renovations, Killing Over 100 People

Published

on

The company responsible for the upkeep of the Morbi bridge did not obtain a safety certificate before re-opening.


Bridge Collapses

After seven months of renovations, the Morbi walking bridge in India opened to the public. Four days later, the bridge collapsed, killing more than 130 people. 

According to the local government, there were about 200 people on the bridge when it collapsed on Sunday, despite its capacity of 125. 

During a campaign event on Monday, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi said the state government had set up a committee to investigate the tragedy.

“I assure the people of the country that there will be nothing lacking in the relief and rescue efforts,” he stated.

Along with the investigation, the state has launched a criminal complaint against Oreva Group, the company responsible for maintaining the bridge. Oreva Group reopened the bridge after renovations without getting a safety certificate from the government. 

Shifting Blame

In response, Oreva Group spoke to a local news outlet and blamed those on the bridge for its collapse.

“While we are waiting for more information, prima facie, the bridge collapsed as too many people in the mid-section of the bridge were trying to sway it from one way to the other,” the group claimed.

The state government has offered compensation for the families of the deceased, but that is not enough for some. One father whose wife and two children died in the collapse told VICE he wants answers and accountability.

“Why were so many people given tickets? Who allowed them? Who is answerable?” he asked.

Indian police have arrested nine people including ticketing clerks and security guards for failing to regulate the crowd, according to Reuters. 

See what others are saying: (Reuters) (VICE) (CNN)

Continue Reading

International

Xi Jinping Tightens Grip on China by Eliminating Rivals

Published

on

Despite the staggering power grab, Xi faces geopolitical competition from abroad as well as social and economic instability at home.


Xi Surrounds Himself With Allies

Chinese President Xi Jinping shook up politics over the weekend when he revealed the government’s new leadership, almost exclusively composed of his own hardline loyalists.

Six men — Li Qiang, Zhao Leji, Wang Huning, Cai Qi, Ding Xuexiang, and Li Xi — will form the Politburo Standing Committee, China’s top ruling body.

The four new members are all Xi loyalists, pushing out Premier Li Keqiang and the head of China’s top advisory body Wang Yang, two key party figures outside Xi’s inner circle who retired despite being eligible to serve another term.

For the first time in a quarter-century, China’s 24-member Politburo will be made up entirely of men, underlining the exclusion of women from Chinese politics.

An official account of the selection process said that a top criterion for leadership was loyalty to Xi, and rising officials must stay in lockstep with him “in thinking, politics and action.”

Topping off the developments, Xi officially secured an unprecedented third term as leader, something that was only made possible in 2018 when the government abolished term limits on the presidency. The weekend marked China’s greatest consolidation of political power in a single figure in decades.

As the 20th Communist Party Congress came to a close Saturday, China’s former leader Hu Jintao appeared reluctant as he was suddenly and inexplicably escorted from his seat next to Xi out of the Great Hall of the People.

Some commentators have argued that a tightly knit band of yes men may help Xi fend off internal party dissent, but it could ultimately result in poor governance as his subordinates fear giving him bad news.

The Arc of History Bends Toward China

Despite the extreme concentration of political power, China’s Communist Party stares down a gauntlet of challenges both foreign and domestic.

Beijing remains locked in a strategic competition with Washington, which has sought to contain the East Asian rival’s rise as a global superpower, but the past week’s congress may portend a stubbornly defiant China for years to come.

Xi is expected to use his firmly secure position within the party to pursue his agenda in full force — by strengthening Beijing’s claim over Taiwan, expanding China’s economic foothold in developing countries, and achieving self-sufficiency in strategic technologies such as semiconductors.

At home, China’s economy has faltered during the pandemic, with high unemployment, low consumption, and slow economic growth putting pressure on a government that stakes much of its legitimacy on promises to deliver prosperity to the population. Between July and September, the country’s GDP grew by 3.9%, according to official data released Monday, which is above many analysts’ expectations but still far below the state’s target of around 5.5%.

China’s National Bureau of Statistics postponed the data’s publication last week ahead of the 20th party congress, reinforcing concerns that Xi’s leadership will put politics before economics.

Monday’s announcement roiled stock markets, with Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index plunging 6%, as well as the Shanghai Composite and the Shenzhen Composite Index both falling by about 2%.

Beijing has also seen increased political resistance from the population, from anti-lockdown protests in Shanghai to widespread mortgage boycotts over delays from real estate developers.

Last week, a man unfurled two large banners from an overpass in Beijing and called President Xi a “dictator” through a megaphone.

Such small-scale demonstrations are not new, but they took place in the capital just before the congress drew enough attention for photos of the stunt to go viral on social media, where an equally swift censorship campaign stamped out any mention of it.

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (CNN) (The Washington Post)

Continue Reading

International

Elon Musk Walks Back Threat to Cut Ukraine’s Starlink Internet Service

Published

on

Although the satellites have been invaluable for Ukrainian military operations, outages have left soldiers without communication devices in recent weeks.


Let Them Eat Satellites

SpaceX founder Elon Musk said on Saturday that his company would continue funding internet service for Ukraine after declaring that he would have no choice but to cut it off the day prior.

“The hell with it,” he tweeted. “Even though Starlink is still losing money & other companies are getting billions of taxpayer $, we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free.”

It wasn’t immediately clear whether the often jocular billionaire was being sarcastic, but in response to another Twitter user he said, “We should still do good deeds.”

SpaceX’s Starlink satellites help the Ukrainian military operate drones, receive intelligence updates and communicate out in the field, which is vital since many regular internet and cellular phone networks have been destroyed by Russia.

At least 20,000 satellite terminals have been donated to Ukraine since the spring, but SpaceX has footed the bill for a small minority of them. According to a letter the company sent to the Pentagon last month, around 85% of the terminals were paid for in part or in full by the United States, Poland, and other entities, who also covered some 30% of the internet connectivity.

SpaceX claimed in the letter that Starlink services for Ukraine would cost over $120 million for the rest of the year and nearly $400 million for the next 12 months.

“We are not in a position to further donate terminals to Ukraine, or fund the existing terminals for an indefinite period of time,” it said.

The company, therefore, requested that the Pentagon take over funding for the satellite terminals.

Earlier this month, Musk claimed on Twitter that Ukraine’s Starlink services had cost SpaceX $80 million so far.

On Friday, following CNN’s publication of the SpaceX letter, Musk reaffirmed that his company “cannot fund the existing system indefinitely, *and* send several thousand more terminals that have data usage up to 100X greater than typical households.”

He added, however, that it was not seeking to recoup past expenses.

On Monday, Politico reported that the Pentagon is considering paying for the Starlink satellite network from a fund that has been used to supply weapons and equipment over the long term, according to two U.S. officials who are involved in the deliberations.

Starlink Leaves Ukraine’s Soldiers Stranded

Ukrainian troops experienced “catastrophic” outages in their Starlink communication devices in recent weeks, according to a Financial Times report earlier this month.

The services reportedly stopped functioning at critical moments, such as when soldiers breached the front lines into Russian-controlled territory or engaged in pitched battles.

“They were acute in the south around the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions, but also occurred along the frontline in eastern Kharkiv, Donetsk and Luhansk,” an official told the outlet.

Last month, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed to annex all four regions and held referendums widely considered to be a sham justification for his conquest of the Donbas.

The regions are also the focus of a massive Ukrainian counteroffensive that has sent Russian troops scrambling in recent weeks.

One Starlink donor reportedly believed the outages were a result of SpaceX’s efforts to block Russian forces from misusing Starlink terminals.

As Ukrainian soldiers liberated Russian-occupied territory, the sources said, public announcements of their gains lagged behind, and so did Starlink’s coverage.

Another official told the outlet that connection failures were widespread and led to panicked calls from soldiers to helplines.

Musk responded to the report by tweeting, “As for what’s happening on the battlefield, that’s classified.”

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (CNN) (Financial Times)

Continue Reading