# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
36,000 Afghan evacuees lack pathway to permanent legal status in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Unless Congress legalizes them, many Afghan evacuees could have to apply for asylum to be able to stay in the U.S. legally.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Ukrainian soldier walks along the "contact" line between national forces and Russian-backed separatists in Mariupol, in Ukraine's Donetsk region, on Jan. 20. (Andriy Dubchak/AP)

Russia on Thursday launched a multi-pronged attack against Ukraine. President Vladimir Putin announced the military operation in an early morning address, saying that the goal of the offensive was the "demilitarization" and "denazification" of the country.
Are you on Telegram? Subscribe to our channel for the latest updates on Russia's war in Ukraine.
Three days into the invasion, outmanned Ukrainian forces are - for now - fending off Russian attacks in major cities, including the capital, Kyiv. Nearly 200 Ukrainians have been killed in the fighting, health officials said Saturday and more than 150,000 have fled to neighboring European countries.

The TikTok buildup: Videos reveal Russian forces closing in on Ukraine

The crisis is centered in part on land borders and strategic influence. Moscow sees Ukraine as an important buffer against NATO. But Ukraine sees Russia as an aggressor that, even prior to this week's invasion, had already occupied parts of Ukrainian territory.

Separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk, backed by Russia, have been fighting Ukrainian government forces since 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and supported the establishment of separatist enclaves in the eastern part of the country.

Here are four maps that help explain the deep roots of the conflict and where things stand right now.

What to know

How are Russia and Ukraine linked historically?

Why does Putin care whether Ukraine joins NATO?

What parts of Ukraine did Russia control before the current invasion?

Are there Russian-linked separatist regions in other countries?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Four maps that explain the Russia-Ukraine conflict

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The conflict playing out between Russia and Ukraine is one marked by land borders and shaped by strategic influence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Press play to listen to this article

WARSAW - Poland is preparing for a massive influx of refugees if Russia attacks Ukraine.

"We have to be prepared for the worst-case scenario and [we have] been taking steps so as to be prepared for a wave of up to a million people," Deputy Interior Minister Maciej Wąsik told Polish Radio.

The Polish government has pledged solidarity with Ukraine as tensions with Russia rise and said people fleeing the country in case of a Russian invasion would be "real refugees" and will receive help, Wąsik said. "In line with the Geneva Convention, these people will be under Polish protection, and we absolutely won't say no to helping them."

Ukraine shares borders with EU members Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Hungary, but has the closest ties with Poland.

However, there are doubts whether Poland has the capacity to deal with such a huge influx of people fleeing war. Last year, Belarusian strongman Alexander Lukashenko sparked a political and humanitarian crisis in Poland by encouraging a few thousand migrants from the Middle East to fly to Minsk and then make their way into the European Union.

Polish border guards pushed many people back into Belarus - with human rights groups saying that violated their right to claim asylum.

A Ukrainian crisis would be very different. Ukrainians have the right to visa-free entry into the EU and Ukraine borders the EU - meaning authorities won't be able to claim that refugees should seek asylum elsewhere.

The interior ministry told POLITICO in an email that it is "constantly monitoring the situation in connection with the crisis on the Ukrainian-Russian border."

"The situation is analyzed on an ongoing basis in close cooperation with the Border Guard and the Office for Foreigners, including in terms of the availability of places in centers for foreigners," the ministry said.

The ministry did not answer questions on what concrete steps it has taken to handle the scenario outlined by Wąsik.

Observers have doubts if Poland can do much. There are no more than 2,000 places to house refugees across 10 centers run by the Office for Foreigners - the government department responsible for migration. The Border Guard has just over 2,300 spots, but only 800 are currently available. "The Border Guard is prepared to make additional places available," a spokesperson said.

"To say that Poland will help a million people fleeing war is simply irresponsible," said Agnieszka Kosowicz, who heads the Polish Migration Forum, an NGO promoting the rights of migrants in Poland.

There are already more than a million Ukrainians in Poland who arrived to seek better jobs and have effectively become a part of Polish society. But a sudden influx of hundreds of thousands of people fleeing war and death is not something Poland will be able to handle, said Jan Piekło, former Polish ambassador to Ukraine.

"The Polish government is - or should be - aware that the crisis will be quite different. It will be a wave of terrified people who will try to find a safe place and not migration for jobs stretched over time in which people take care of themselves. Poland will need help," Piekło said.

Poland also has little experience with such a crisis. The Office for Foreigners' most recent data covering the first nine months of 2021 shows that just 5,200 people applied for international protection, a term that includes being recognized as a refugee or granting subsidiary protection.

Out of that number, most applicants were citizens of Afghanistan and Belarus. There only were 200 Ukrainians.

The Warsaw office of the UNHCR, the U.N.'s refugee agency, says it's on standby to help as soon as it is asked, said spokesperson Rafał Kostrzyński.

"Poland should do what the Geneva Convention requires it to do. It should create capacity for people to apply for refugee status. It should also turn to other countries for help to ensure that procedures run smoothly. We are ready to help both in implementing asylum procedures as well as with humanitarian help," said Kostrzyński.

Poland's nationalist government has long rejected the idea that EU countries should share out asylum seekers - a demand made by frontline states like Greece and Italy when dealing with migration surges.

The reality of hundreds of thousands of people crossing the border will very quickly test Poland said Andrew Stroehlein, the European media director with Human Rights Watch.

"In the Belarus border case, there were 'only' thousands of people concerned, and Poland's authorities, with the EU fully behind them, couldn't even deal with the situation properly," Stroehlein said. "That doesn't bode well for a worst-case, big-numbers scenario in Ukraine."

The problem will likely be less acute in other EU member countries bordering Ukraine, said Oana Popescu-Zamfir, director of the Bucharest-based GlobalFocus Center, a foreign policy think tank.

"Historically, we haven't had that much migration from Ukraine and in the event of a war, most refugees would head for Poland where there are so many of their compatriots already," Popescu-Zamfir said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Poland braces for 'up to a million people' fleeing war in Ukraine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Press play to listen to this article WARSAW - Poland is preparing for a massive influx of refugees if Russia attacks Ukraine. "We have to be prepared for the worst-case scenario and [we have] been taking steps so as to be prepared for a wave of up to a million people," Deputy Interior Minister Maciej Wąsik told Polish Radio.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The situation along the Ukrainian border has grown even more dire, according to top U.S. officials, who warned Sunday that a Russian invasion of Ukraine may now only be a matter of time.

Speaking on ABC's This Week, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan offered one of the administration's most stark assessments of the situation, saying that Russian President Vladimir Putin "has put himself in a position with military deployments to be able to act aggressively against Ukraine at any time now."

"We believe that there is a very distinct possibility that Vladimir Putin will order an attack on Ukraine," Sullivan said. "It could take a number of different forms. It could happen as soon as tomorrow or it could take some weeks yet."

With more than 100,000 Russian forces estimated to be in position along Ukraine's borders, U.S. officials believe Putin has already amassed nearly three-quarters of the total amount of troops he would need for a full-scale attack. Russian forces continue to assemble around Ukraine, the officials said, including naval assault ships that could be used to invade Ukrainian ports.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the estimates.

The U.S. estimates that an attack could result in the deaths of tens of thousands of soldiers and civilians alike, while millions of Ukrainian refugees would be left to flee, likely to nearby Poland.

Russian officials have sought to downplay the warnings from Washington, with the country's deputy ambassador to the United Nations, Dmitry Polyanskiy, calling them "madness and scaremongering."

In a tweet, Polyanskiy said, "what if we would say that US could seize London in a week and cause 300K civilian deaths?"

Amid the war of words, some officials continue to hold out for a diplomatic solution. French President Emmanuel Macron is due in Moscow on Monday, and then the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv on Tuesday.

"It is our vital interest to find a solution to this current crisis through dialogue and through engagement, and this is what we're doing currently," said Peter Stano, the lead spokesperson for foreign affairs and security policy for the European Union, in an interview with NPR's Weekend Edition Sunday.

Stano described a possible invasion as a "worst-case scenario" that the EU is prepared for, but hopes will not come to pass.

"We stand united, the European Union [and] our trans-Atlantic partners, including the United States, in facing this challenge because this is one of the most serious challenges in the post-Cold War era and it's an unprecedented challenge to the European Security Order," Stano said. "We will not back down. We will stand firm in support of Ukraine and in defending the international principles which apply here."

Stano went on to call Russia's decision to send an abundance of troops to the Ukrainian border "unprovoked," "unjustified" and "unwarranted."

Russia stands to face heavy sanctions should the situation deteriorate, officials have previously stated. Stano echoed these sentiments during Sunday's interview, explaining that the consequences for Russia would be "much, much tougher" this time than what they've faced in the past.
Daniel Estrin contributed reporting from Kyiv

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
U.S. says Russia has amassed about 75% of the troops it would need to invade Ukraine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The situation along the Ukrainian border has grown even more dire, according to top U.S. officials, who warned Sunday that a Russian invasion of Ukraine may now only be a matter of time.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Native American tribes reclaim California redwood land for preservation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Group of 10 tribes inhabiting the area since thousands of years will be responsible for protecting the land dubbed Tc’ih-Léh-Dûñ

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The U.S. Capitol Is Filled With Racist Depictions of Native Americans. It's Time for Them to Go

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's not just Confederate statues. The U.S. Capitol is filled with racist stereotypes about Native Americans-and it's time for them to go.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tribes: Settlement in opioids case will foster healing | Peninsula Daily News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Native Americans from South Dakota would have been able to hunt or fish anywhere in the state for free and visit or camp in state parks without paying fees under two bills considered by the state Legislature.

House Bill 1141 sought to allow enrolled members of a federally recognized Indian tribe located entirely or partially in South Dakota to be exempt from fees for hunting or fishing licenses, permits or stamps. House Bill 1142 proposed allowing those same tribal members to be exempt from fees to enter or camp in state parks.

Both bills were heard Monday by the House State Affairs committee. While discussion on House Bill 1141 was deferred, House Bill 1142 was amended to include fee exceptions for hunting and fishing licenses, permits and stamps. The bill was then deferred to the 41st legislative day, effectively stopping the bill from going any further.

Both bills were proposed by Rep. Shawn Bordeaux, D-Mission, a member of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe. Bordeaux said he proposed the state park fee waiver for Natives after seeing that Minnesota had enacted a law waiving park entrance fees for tribal members starting this year. New York state waives hunting and fishing fees for enrolled tribal members, according to state law.

In an interview with News Watch, Bordeaux said tribal members should have free access to state parks and recreation areas once inhabited by their ancestors, as many of those lands retain cultural and spiritual significance among Native Americans. Bordeaux said tribal members should also be allowed to hunt and fish without fees, just as they did before the state was settled by Europeans. Treaties signed between Indian tribes and the federal government generations ago guaranteed such rights, but have been ignored by South Dakota and other states, he said.

"We feel like we should be able to go the state parks because it's our land, and it was taken from us," said Bordeaux, an administrator at Sinte Gleska University in Mission. "Is it too much to ask for our Legislature and state to say, 'OK, we recognize that all this land was yours, so we're going to make it free to card-carrying Natives'?"

Bordeaux also sees the fee waivers as important to Native Americans in both in a practical and a philosophical sense.

In practice, making park and camp usage free and removing license fees for hunting and fishing would provide a new opportunity for outdoor activities among Native American individuals and families who often struggle financially.

State park entrance fees are $8 daily or $36 annually for one vehicle; camping fees range from $15 to $26 per night. Resident fishing fees are $8 per day or $28 per year; resident hunting fees vary, but common fees are $33 for pheasant and small game and $40 for many deer licenses.

"For a family, it's really expensive, and these are depressed areas, some of the poorest counties in the nation where we live," he said. "This would give our kids a chance to get out in a way that is more affordable, and when you're putting deer as food on your table or your grandma's table, there's a real need for this."

Bordeaux said the fee waivers would have a very limited impact on state revenues, especially since most Natives already hunt or fish on reservation lands, and because many state parks are far from Native communities. Fiscal impacts would be minimal in the long run but especially at a time when the state coffers are flush with more than $1 billion in federal COVID-19 aid, Bordeaux said.

Officials with the Department of Natural Resources in Minnesota estimate the state park fee waiver there will cost the state only about $25,000 in reduced fee revenue and $2,000 lost in sales-tax collections.

From a philosophical perspective, Bordeaux said waiving the fees would send a strong signal to the Native American population in South Dakota that the state cares about them and supports their rights to visit religious, cultural and recreational sites.

"We feel like it's not going to cost a whole (lot) of money, it's a nice gesture, and it's a thing that can go a long ways toward reconciliation to bring our peoples together," Bordeaux said. "It's a little carrot, but if it's the only carrot in your view, it's substantial enough to see it as something important."

Both measures have been referred to the House State Affairs Committee.

The South Dakota Department of Game, Fish & Parks, which runs state parks and regulates hunting and fishing, had not taken a position on the two bills as of Jan. 31, according to spokesman Nick Harrington.

State law allows for some exceptions to park-entrance fees, Harrington said, including for disabled veterans or former prisoners of war, who also get half-off camping fees. Some tribal members do not have to pay entrance fees to state parks or recreation areas within their boundaries, including Crow Creek tribal members at West Bend Recreational Area, and Yankton Sioux tribal member at North Point, Fort Randall South, Randall Creek or Fort Randall Spillway recreation areas.

The state Hunting Handbook also notes that state hunting licenses are not valid on reservation lands, and that tribal licenses are not valid on non-reservation lands. Active military and disabled people receive free or reduced fishing access.

Most Indian tribes in South Dakota and across the U.S. already allow members to hunt and fish on reservation lands without a fee, though they are still subject to permitting requirements, bag limits and other restrictions set by tribal governments, said Remi Bald Eagle, intergovernmental affairs coordinator for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe in western South Dakota. Fees are not charged to tribal members for entrance or usage of reservation parks, Bald Eagle said.

But Bald Eagle said many treaties signed between Indian tribes and the federal government call for allowing Native Americans to hunt and fish on lands outside reservation boundaries that are within the wider treaty boundaries. In regard to the Cheyenne River tribe, treaties signed in the 1800s should allow tribal members to hunt and fish without state licensing through all of South Dakota west of the Missouri River, but Bald Eagle said state laws do not recognize the full language or intent of the treaties of 1851 and 1868.

"One of the primary things we as Lakota people feel is that the treaties were never honored, that we made treaties for peace, and they have been consistently abrogated by one party and not the other," Bald Eagle said, speaking for himself and not on behalf of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. "We reserve the right to hunt and fish anywhere within the treaty territory, not just on reservations, but that includes our ceded lands, which are basically all of western South Dakota."

Bald Eagle said he doesn't think the fee waivers would be seen as much of a financial break by Native Americans, who would be more likely to view passage of the bills as acknowledgment of the treaties and of respect for Native Americans and their history and way of life.

"It really weighs on our hearts more than it does economically, to not be welcomed, to not be allowed to go onto our land as we see fit," Bald Eagle said. "It would be refreshing to us, and how this is received by non-tribal members may be seen as a litmus test for how future relations between Natives and non-Natives will go."

Rep. Jennifer Keintz, D-Eden, said she signed on as a co-sponsor of both Native fee-waiver bills because she sees the measures as a gesture of goodwill and reconciliation toward Native Americans in South Dakota.

"When I read the bills, what initially occurred to me is something I think about a lot living here in South Dakota, that it has to be painful for a lot of Native Americans to be charged a fee to access lands that were stolen from their ancestors," said Keintz, who works in real estate. "I know that waiving these fees won't change that past ... and maybe it's only a small gesture, but it's not insignificant to say that we can't fix what happened in the past, but at least we can give you access to these abundant natural resources, wonderful parks and recreation, and all of this that we have in South Dakota that was built on land that was taken from your ancestors."

Keintz also noted that Gov. Kristi Noem has sought to eliminate fees the state charges to developers or businesses, and that the Legislature is often looking for ways to reduce or eliminate fees paid by residents.

"I don't know how this idea [of tribal fee waivers] is being met by others in the Legislature, but if it is controversial, it sort of shows where our priorities lie," Keintz said.

Increasing inclusiveness and creating more equity for Native Americans was clearly part of the impetus for the removal of state-park fees in Minnesota, where Gov. Tim Walz recommended the fee waiver. The law extended existing fee waivers from known sacred sites within state parks to the entire state-park system.

"This proposal will better recognize and honor the cultural and spiritual ties between Minnesota Tribal Nations and many state parks and recreation areas, and improve access of tribal members to these sites," the governor's office wrote in a report. "This proposal would also be a move toward greater inclusion at state parks and recreation areas, a high priority for the DNR as we continue to focus on creating a welcoming and inclusive outdoor recreation system."

In an email to News Watch, Minnesota DNR spokesman Jamie McBride said the state allows tribal members to hunt and fish on non-reservation state lands if they possess a tribal hunting or fishing license. The agency has also recently hired a tribal liaison officer, implemented a tribal-relations working team and provided Native culture, history and sovereignty training to DNR employees.

"Strengthening tribal relationships is a strategic priority for the Minnesota DNR," McBride wrote. "Many issues are deeply complex, and DNR is dedicating the needed time and resources toward active listening, proactive response and shared problem solving."

South Dakota state Rep. Tamara St. John, R-Sisseton, said she has not taken a position on the fee-waiver bills because she has not yet seen any potential fiscal impact data or specifics regarding implementation or regulation of wildlife and fishing activities. So far, the bills contain no reference to changing existing statewide hunting or fishing laws for tribal members beyond the waiving of fees.

Yet St. John, an enrolled member of the Sisseton Wahpeton Sioux Tribe who is also co-chair of the state Tribal Relations Committee, said she understands and appreciates the argument that tribal members should have free and open access to lands they once inhabited and often see as spiritual sites.

"These are all the homelands to indigenous people and these lands have the footprints of indigenous people," said St. John, a tribal historian by trade. "Where we don't have access to places of importance, places we used to gather or hunt or pray, the importance of access is something that is always in the back of my mind."

Furthermore, St. John said the fee waivers would be one more way in which the state could encourage people to get outdoors and to maintain traditions of hunting and fishing in the state. St. John added that visiting state parks, camping and engaging in outdoor sports are also an avenue for Native Americans to build family relationships, promote mental health and possibly share Native history and culture with others.

"I think it would be great encouragement, and what a nice way of promoting mental health and also sharing tribal history," she said.

Bald Eagle said state-park entrance fees have been an emotional burden for many Native Americans, especially those who were prohibited from practicing religious ceremonies on state lands before the 1978 American Indian Religious Freedom Act, which allowed Native Americans to visit sacred sites across the country.

Bald Eagle recalls how his father used to take his family to Bear Butte in Meade County to make an offering of tobacco to elders in the spirit world. Saying prayers while casting the tobacco into the air or placing it in the ground was the common ceremonial method. But when such practices were banned on public lands, Bald Eagle's father would instead deliver prayers before driving to Bear Butte, then arrive and hurriedly place a bit of tobacco in a pouch and hang it from a tree before quickly fleeing.

Bald Eagle said passage of the fee waivers might attract more Native Americans to state parks, and some may wish to perform religious ceremonies in parks. But he said the practice would likely become more of a "novelty" that would rarely be repeated, but that would remain close to the hearts of tribal members who would cherish the right to choose to do so if they wished.

"If something like this were to pass, it would stoke the curiosity of many people and we would go to put our feet in the grass and say, 'Can it really be?' It seems surreal to even suggest something at that level," Bald Eagle said. "It would be nice to be able to walk on our homelands without the necessity to pay for it. To gather medicine or to do ceremony, that would be ideal."

Bordeaux said that even if his fee waivers do not pass this legislative session, it is important to start a conversation that can be continued in future sessions.

"I'm hopeful that even if we only get one person to agree this session, in the future, some student might be watching and think about getting involved in state government as a result," he said. "This will happen; it might take 10 or 15 years, but I do believe these bills will pass eventually."
This article was produced by South Dakota News Watch, a non-profit journalism organization located online at SDNewsWatch.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
House committee rejects bill that would allow Native Americans to hunt, fish and visit state parks for free

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Native Americans from South Dakota would have been able to hunt or fish anywhere in the state for free and visit or camp in state parks without paying fees under two bills considered by the state Legislature.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
SYDNEY (Reuters) -Britain warned Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday that its allies would stand together to fight for democracy against dictatorships that it said were more emboldened than at any time since the Cold War.

Speaking in Australia, British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said Britain and its allies in the "free world" must respond together to global threats, deepen ties with democracies in the Indo-Pacific and "face down global aggressors" who were using economic dependence to try to get what they want.

Truss and Britain's defence secretary, Ben Wallace, met their Australian counterparts in Sydney for the annual Australia-United Kingdom Ministerial Consultations (AUKMIN), where a deal for Australia to acquire nuclear submarines was discussed.

Australia's defence minister, Peter Dutton, said there was no plan to establish a British military base in Australia. The two countries signed deals to fund infrastructure in the region as a counter to Beijing's influence.

In a joint statement, the ministers expressed concern at Russia's military build-up on the border with Ukraine and "their absolute support for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity". Russia denies planning to invade Ukraine.

Political Cartoons on World Leaders

In a speech at the Lowy Institute foreign affairs think tank, Truss said Putin should "desist and step back from Ukraine before he makes a massive strategic mistake."

Truss said "invasion will only lead to a terrible quagmire and loss of life, as we know from the 1979-1989 Soviet-Afghan war and conflict in Chechnya."

Global aggressors "are emboldened in a way we haven't seen since the Cold War," Truss said.

"They seek to export dictatorship as a service around the world ... That is why regimes like Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar find their closest allies in Moscow and Beijing."

Britain should work with allies such as Australia, Israel, India, Japan and Indonesia to "face down global aggressors", especially in the Pacific.

China's "economic coercion" of Australia was "one of the wake-up calls" to Britain that Beijing was using its economic might to exert control over other countries, she said.

Beijing, which imposed trade sanctions on Australian goods after Canberra called for an international investigation into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, has denied accusations of economic coercion.

Asked about the UK-Australia talks and their focus on countering China's growing clout, the foreign ministry in Beijing rejected such conclusions.

"On the so-called China threat, it is also based on nonsense, China firmly objects to this, we urge relevant parties not to go further on the wrong path of creating division and confrontation," Zhao Lijian, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman told a daily briefing on Friday.

(Reporting by Guy Faulconbridge in London, Kirsty Needham in Sydney and Emily Chow in Beijing; Additional reporting by Martin Pollard; Writing by Guy Faulconbridge in London, editing by Gerry Doyle and Timothy Heritage)

Copyright 2022 Thomson Reuters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Britain Warns Putin and Xi: West Will Stand up to 'Dictatorship'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SYDNEY (Reuters) -Britain warned Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday that its allies would stand together to fight for democracy against dictatorships that it said were more emboldened than at any time since the Cold War.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sudan’s feared secret police make a comeback

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Amira Osman is one of dozens believed to have been arrested by Sudan’s feared secret police.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Afghan women chant slogans and hold banners during a women's rights protest in Kabul on Jan. 16. (Wakil Kohsar/AFP/Getty Images)

KABUL - It had been six days since the two women's rights activists were abducted. Now, Taliban fighters were on Masooma Hemmat's street, searching for her. She was inside her house, along with another activist, when a neighbor called to warn her. When Hemmat heard the word "Taliban," she hung up in fear.
Are you on Telegram? Subscribe to our channel for the latest updates on Russia's war in Ukraine.
"I was looking for a way to escape," Hemmat, 28, recalled. "I thought that we, too, were going to be taken and disappeared."

Even as the Taliban tries to persuade the world to recognize and financially support its government, it has embarked on a violent crackdown on dissent. In recent weeks, Taliban fighters have targeted women's rights activists, especially those protesting the Taliban's denial of their basic rights.

Armed militants have beaten female demonstrators, sprayed pepper spray in their faces and shocked them with electric prods, according to a half-dozen activists interviewed by The Washington Post. Other women have received threatening calls and text messages and have been harassed on social media. Several said they were followed by militants in an apparent effort to intimidate them. Many went into hiding. All agreed to speak on the record because their faces and names are known to the Taliban.

Then the threat escalated. Gunmen, on the evening of Jan. 19, took into custody two well-known activists, Tamana Paryani and Parwana Ibrahimkhil, in separate operations. Paryani and her three sisters were abducted from their third-floor apartment, while Ibrahimkhil was taken with her brother-in-law in another part of Kabul, according to human rights activists and the United Nations. Three days earlier, both women protested in the streets against the Taliban. Neither has been heard from since their disappearance.

Taliban fighters have targeted women's rights activists, especially those protesting the Taliban's denial of their basic rights. (Video: Courtesy of Feroza Uruzgani)

"Through the abduction of these women, the Taliban are sending a clear message about how society should function, who is the authority and the power, and how people should obey it," said Sahar Fetrat, assistant researcher for Human Rights Watch's women's rights division. "It's about stopping any kind of activism, any kind of protest against the Taliban."

The targeting of female activists has continued even after a meeting late last month in Oslo, where Taliban representatives met with special envoys from the United States and European nations to seek more humanitarian aid and diplomatic recognition. The envoys, in a statement, urged the Taliban to "stop the alarming increase of human rights violations, including arbitrary detentions (to include recent detentions of women's rights activists), forced disappearances" and other abuses.

On Thursday, the U.N. Assistance Mission in Afghanistan announced in a tweet that two more women's activists reportedly had been detained by the Taliban in the previous 24 hours. At least eight women linked to activism are believed to have vanished in recent weeks, according to protesters.

Khalid Zadran, a Taliban police spokesman, said that the police had not arrested Paryani or Ibrahimkhil, and that "our police didn't threaten anyone through calls or messages." Qari Saeed Khosti, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry, also denied any role, saying, "This issue has nothing to do with us." Two spokesmen for the Taliban's intelligence agency did not respond to requests for comment.

In Oslo, the Taliban's acting foreign minister, Amir Khan Muttaqi, blamed rogue elements inside the Taliban who may have detained the women, according to Afghan media. The incidents, he said, were under investigation.

A video of Paryani has emerged on social media in which she is seen screaming for help, declaring that Taliban fighters are banging on her door. "Help please, the Taliban have come to our home," she's heard saying in the footage. On social media, some Taliban officials and loyalists declared that the video was fake and a ploy to seek asylum abroad.

But an employee at the building where Paryani lived with her three sisters, a short walk from a bustling road, said in an interview that seven to 10 Taliban fighters arrived around 7:30 p.m. and began to bang on her door. "She was screaming and shouting for help," said the employee,who spoke on the condition of anonymity for his own security.

The fighters, he said, then "broke the door down," dragged Paryani and her sisters to the street, and took them around the building on foot. "She is a good person," he said, referring to Paryani. "We don't know why they would arrest her."

A person who identified himself as Ibrahimkhil's brother answered their mother's cellphone. "I can confirm the Taliban arrested them, but I don't know where they are and in what situation they are in," he said. He added that hecould not say more because "the Taliban threatened us not to speak with anyone."

The U.N. human rights agency last week said in a statement that it found the disappearances troubling, part of "a pattern of arbitrary arrests and detentions" of civil society activists, journalists and others.

The authorities should take measures to ensure the activists' "safe and immediate release" and hold those responsible accountable, Ravina Shamdasani, spokeswoman for the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, told journalists in Geneva.

"The lack of clear information on the location and well-being of these and other individuals perpetuates a climate of fear and uncertainty," she said.

Fleeing the Taliban

For weeks, Hemmat has lived in such a climate.

After hanging up the phone, she peered out from the balcony and saw a group of Taliban fighters approaching the house, Hemmat said. She went to a closet and found two burqas and handed one to her activist friend, Shamail Tawana Nasiri. The women put them on.

"We went out the back door, jumped into a taxi and drove to my relative's house," Hemmat recalled.

Both earned college degrees and had jobs in the former government, beneficiaries of two decades of Western presence in Afghanistan that enhanced women's rights and participation in society.

Today, in most areas, girls cannot attend school beyond the sixth grade. With the exception of those working in the health sector and education, women are banned from government jobs. No woman is among the 33 cabinet ministers of the Taliban interim government, which shut down the Ministry of Women's Affairs and turned it into the office of the religious morality police. Women are now required to take a male relative with them on long journeys.

"When we lost our jobs, and after they implemented restrictions on us, that made us go outside and protest," Hemmat said. "Our future was either life or death."

The peaceful protests for equal rights for women were often small, sometimes no more than 20 to 30 women, but they attracted media attention. Taliban fighters would push the participants with their rifle butts. They arrested and beat up local journalists covering the protests.

By last month, the Taliban had adopted harsher tactics. On Jan. 13, Hemmat and Nasiri joined a group of activists calling for an investigation into the abduction of Alia Azizi, a female prison official in Herat who has been missing for more than three months. The protest didn't last long.

"The Taliban tore up our banners," Hemmat said, as Nasiri nodded in agreement. " 'If you don't leave we'll fire on you,' they said as they pointed their guns at us."

The next day, a Taliban loyalist tweeted out a photo of Nasiri and wrote a message addressed to Taliban intelligence officials, urging them to arrest her and other activists. He accused her of sedition, saying that she will organize protests "until the collapse of the system."

Nasiri, 24, stayed inside her home, fearful of being arrested.

Then, on Jan. 19, Paryani and Ibrahimkhil disappeared.

"When I saw the video of Tamana crying and calling for help, I felt hopeless," Nasiri recalled. "I couldn't sleep that night. I kept looking out the window thinking the Taliban will come to my house and arrest me."

On Jan. 25, as the Oslo talks were taking place, Nasiri felt more confident about leaving her house. She went to Hemmat's house for tea. That's when their worst fears came true.

Nowadays, they keep a very low profile.

"We are still hiding," Hemmat said.

'They harassed and beat us'

Sidika Tariq, 27, was hit in the back with the butt of a gun during a recent protest, she said. The Taliban, she added, warned the women: "We are an Islamic government. Your demands are illegal."

Later, on Jan. 29, she was on her way to Kabul University to speak with another activist. Gunmen stopped her and demanded that she get into their truck.

"They threatened me with their guns," Tariq said. "They were pushing me and saying 'Come with us.' I was screaming and shouting. I beat them with my bag."

A crowd soon gathered. The gunmen released her and left. She said she wasn't sure who they were, though she suspects they were Taliban.

Feroza Uruzgani, 37, a mother of four with a master's degree, was with Paryani and Ibrahimkhil at their last protest on Jan. 16. About 25 women had gathered to march toward Kabul University.

A large contingent of Taliban fighters, she said, was present, as if the militants had learned about their plans. As they marched, some fighters pointed their guns at the protesters. Human Rights Watch reported that some were calling the women "puppets of the West" and "whores."

"They sprayed gas on us," Uruzgani recalled. "They harassed and beat us. They shocked protesters with electricity sticks."

Human Rights Watch researchers said the chemical substance was probably pepper spray.

After the abductions, Uruzgani has left her home twice, covered up in sunglasses and a headscarf. She has deleted from her phone most videos of protests, in case she gets stopped by the Taliban. Sometimes, she removes her sim card and shuts down her phone, worried that the militants are able to tap her conversations.

"We are psychologically under pressure," said Uruzgani, who lost her job at a nonprofit working to assist women when the Taliban entered Kabul.

Nevertheless, all of the activists interviewed said they want to continue to fight for their rights. Some have held news conferences inside their houses with a handful of journalists. Others have taken to social media to defy the Taliban.

Since Jan. 16, there have been no street protests, the activists said.

All said they feel abandoned by the world. Denunciations from the United Nations and Western officials have done nothing to prevent the Taliban from targeting female activists. More tangible pressure needs to be applied, they said, such as refusing to meet or talk with Taliban officials about diplomatic recognition or humanitarian funding, denying them legitimacy until they improve their treatment of women.

"We have learned from our protests," said Nafisa Bahar, 29, a leading activist. "If we don't have strong support from the international community, our movement will not be effective. We will have more victims if we continue this way."
Read more: A popular Uzbek commander fought for the Taliban for more than two decades. He was arrested anyway. Along Afghanistan's 'highway of death,' the bombs are gone but suffering has deepened Taliban wages campaign of targeted killings against former members of Afghan security forces

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Faced with disappearances, beatings and intimidation, Afghanistan's women's rights activists go quiet on the streets

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
KABUL - It had been six days since the two women's rights activists were abducted. Now, Taliban fighters were on Masooma Hemmat's street, searching for her. She was inside her house, along with another activist, when a neighbor called to warn her. When Hemmat heard the word "Taliban," she hung up in fear.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Taliban forces have fired pepper spray at a group of women protesting in Afghanistan's capital to demand rights to work and education.

Since seizing control of the country by force in August, the Taliban authorities have imposed creeping restrictions on Afghans, especially on women.

About 20 women gathered in front of Kabul University on Sunday, chanting "equality and justice" and carrying banners that read "women's rights, human rights", an AFP correspondent reported.

The protest was later dispersed by the Taliban fighters, who arrived at the scene in several vehicles, three of the protesters told AFP.

"When we were near Kabul University three Taliban vehicles came, and fighters from one of the vehicles used pepper spray on us," said one woman, who asked not to be named for security reasons. "My right eye started to burn. I told one of them: 'Shame on you,' and then he pointed his gun at me."

Two other protesters said that one of the women had to be taken to hospital after the spray caused an allergic reaction in her eyes and face.

An AFP correspondent saw a fighter confiscate a mobile phone from a man who was filming the demonstration.

The hardline Islamist group have banned unsanctioned protests and have frequently intervened to forcefully break up rallies demanding rights for women.

The Taliban authorities have blocked female public sector employees from returning to work, many secondary schools have still not reopened for girls and public universities are shut. Long-distance trips for women who are not accompanied by a close male relative have been banned.

The authorities have also issued guidelines that prevent television channels from broadcasting serials featuring female actors.

Many women are living in hiding, fearful of a regime notorious for human rights abuses during the Taliban's first stint in power between 1996 and 2001.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Taliban forces pepper-spray women's rights protesters in Kabul

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Taliban forces have fired pepper spray at a group of women protesting in Afghanistan's capital to demand rights to work and education. Since seizing control of the country by force in August, the Taliban authorities have imposed creeping restrictions on Afghans, especially on women.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.

For years, under multiple presidents of both parties, the immigration court system has been something of a mess, struggling with a huge backlog of cases that has just seemed to snowball and snowball, sometimes keeping individuals in legal limbo for several years. Now new data shows the backlog of cases in immigration court has reached the highest level ever-at almost 1.6 million, according to a recent report from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University. And it's not just that more cases are being added because more people are trying to either request asylum or enter the US illegally. Changing politics actually have a lot to do with it, and it's been a constant challenge for immigration judges, lawyers, and immigrants themselves to survive the whiplash.
Each judge would have to hear more than 2,800 cases to get the pipeline to zero, and that's if no new cases were added. But, of course, that's not the reality.
While talking about court backlogs can seem abstract or too in the weeds, each of these cases has a person's future at stake; it can determine whether someone gets deported, is granted asylum, is released from a detention center, or is given a green card. In short, each case determines if someone can plant roots. An immigration attorney tweeted this week that his client had waited four years for his first hearing, which was set for February 2, 2022, but had now been moved to April 2025. In light of the overwhelming new numbers, I recently spoke with people who work in immigration court to help unpack how we got here and how we could possibly fix this seemingly intractable problem. Here, I break down what's going on with the courts in what I hope is the least wonky way possible.

The size of the backlog is breaking records-and so is the pace at which it's growing

To put the 1.6 million cases in perspective, the backlog is split between approximately 560 judges hearing cases at 70 immigration courts throughout the United States and its territories. Each judge would have to hear more than 2,800 cases to get the pipeline to zero, and that's if no new cases were added. But, of course, that's not the reality-and based on the data recently released by TRAC, many more cases are going to be added soon.

"A disturbing new trend has emerged during the Biden administration that demands attention," the TRAC report said. "The growth of the backlog has been accelerating at a breakneck pace." The quarterly growth in the number of pending cases between October and December 2021 is the largest on record, adding almost 140,000 new cases and far exceeding any three-month increase even in the Trump administration, when the backlog grew at a rate faster than in the previous two administrations. "These findings suggest that the Immigration Courts are entering a worrying new era of even more crushing caseloads," the report explained. "All the more concerning since no attempt at a solution has yet been able to reverse the avalanche of cases that immigration judges now face."

According to TRAC, the partial court shutdowns during the pandemic havecontributed to the backlog's growth. But the main contributor in recent months is the "deluge of new cases filed by the Department of Homeland Security." If new cases continue to grow at this pace, "the court will receive 800,000 new cases-at least 300,000 more than the annual total the court has ever received during its existence." Frustratingly, the people I spoke with didn't know why this was, and DHS did not respond to a request for comment.

Immigration court is not like the courtrooms in Law & Order

A key reason why we ended up here in the first place, immigration judge Mimi Tsankov told me, is that judges in immigration court do not operate like most other judges. "People have this perception about what they see on TV where they likely see judges who have a lot of power in the courtroom," Tsankov said. "We don't have the same kind of power."

Unlike the judges you usually think about, immigration judges are employees of the Department of Justice and the courts are overseen by the Executive Office for Immigration Review, under the US attorney general.

Tsankov is a judge in the New York immigration court and spoke to me in her capacity as president of the immigration judges union, the National Association of Immigration Judges (NAIJ). She explained that judges can't control what cases they see or in what order. They have no say in who their clerks are and what their staff should be working on. "Our managers can say, 'We gave you staff person X, but we need that person to work on a project for three weeks,'" she said. This often translates into missing or delayed filings, judges not getting the right documents on a case before a hearing, or attorneys not getting their questions answered or their messages returned, which leads to delays.
"People have this perception about what they see on TV where they likely see judges who have a lot of power in the courtroom. We don't have the same kind of power."
Dockets are determined by politicians, not judges

Another reason judges can't finish their cases is that the priorities in their dockets change every time there's a new president in the White House. Tsankov explained it this way: "If I have 2,700 cases that are assigned to me and I have a way I'd like to schedule them out over the next three years, because I don't control my docket, a manager can come along and say, 'Sorry judge, we're going to take six months worth of your cases and we're going to put those at the end of your docket and now we're going to give you six months worth of new cases.' And of course none of them have attorneys yet so that causes major delays in trying to resolve the cases that are constantly being shifted around."

Since the courts fall under the executive branch, cases get shifted before they're completed because "each new administration that comes into power has their own priorities. That person decides what the laws and the priorities are going to be," Tsankov noted. So one president can choose to prioritize the cases of, let's say, asylum seekers who have been waiting for years in the United States, while a new administration can direct the DOJ to instead front load and try to quickly close the cases of people who have just been apprehended at the border. Further complicating this setup, a judge's ruling can also be appealed by DHS or the attorney general can even overrule a judge.

In late January, Tsankov spoke in a congressional hearing with the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship in support of an independent immigration court, along with representatives from the Federal Bar Association and the American Bar Association. Tsankov said that the DOJ's control over the courts "has yielded extreme pendulum swings" that have judges "reeling as they navigate their judicial responsibilities on the one hand and heavy political scrutiny."

She's not the first to say this. For several years now, the NAIJ has been asking for independence from the DOJ so judges can be free of political pressures. Not only has their request not been granted, the Trump administration actually went after the judge's union-asking the Federal Labor Relations Authority in 2019 to decertify it. The union has been in existence since 1979. Just last month the FLRA voted to strip the union of its certification, something the NAIJ is planning to appeal. Tsankov called this a "union busting effort by a politically minded group that really wants to silence the immigration judges."

"I don't understand the threat that the organization presents," she added. "We are calling for a good governance solution."

There is a problem of resources, resources, and more resources

There seems to be a disconnect in the US immigration system between the enforcement side and the judicial side, as longtime immigration judge Dana Marks brought up in an NPR interview last year. The budgets for the DHS agencies that put people in immigration court proceedings (Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement) are astronomical and just keep growing, but the budget increases to immigration courts have not grown at a matching pace. In recent years, both the Trump and the Biden administrations have added more judges to the courts to help clear the backlog. But more judges alone can't make a significant dent without more court staff, not to mention consistent political priorities.
The issue is boththe lack of resources and the misallocation of resources-like not having enough laptops to hold virtual court hearings outside of courtrooms during the pandemic.
As Tsankov told me, the issue is boththe lack of resources and the misallocation of resources. And this manifests in ways that seem mundane but have significant impact: It's not having the right staff to answer the phones and respond to voicemails, or to sort mail that is full of documents relevant to people's cases; it's also not having enough laptops for judges to hold virtual court hearings outside of their courtrooms during the pandemic. Tsankov said there are only about 100 laptops available among all the judges, meaning only 20 percent of judges can hold court virtually.

The bureaucratic nightmare for judges is equally felt by immigration lawyers, like Florida-based Chelsea Nowel. She told me she constantly struggles to communicate with the court clerks, get status updates on her cases, and more. It's like having a sentenced case "run in a traffic court," she said.

The long wait times create several layers of "chaos"

The time it takes to resolve immigration cases is a challenge that compounds so many of the other challenges in the system. Changes in immigration law "happen constantly and sometimes without warning," Nowel told me. Someone may be preparing their case for years but is now no longer eligible. "We saw this a lot during the previous administration, if their case had happened sooner they may have been approved, but now all of the sudden they're going to be denied." But at this point, they've already sometimes waited years in the system.

Immigration court is "absolute chaos," as Nowel put it.

At the individual level, the massive backlog creates "a ton of extended anxiety and fear," Nowel added. Waiting so long to close immigration cases means that her clients are "never truly settled, they're never confident, they don't know what's going to happen next." She said they have to deal with unpredictable changes and last-minute cancellations that take an emotional toll, especially on asylum seekers. This, then, makes their cases harder to adjudicate. "Trauma records different in your memory" as time passes, she said, meaning some people can end up losing details over the years regarding what happened to them, or they're less able to talk about their trauma because they've had to bury it for so long.

One of her cases for a Central American asylum seeker has been rescheduled three times and has been pending for five years, a timeline that is not uncommon. The most "egregious" wait time she has come across is the case of a Palestinian asylum seeker that has been pending for 20 years. "They've had children who are US citizens and who have gone to college," she said. The case started in 2003 and got stuck in other branches of DHS before getting caught up in the court backlog, "and they still have not had a court hearing date."

So, what can be done about this mess?

When I asked Nowel why the general public should care about how US immigration courts are run, she argued that the backlog can be seen as another form of family separation: "People were very outraged when they heard about the separation of children and families. This is a similar situation in which families are not able to settle down to make a life for themselves or to be assured that they will not be returned to locations where these horrific and traumatic experiences have happened because of this extensive backlog."
"Families are not able to settle down to make a life for themselves or to be assured that they will not be returned to locations where these horrific and traumatic experiences have happened because of this extensive backlog."
And aside from asylum cases, the backlog affects people who are about to be legal permanent residents, or who are spouses of US citizens who could have gotten their green cards in just a few months, but instead it took a few years-things that Nowel said "could be cleared up really quickly."

So let's start with what many see as a crucial first step: free immigration courts from under the DOJ. This would be a huge move to "fix the system," according to Tsankov, the NAIJ, the Federal Bar Association, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, dozens of human rights organizations, and others judges who have spoken out over the years. What they propose is to create what's known as an Article I court, which, with congressional approval, would work independently-potentially similar to the US Tax Courts. Doing this, supporters say, would allow judges to manage their own case loads, oversee their staff and resources, and act independently from whatever the White House immigration policy is on any given year.

Recently, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), chair of the Judiciary Committee's immigration and citizenship subcommittee, introduced a bill that would remove immigration courts from control of the DOJ and the attorney general. The Rule of Law Act of 2022 immediately received a very warm welcome from immigrant rights groups, legal experts, the Federal Bar Association, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, and the NAIJ. The bill would also set hiring standards that would require immigration judges to have at least 10 years experienceas attorneys and prior experience with immigration law specifically. (Under the Trump administration, many judges were appointed despite having no immigration law experience.)

Another important change that would help with the backlog and overall due process would be to provide lawyers for every person going through immigration court proceedings. The majority of immigrants navigate the system without representation, even though, for decades, human rights groups, international nonprofits, lawyers, and immigrants themselves have been asking for guaranteed legal representation. The immigration system as a whole is incredibly complex even for people who have lawyers, and inconceivably daunting for those who don't. Unlike in other legal proceedings, if you can't afford an attorney, one won't be provided to you in this court. "Those who appear in Immigration Court are often uneducated in our language, culture and law but are nevertheless required to present their claims unaided, while the DHS is represented by skilled government attorneys," NAIJ has said. "This challenge becomes much more difficult when a respondent is detained."

These steps alone could make a big difference in the future of immigration cases, though Nowel pointed out that to really lower the backlog, there still needs to be more immigration judges and more courtrooms. Until then, Tsankov stressed how important it is that judges have the time to listen carefully and review every piece of evidence, so immigrants "know that the system is a fair one and that they have a real shot."

"By law we are required to give them due process and we take that responsibility very seriously," Tsankov said. "Some of them may not be eligible for the relief but they need to feel that there is a humane process."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
More immigrants are waiting in legal limbo than ever before. Why is it so hard to fix the backlog in the courts?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter. For years, under multiple presidents of both parties, the immigration court system has been something of a mess, struggling with a huge backlog of cases that has just seemed to snowball and snowball, sometimes keeping individuals in legal limbo for several years.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Getty Images

This story was originally reported by NBC 7's sister station, Telemundo 20. To read the article in Spanish, click here.

Feb. 14 is almost around the corner and though it's often associated with hearts, love and all things romance, it will have a special meaning for immigrants in the U.S. thanks to a campaign that encourages them to stop their production and consumption activities on that day.

The "A Day Without Immigrants" campaign aims to create political pressure in Congress, calling on the country's leaders to create an immigration reform that would guarantee a status to the nation's more than 11 million undocumented immigrants.

"We are not going to school. We are not going to spend," a post from the campaign read. "Instead, we will take to the streets peacefully to raise our voices."

The purpose of the online-launched campaign, it says, is to make the government realize it is time for immigration reform.

"This is going to be absolute. Is this going to make Congress act? No, not immediately," said immigration attorney Haim Vásquez.

A rally for the campaign, organized by Carlos Eduardo Espina, is scheduled for Monday at 10 a.m. outside the White House and in all major cities. Immigrants are encouraged to stop their activities for a day in support of the initiative.

These types of protests have been held in the past, "and it is done to try to create an importance of the immigrant people in the United States and how it affects the workforce," Vásquez added.

The Internet has helped the message circulate. On Facebook, the group "A Day Without Immigrants" reached 60,000 members.

"The contributions of immigrants in this country can be seen everywhere. From those who harvest fruits and vegetables, to those who build houses, to those who develop innovative technological products, such as Tesla cars," said Daniel Perez Listón, Professor of Finance at the University of St. Thomas.

According to the organizer's posts, Espina said he supported President Joe Biden's 2020 presidential campaign when he promised: "to work with Congress to create a road map to citizenship for the nearly 11 million people who have been living in our country and strengthening it for years."

After a year into the presidency and not seeing these changes materialize, Espina said he has withdrawn his support.

According to Perez Listón, the impact of the campaign could be greater due to the pandemic.

"We are short on employees, so it could have a greater impact than in previous years," he said.

In the U.S., 14% of the population was born in another country. Of that total, 31 million immigrants are documented, while nearly 12 million are not authorized to stay in the country.

"Of those 11 million, some 7 to 8 million of them work in the labor force, without benefits," said Perez Listón, who added that the Infrastructure Construction project included an immigration element. "But unfortunately, the Senate parliamentarian has removed any possibility that this part of immigration enters into that bill because it is not economic, she has determined it that way."

Organizers will see on Monday what dimension the campaign reaches and if it resonates with the Biden administration and the Congress.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'A Day Without Immigrants' Campaign Organized to Call for Immigration Reform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A campaign calling on Congress and the White House to enact a new immigration reform is encouraging immigrants to stop all labor on Monday to show the nation's leaders how their important their roles in the country are and how they're needed for success.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A new Statistics Canada study shows immigrant children have a higher postsecondary education rate, and make more money after their mid-20s than the overall Canadian population.

The study is based on 2019 income tax data from the Longitudinal Immigration Database (IMDB), which provides a long-term perspective on how immigrant children integrate into Canadian society.

The results show immigrants who came to Canada as children participated in postsecondary education more often than the Canadian population as a whole, with those admitted at younger ages participating the most. Also, children admitted as economic immigrants fared better than the overall Canadian average from age 25 on. Then by age 30, children of sponsored and refugee families had median wages comparable to the overall population. These results were similar to what Stats Can found in a study for the 2018 tax year.

Data from 2019 will contribute to baseline estimates in preparation for future research on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on immigrant children, their adjustment period, and their long-term socioeconomic outcomes in adulthood.
Discover if You Are Eligible for Canadian Immigration
Immigrant kids participation in post-secondary studies

Kids who immigrated to Canada before age 15 had particularly high rates of postsecondary participation. The participation rate was about 70% for 20-year-old immigrants admitted as children, compared with about 59% of the overall Canadian population. At age 25, the participation rate was about 33% for immigrants admitted as children, and about 27% for the overall Canadian population.

As immigrant kids landed at older ages, their participation in postsecondary education generally decreased. In 2019, nearly 77% of 20-year-old immigrants admitted before age five went into postsecondary studies. The participation rate dipped to about 72% for those admitted between ages five to nine, and nearly 64% for those admitted between the ages of 10 to 14 years. Various factors affect postsecondary participation, such as academic preparation and knowledge of official languages.

Postsecondary participation among child immigrants also appears to be related to their parents' socioeconomic characteristics. As a result of Canada's selection process for economic immigrants, most of these parents already have some postsecondary education at the time of their admission. Because of this, immigrants admitted as children of economic immigrant families have much higher postsecondary education participation than children admitted under other immigration categories, especially during early adulthood.

Children of economic immigrants saw a postsecondary participation rate of more than 75% at age 20, compared to children of sponsored families at about 61%, and the overall population of Canada's rate at nearly 59%. Refugee children had the lowest participation in postsecondary education at a rate of nearly 54%.
2019 postsecondary education participation for immigrants admitted as children

Economic class children report higher earnings

At age 20, immigrants who came to Canada as children had lower median wages ($10,900) than the overall Canadian population ($12,900). The study suggests this is because at this age, immigrants were most likely enrolled in postsecondary studies. At age 25, median wages of immigrants went up to $31,500, surpassing the overall Canadian population at $30,290.

However, at age 25, economic immigrant children had about 11% higher median wages ($33,700) than the overall Canadian population ($30,290) of the same age. Median wages of 25-year-old immigrants who came to Canada as children of sponsored families were lower than the overall Canadian average.

At age 30, immigrants admitted as children of economic immigrants had median wages of $55,500, about 29% higher than the overall Canadian population at $42,940. Children admitted with refugee families were making slightly more than the Canadian average at $43,200, and children of sponsored families were making about $41,000.
2019 median wages of immigrants admitted as children by age and immigration category

Discover if You Are Eligible for Canadian Immigration © CIC News All Rights Reserved. Visit CanadaVisa.com to discover your Canadian immigration options.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Immigrant children become more educated and higher paid than Canadian average: study

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new Statistics Canada study shows immigrant children have a higher postsecondary education rate, and make more money after their mid-20s than the overall Canadian population. The study is based on 2019 income tax data from the Longitudinal Immigration Database (IMDB), which provides a long-term perspective on how immigrant children integrate into Canadian society.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
As Officials Look Away, Hate Speech in India Nears Dangerous Levels

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Activists and analysts say calls for anti-Muslim violence — even genocide — are moving from the fringes to the mainstream, while political leaders keep silent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In early December, the United States announced a diplomatic boycott of the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing, citing China's "egregious human rights abuses and atrocities" in the northwestern region of Xinjiang. Though American athletes will still compete in the Games, no U.S. government officials will attend the global gathering. Australia, the United Kingdom and Canada also plan to join the diplomatic boycott. As some critics have pointed out, the gesture is largely symbolic, calling attention to the issue without taking punitive action against the Games' host.

China's repression of the Uyghurs, a Muslim minority group based in Xinjiang, has prompted widespread condemnation by the international community in recent years. The Trump and Biden administrations both placed economic sanctions on China for its treatment of the Uyghurs. Congress has been busy, too, passing legislation that bars imports from Xinjiang unless they're proven to have been made without forced labor. The Asian superpower, for its part, denies any wrongdoing.

The Olympics represent perhaps the most visible battleground for political maneuvers like the planned diplomatic boycott. In 1980, the U.S. boycotted the Moscow Summer Olympics, protesting the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan the previous year. Experts at the time called into question the effectiveness of the boycott, pointing out that it deprived American athletes of the chance to compete while having little effect on Soviet policies. Nevertheless, in response, the Soviets and 13 other communist countries boycotted the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles, hosting a separate set of so-called Friendship Games. Decades earlier, in 1936, human rights activists unsuccessfully campaigned for the U.S. to boycott the Berlin Summer Olympics due to the Nazis' ongoing persecution of German Jews.

The story of what the Uyghurs have experienced in Xinjiang, from detainment to mass surveillance to forced sterilization, has trickled out slowly due to the stringent control China exerts over its media. But over the past ten years, as documents have been leaked to the press and more Uyghur activists have escaped the country, a bleak picture has emerged, leading some observers-including the U.S.-to classify China's ongoing human rights abuses as genocide. Here's what you need to know about the Uyghurs ahead of the Olympics' opening ceremony on Friday, February 4.

Who are the Uyghurs?

Tracing their ancestry to the sixth century C.E., when they migrated to the Mongolian steppes, the Uyghurs are a Turkic people whose language is closest to Uzbek. Islam is the group's dominant religion; around the 16th century, Uyghur religious leaders founded several Islamic city-states in what was then referred to as East Turkestan. It wasn't until 1884 that the region was made an official province of China and renamed Xinjiang, which translates to "New Frontier."

When the Qing Dynasty collapsed in 1911, several Uyghur leaders led successful attempts to create independent Muslim republics in western China. But with the rise of the Communist Party in 1949, China officially claimed Xinjiang once more.

The Chinese government has encouraged members of the country's ethnic majority, the Han, to settle in Xinjiang since 1949. At the time, Han Chinese people made up just 6.7 percent of the region's population. By 1978, that number had jumped to 41.6 percent. Today, the 12 million Uyghurs living in Xinjiang still represent a slight majority, but the Han population is in the majority in many cities, including the capital of Urumqi. Though Xinjiang is the largest region in the country and the largest economy among non-coastal provinces, the majority of Uyghurs still live in rural areas and have been largely excluded from this development.

When did China begin its crackdown on Xinjiang?

Muslim Uyghurs have faced prohibitions on their religious and cultural practices since the formation of the Chinese Communist Party in 1949. In light of this oppression, Uyghurs began migrating out of the region as early as the 1960s. Periodic calls for Uyghur independence from China gained traction in the 1990s, when the collapse of the Soviet Union led to the formation of independent Central Asian states like Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. No equivalent liberation arrived for the Uyghurs.

The 1990s also marked the beginning of China categorizing Muslim Uyghur activists as terrorists. The country's Communist Party grew increasingly worried after the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan in 1996. Although several hundred Uyghur fighters in Afghanistan had some relationship with Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in 1998, there is little evidence of widespread extremism in Xinjiang, notes scholar Sean Roberts. Fears of domestic attacks increased after 9/11, when the U.S. adopted the rhetoric of the global " War on Terror."

In July 2009, ethnic riots erupted in Xinjiang's capital of Urumqi, resulting in the deaths of nearly 200 people and many more injuries. The Chinese government reported that the majority of the dead were Han Chinese, while Uyghur groups claimed that the number of Uyghur casualties was drastically undercounted. Either way, the 2009 event marked a turning point in the Communist Party's behavior toward the Uyghurs, according to Australian scholar Michael Clarke, editor of the forthcoming book The Xinjiang Emergency: Exploring the Causes and Consequences of China's Mass Detention of Uyghurs.

"The hardline taken today builds on historical precedence within the party's governance of Xinjiang," Clarke says. "They've always carried out anti-religious campaigns and controlled ethnic minority cultural expression. What's been different is the intensity and duration of the campaigns to stamp out what they see as being the roots of deviancy."

China has a history of targeting ethnic minorities, including Tibetans and African immigrants. But the Communist Party's stated reason for taking action against the Uyghurs is the purported threat of terrorism and separatism, says Naomi Kikoler, director of the Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.

"For the past few decades, the Chinese government has been targeting the Uyghurs on the basis of ethnic and religious identity," Kikoler explains. "You'll see that people are being detained for the expression of their religious identity, for having worn their hair in a particular way, for having been caught praying."

What is happening to the Uyghurs?

In 2013, China adopted the Belt and Road Initiative, an enormous infrastructure project aimed at connecting East Asia and Europe. In order for the project to be successful, government officials believed, the westernmost province of Xinjiang had to be under tight control.

As part of its plan to curb resistance in the region, China launched the Strike Hard Campaign Against Violent Terrorism in 2014. The initiative led to an increased amount of surveillance, with roadblocks and checkpoints, confiscation of Uyghurs' passports, and the introduction of " people's convenience cards " that restricted Uyghurs' freedom of movement.

Around the same time, the state began advocating intermarriage between Han Chinese and Uyghur people. This was only the first step in diluting the Uyghur population in Xinjiang. Between 2015 and 2018, more than two million new Han residents moved to the province. Authorities began fining Uyghur families with too many children but failed to enforce restrictions on Han families to the same extent. (China rolled back its infamous one-child policy in 2016, upping the limit to two children and, more recently, even three.) Researchers later discovered that the government subjected hundreds of thousands of Turkic Muslim women to forcible intrauterine device (IUD) insertions, sterilizations and abortions. Though Xinjiang is home to just 1.8 percent of China's population, in 2018, it accounted for 80 percent of all IUD insertions in the country, according to research conducted by British scholar Jo Smith Finley.

In 2017, China began building massive detention centers described by government officials as reeducation camps. The men and women detained in these camps are brought in for seemingly innocuous behavior: praying, attending religious weddings, visiting a mosque. Totaling more than 380 at their peak, the centers have held between one and three million Uyghurs in total, making them the largest mass internment of an ethnic-religious minority since World War II.

Initially, the Chinese government insisted that the facilities were for vocational training. In 2019, officials claimed that all of the camps were being closed down. But satellite images taken in 2020 corroborated reports of their continued existence, contradicting China's assertion that everyone detained at the camps had " graduated " after successful reeducation.

"For many people, we simply do not know where they are or how long they've been detained," Kikoler says. "One thing we have not seen is any form of mass release. Even with the increased public scrutiny on what's happening in Xinjiang, there have been no large-scale releases of individuals being detained, nor has there been a robust effort to inform families of the whereabouts of their loved ones."

Leaked documents written in 2017 and published by the New York Timesin 2019 show that the Chinese government used databases powered by artificial intelligence (A.I.) to conduct warrantless searches, track popular phone apps and monitor people through facial recognition technology. The records also indicate that police rounded up 15,683 "suspicious persons" in one seven-day period in June 2017. Elsewhere in the region, security forces detained around one in six adult residents of a single village. Children whose parents are arrested are not allowed to stay with relatives; instead, they are forcibly removed to state institutions and full-time boarding schools.

Survivors of the detention facilities say that prisoners are subjected to torture, rape and beatings. An unknown number of people are thought to have been killed in the camps, either as a result of abuse or medical neglect, but exact numbers are difficult to come by.

Uyghur activists living abroad have noted that family members still in Xinjiang are punished when the expats speak out about conditions in the region. In 2018, Uyghur American activist Rushan Abbas attended an event in Washington, D.C., vocally denouncing China's behavior. Shortly thereafter, Chinese authorities detained both her sister and aunt.

Forced labor awaits many who survive the reeducation camps. According to a report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), more than 80,000 Uyghurs were transferred from Xinjiang to factories across China between 2017 and 2019. At these factories, they were subjected to constant surveillance, a ban on religious activities and ideological training outside of work hours.

The Xinjiang provincial government pays local governments a price per head to organize labor assignments. More than 80 companies benefit from this forced labor, including Adidas, Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Calvin Klein and BMW. The Uyghurs being placed in factories or farms are essentially enslaved, Kikoler says. They have no freedom of movement or rights to visit family, and they face surveillance and further reeducation.

Is China committing genocide?

The United Nations' definition of genocide is broken into five parts: killing members of a specific group, causing serious bodily or mental harm, imposing measures to prevent births, forcibly transferring children from one group to another, and creating conditions to destroy the group. These criteria distinguish genocide somewhat from " cultural genocide," in which the language, religion and cultural practices of a group are outlawed.

According to Smith Finley, scholars have long debated whether China's human rights abuses fit the definition of genocide. But that stance has started to change. "One year ago, not all scholars in Xinjiang studies agreed that the situation could or should be called a genocide," she wrote in the Journal of Genocide Researchin 2020. "In recent months, however, more have shifted closer to this position, and others beyond our discipline have joined in."

Clarke argues that cultural genocide is a more accurate description for China's systematic campaign against the Uyghurs-but emphasizes that this designation shouldn't be taken any less seriously. He points to the history of cultural genocide in Australia, North America and Latin America, where Indigenous peoples were forced into abusive boarding schools, banned from speaking their languages or practicing their religions, and treated as second-class citizens. The effects of those policies continue to impact Native communities today.

"The cultural genocide framework is much more clearly justified in terms of the evidence we have, and if you can make that case clearly, that's something that states like Australia, Japan, the U.S. and Canada could use to gain more traction internationally," Clarke says.

Kikoler understands why observers might prefer to describe the situation in Xinjiang as cultural genocide, but she points out that the term-unlike genocide-has no legal definition.

"When many people think of genocide, they think of mass killing, but it's important to note that within the genocide convention, the restrictions on the ability to have children, the transferring of children away from families, those are all components," Kikoler says.

How has the international community responded?

In January 2021, then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared that the Chinese government was committing genocide and crimes against humanity-a statement later reiterated by current Secretary of State Anthony Blinken. Between February and June 2021, the governments of Canada, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Belgium, the U.K. and the Netherlands all passed motions either declaring that China was committing genocide against the Uyghurs or that the serious risk of genocide existed.

Early last year, the European Union (E.U.), Canada, the U.S. and the U.K. organized joint sanctions against senior officials in Xinjiang, issuing travel bans and asset freezes. China responded by denying all the allegations and issuing its own round of sanctions against a number of individuals in the E.U., including Smith Finley.

Beyond sanctions and political moves like the diplomatic boycott of the Olympics, Kikoler argues that the international community needs to get creative in its response to China.

"This is a vexing challenge," she says. "What do you do when [China is] one of the world's superpowers who can use the U.N. Security Council as a shield, when they can use the Belt and Road Initiative to pay off not just neighboring countries but countries in Europe?"

Kikoler suggests a concerted effort to stop importing resources from Xinjiang, such as the polysilicon used to make solar panels. She adds that individuals must recognize that they can take action, too.

"Even though we may never have met someone who is Uyghur, we may never have been to China, each of us owns a t-shirt that likely has cotton that comes from Xinjiang and was likely made by slave labor," Kikoler says. "I don't think we often talk about the level of proximity that we sometimes have to acts of potential genocide."

What might happen next?

Clarke worries that China's brutal treatment of the Uyghurs will continue indefinitely, as the policies in place are a "cornerstone" of President Xi Jinping's administration. The Chinese Communist Party has started to use similar categorizations of "terrorism" and "separatism" for democracy activists in Hong Kong.

What's more, the Chinese surveillance technology used to closely monitor Uyghurs in Xinjiang has been exported to other authoritarian governments around the world, including Ecuador andVenezuela. (That said, companies in the U.S. and other European nations have also shared this type of technology, including with China itself.)

Whether the U.S. and its allies will continue to impose sanctions on China for its treatment of the Uyghurs remains to be seen. But China's condemnation of individuals who speak out against the treatment of Uyghurs-"lies and disinformation," in the communist government's words-indicates that the country's leaders appear poised to continue denying or defending their behavior.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is China Committing Genocide Against the Uyghurs?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Muslim minority group faces mass detention and sterilization-human rights abuses that sparked the U.S.' diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Olympics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pitt Instructor Apologizes After Comparing Mask-Wearing To The Holocaust

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A University of Pittsburgh professor is saying sorry after reportedly making controversial comments in the classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The uproar over Whoopi Goldberg's remarks about the Holocaust has catalyzed somber reflections by many American Jews about not only the legacy of the Holocaust but anti-Jewish discrimination in the United States and their sense of a collective identity.

The actor and TV host swiftly apologized for saying this week on ABC's "The View" that the genocide was not about race but rather "man's inhumanity to man," noting in subsequent remarks that she had failed to acknowledge that the Nazis considered Jews an inferior race.

As Goldberg serves a two-week suspension from the show, a range of Jewish leaders have noted the complexity of describing how race fits into the overall concept of Jewish identity. It entails a mix of religion, nationality, ethnicity, culture and history, said Greg Schneider, executive vice president of the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, a New York-based group that seeks restitution for Holocaust victims.

"But the hatred of the Jew is unfortunately not as complicated. It's deep-seated. It's millennia old. We don't seem to have a cure for it," he said. "So it's not so easy to put a label, to put a name on what it is to be Jewish. But it's certainly easy to see what it is to be antisemitic."

Schneider and others expressed hope that the episode reminds people that Jews have historically experienced extensive discrimination in America, such as being barred from purchasing homes in certain areas, excluded from country clubs and denied admission to some universities.

In the past there even were travel guides for Jews with tips on how to avoid discrimination on the road, guidebooks that preceded the 1936 debut of "The Negro Motorist Green Book," which provided similar advice for African Americans.

Rabbi Noah Farkas, president and CEO of the Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles, recalled growing up in Plano, Texas, where the handful of Jewish families, including his own, sometimes experienced antisemitism.

"We never saw ourselves in the same category as any of the white Anglo Southern Baptists," he said. "Although we had white skin, we didn't consider ourselves part of the white culture."

The racial equation has only grown more complex as Jews of color - including African Americans, Hispanics and Asian Americans - account for a growing percentage of the overall Jewish population.

"Jews are multiethnic, multiracial," Farkas said. "We don't consider ourselves just a community of faith."

Farkas said systemic discrimination against Jews in the U.S. has largely faded over the decades, but antisemitism persists and antisemitic violence over the past five years has been at its highest level in decades.

The deadliest incident was the mass shooting in 2018 at Pittsburgh's Tree of Life synagogue, where 11 worshippers from three different congregations were killed by a gunman who railed against Jews and immigrants they helped, according to prosecutors in his pending hate-crimes trial.

Lauren Bairnsfather, director of the Holocaust Center of Pittsburgh, said America has been such "a place of assimilation and opportunity" for Jews that many were blindsided by the massacre.

"People didn't understand how this was possible to happen in the United States because there's this illusion of total safety," said Bairnsfather, whose center hopes to share space with Tree of Life in a renovated synagogue as a statement against antisemitism.

"Race is a made-up construct, but racism is very real," she added, noting that Adolf Hitler based his racial laws in Nazi Germany partly on Jim Crow laws targeting African Americans in the U.S.

Jonathan Sarna, professor of American Jewish History at Brandeis University in Waltham, Massachusetts, said that historically, American Jews commonly spoke of themselves as a race - until they saw how the Nazis applied that term as a pseudoscience. Jews then began to speak of themselves as a people or ethnicity, and many accepted the idea that Jews had been absorbed into a larger white majority as had earlier communities such as the Irish.

Thus, Sarna's students, most of them Jewish, had no firsthand experience to prepare them for the Tree of Life shootings or the antisemitic chants by marchers in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017.

"My students, after Pittsburgh, they were in shock," Sarna said. They knew about the Holocaust, "but suddenly stuff that had happened in Europe, they saw here."

While historical awareness of the Holocaust may be common among younger generations of Jews, that's less true of the broader U.S. population. According to the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, 63% of respondents in a 2020 survey of adults under 40 did not know that 6 million Jews were murdered by the Nazis. And 36% thought 2 million or fewer Jews were killed.

Stefanie Seltzer, an 83-year-old Holocaust survivor who as a child was smuggled by her mother out of a ghetto in Poland, has been talking to U.S. students since the mid-1970s about her experiences and said she is alarmed by a pervasive lack of knowledge. In the Goldberg episode, she sees opportunity.

"Maybe it will kick open the door to discussion in school," Seltzer said.

The controversy has added heat to a simmering debate in eastern Tennessee over a recent decision by the McMinn County School Board to withdraw from its curriculum the graphic novel "Maus," a Pulitzer Prize-winning work about the Holocaust. Goldberg made her original remarks during a conversation about the board banning the book.

Like Seltzer, Michael Dzik, executive director of the Jewish Federation of Greater Chattanooga, sees an opportunity to educate the community: With support from other organizations, the federation will host a virtual conversation Monday with "Maus" author Art Spiegelman.

"If we've learned anything from the Holocaust," Dzik said, "we must speak out and take action when we think that there's a wrong out there and what it could lead to."

Farkas, of the Los Angeles Jewish federation, said U.S. Jews should resist letting antisemitism define their identity and strive to live meaningful, joyous lives, including standing in solidarity with other groups who have faced discrimination.

"From slavery and Jim Crow to Japanese interment, America has yet to realize the dreams of so many," he said. "We can all do a better job learning and listening from each other - that is where healing begins."

___

Associated Press writer Holly Meyer contributed to this report.

___

Associated Press religion coverage receives support from the Lilly Endowment through The Conversation U.S. The AP is solely responsible for this content.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
US Jews talk identity, Holocaust after Goldberg's remarks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The uproar over Whoopi Goldberg's remarks about the Holocaust has catalyzed somber reflections by many American Jews about not only the legacy of the Holocaust but anti-Jewish discrimination in the United States and their sense of a collective identity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
American historian and author Deborah Lipstadt poses for a photo on the red carpet on the occasion of the screening of the movie "Denial" at the Rome Film Festival, Oct. 17, 2016. (AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia)

Prominent Holocaust scholar Deborah Lipstadt will appear Tuesday before the Senate for her confirmation hearing to lead the State Department's office that aims to monitor and combat antisemitism. Her hearings are expected to shed light on how U.S. leaders should understand antisemitism in light of attacks in the United States and around the globe.

As Lipstadt appears before the Senate, she is expected to make the case that antisemitism is alive and well.

Her recent book "Antisemitism: Here and Now" goes into who and what she considers antisemitic. "Antisemitism is not the hatred of people who h appen to be Jews. It is hatred of them becaus e they are Jews," she wrote. However, not everyone - including Jews - agrees on what exactly antisemitism is, particularly when it comes to criticism of Israel.

Lipstadt's appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was delayed over some of her past criticism of conservative politicians. But in recent weeks, dozens of Jewish groups have put pressure on the Senate to fill the role, especially in the wake of a recent attack on a synagogue in Colleyville, Tex. Rabbi Charlie Cytron-Walker, who was held hostage during that attack, is set to testify before the House Committee on Homeland Security at the same time as Lipstadt's hearing.

In March 2021, Lipstadt tweeted an article about a statement by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who said he would have been more concerned by the Jan. 6, 2021, mayhem at the Capitol if the rioters been "Black Lives Matter and antifa protesters" instead of Trump supporters. Lipstadt tweeted: "This is white supremacy/nationalism. Pure and simple."

Her criticism has not been limited to conservative politicians, however. She has also criticized Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) for characterizing pro-Israel Americans as making it "okay for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country." Allegations of dual loyalties are "part of the textbook accusations against Jews," Lipstadt told Jewish Insider.

President Biden nominated Lipstadt, a professor of modern Jewish history and Holocaust studies at Emory University, last July. If approved by the Senate, Lipstadt will have the rank of ambassador, unlike her predecessors. She would oversee the State Department's Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, which was created by the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act of 2004 under President George W. Bush. The position of envoy was mostly vacant during President Donald Trump's term.

Lipstadt's role would focus on reporting on antisemitism globally and pressing governments to adopt measures to mitigate antisemitism, but she will be seen as the administration's voice on the issue domestically as well.

Lipstadt has long been widely recognized as a leading authority on antisemitism. Her 1993 book, "Denying the Holocaust," prompted a lawsuit from Holocaust denier David Irving under British libel laws. Lipstadt won after a trial in London. She was portrayed in the 2016 movie, "Denial," which re-creates the trial.

She served as an expert witness during a trial in Charlottesville that led to a verdict against white supremacist and neo-Nazi defendants who marched in 2017 with torches, shouting, "Jews will not replace us!"

Norman Eisen, who was dubbed "ethics czar" when he was special assistant to President Barack Obama for ethics and government reform, said he expects Lipstadt to encounterdebates over the definition of antisemitism.

He said he agrees with an "imperfect" definition adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Association. The IHRA definition includes examples, some of which have been criticized by people on the left as attempts to shut down free speech. Among the IHRA's examples of antisemitism are "applying double standards" to Israel and "claiming that the existence of the State of Israel is a racist endeavor."

"Professor Lipstadt will run into these debates. She's more capable of navigating these issues than almost anyone else," said Eisen, who also served as U.S. ambassador to the Czech Republic from 2011 to 2014. "She's a titan in the field. She's not only written about it, studied and taught the subject for decades, she's fought against antisemitism and for equal treatment for Jews and for all people."

Jews make up 2 percent of the U.S. population and 0.2 percent of the world's population. But according to FBI data, 55 percent of all reported religious bias crimes in the United States in 2020 targeted Jews.

In the United States, a Pew Research Center survey of Jewish Americans between November 2019 and June 2020 found that 53 percent said they personally feel less safe than they did five years ago.

"Do you feel safe going to synagogue?" is part of the regular conversation now among American Jews, said Hadar Susskind, leader of Americans for Peace Now. Many Jewish organizations have removed signs from their buildings and taken addresses off their websites in the past five years, he said.

Susskind is interested in whether the topic of Israel and antisemitism will be brought up in the hearings. The rights group Amnesty International recently said Israel's treatment of Palestinians is a crime against humanity and is illegal under international law, and that the country's "oppression and domination" of Palestinians amounts to apartheid. In response, Israel's foreign minister decried the statement as antisemitic.

"Equating Jews and Israel is wrong, regardless of the direction it's coming from," Susskind said. "We're seeing the weaponization of antisemitism as a way to discredit criticism of Israel policy and shut down discussion on it. When you start to dilute the use of the term ... you're taking the focus away from the very real problem that we're facing."

Rabbi Jill Jacobs, CEO of the rabbinical human rights organization T'ruah, said it's important to call antisemitism what it is: "Antisemitism is hatred or prejudice of Jews as Jews." Antisemitism regularly manifests as conspiracy theories that show up in tropes, such as how Jews supposedly control the world. For example, in the recent attack at the synagogue in Colleyville, Tex., the gunman believed he could have a rabbi call another rabbi to get a prisoner released. But many people still downplay the history of antisemitism across the globe.

"A lot of people think antisemitism has gone away or is not serious," Jacobs said. If their example of antisemitism is the Holocaust, they might say of conspiracy theories, vandalism or physical attacks on Jews, "It's not that serious or it's not a trend," he said.

Jacobs said criticism of Israel can cross the line when people begin to use tropes, such as denying Jewish history or asking student government candidates who are Jewish to declare their stand on Israel.

"If you are thinking about how to criticize Israel, you can substitute another country and see if it would make sense. See if you can put China into the same sentence," she said. "We have to distinguish what makes people uncomfortable and what is actually antisemitic."

Michelle Boorstein contributed to this report.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What counts as antisemitism? Biden nominee Deborah Lipstadt receives confirmation hearing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Prominent Holocaust scholar Deborah Lipstadt will appear Tuesday before the Senate for her confirmation hearing to lead the State Department's office that aims to monitor and combat antisemitism. Her hearings are expected to shed light on how U.S. leaders should understand antisemitism in light of attacks in the United States and around the globe.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A North York middle school has notified parents about two recent antisemitic incidents, including one in which students performed a Nazi salute in front of classmates.

The incidents took place at Charles H. Best Middle School, which is located near Dufferin Street and Finch Avenue.

TDSB spokesperson Sherry Schwartz-Maltz said that in the most recent incident a group of students constructed a swastika out of construction paper, without realizing the full significance of the symbol.

Prior to that, Schwartz-Maltz said, there was another incident about a week ago in which a small group of students performed the Nazi salute in front of a Jewish student.

"These are very, very disturbing incidents and as soon as we found out about it the principal began an investigation but I have to say that it is not the first time that we are seeing swastika graffiti or embracing Nazi ideology at our schools," Schwartz-Maltz, who also chairs the TDSB's Jewish Heritage Committee, said. "When kids see things like Nazi flags unfurled at protests unfortunately it begins to normalize and without education they don't know better and we need to teach them."

Schwartz-Maltz said that there will be "consequences" for the students involved in the alleged antisemitic incidents, however she said that "consequences only do so much."

To that end, she said that the school is working with local community partners to provide all students with a Holocaust education program next week, in which they will hear directly from the descendant of a Holocaust survivor about the meaning behind the swastika.

"These are symbols that they are seeing, they are seeing them on social media, they are seeing them on gaming sites, they are seeing them on the news and it becomes normalized," she said. "That is why it is so very important for us to teach kids what these symbols mean because the swastika is an antisemitic symbol, it is a horrific symbol but mostly it is a universal symbol of hate."

Parents notified in letter

Parents at Charles H. Best Middle School were notified about the antisemitic incidents in a letter that was sent out on Monday.

In it, the principal of the school called the incidents "unacceptable" but stressed that they "are not reflective of who we are and what we stand for as a school community."

Meanwhile, in a statement issued on Tuesday afternoon the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center expressed sadness at the latest incidents, pointing out that they occurred in the Bathurst Manor neighbourhood where a large number of Jewish people, including many Holocaust survivors, live.

"It is extremely disturbing to once again learn of antisemitism rearing its ugly head at a school in Toronto," the statement reads. "At a time of rising antisemitism, it's essential for schools to have the resources to address and prevent such hate incidents and ensure safe spaces for all students. As we see Holocaust awareness diminish, an increase in the use of vile Nazi symbols and the spread of antisemitic rhetoric, especially on social media and gaming platforms, educating students and empowering them to stand up against hate is more critical than ever."

Mayor John Tory also released a statement regarding the situation at Charles H. Best Middle School on Tuesday afternoon, noting that the incidents demonstrate "how much work we still have in front of us to inform and to educate as part of our effort to eradicate antisemitism in all of its forms."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
North York middle school investigating alleged antisemitic incidents

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A North York middle school has notified parents about two recent antisemitic incidents, including one in which students performed a Nazi salute in front of classmates. The incidents took place at Charles H. Best Middle School, which is located near Dufferin Street and Finch Avenue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Brian Flores has sued the NFL and three teams -- the Dolphins, Broncos and Giants -- alleging discrimination regarding his interview processes with Denver and New York and his firing last month by Miami.

The 58-page lawsuit was filed in Manhattan federal court Tuesday and seeks class-action status.

Flores alleges that Dolphins owner Stephen Ross attempted to incentivize him to "tank," or purposely lose games, shortly after he was hired in 2019, with Ross allegedly offering Flores $100,000 for every loss that season. Flores says that as the team won games late in the season, Dolphins general manager Chris Grier told him Ross was "mad" that the on-field success was "compromising [the team's] draft position."

Additionally, Flores alleges that Ross pressured him into recruiting a "prominent quarterback" at the end of the 2019 season, which the coach refused so as not to violate the NFL's tampering rules. Ross then allegedly invited Flores onto a yacht for lunch in the winter of 2020, where he informed him that the quarterback was "conveniently" arriving at the marina for an impromptu meeting.

Flores refused the meeting and left the yacht. Afterward, Flores alleges he was "treated with disdain and held out as someone who was noncompliant and difficult to work with."

Former Miami coach Brian Flores has sued the NFL and 3 teams -- the Dolphins, Giants and Broncos -- alleging in part racism in hiring practices. Among his allegations: Dolphins owner Stephen Ross offered him $100,000 per loss in 2019 to help with the team's draft position and that the Giants and Broncos conducted "sham" in-person interviews with him to comply with the Rooney Rule. The full lawsuit can be found here.

He was fired Jan. 10 despite recording the Dolphins' first back-to-back winning seasons since 2003 (10-6 in 2020, 9-8 in 2021).

Flores also alleged that the Giants interviewed him last month for their head-coaching vacancy for no other reason than compliance with the NFL's Rooney Rule, which requires teams to interview minority candidates for their open positions. The league has amended that rule in recent years and now says teams must hold an in-person interview with at least one external minority candidate for any general manager or head-coach opening.

Flores alleged he spoke with the Giants via Zoom on Jan. 18, prior to the team hiring former Buffalo Bills assistant general manager Joe Schoen as its GM on Jan. 23. He said that the next day Schoen finalized his interview date for Jan. 27, and Giants co-director of player personnel Tim McDonnell texted Flores, saying he hoped he would "come in and win the f-ing job."

However, hours later, Flores' lawsuit alleges, he received a series of text messages from Patriots coach Bill Belichick, under whom Flores worked for 10 years in New England. In those texts, Belichick told Flores he had heard from "Buffalo and NYG that you are their guy."

Flores asked Belichick to clarify whether he meant to talk to him or Brian Daboll, who was also in the running for the Giants' job. Belichick acknowledged his error and informed him that the Giants wanted Daboll.

"Sorry -- I f---ed this up. I double checked and misread the text. I think they are naming Brian Daboll. I'm sorry about that," Belichick allegedly texted.

Flores alleges that his Jan. 27 interview with the Giants -- which satisfied the Rooney Rule, because he was the first minority candidate to interview in-person -- was a "sham." New York hired Daboll, the former Bills offensive coordinator, a day later.

Flores alleges that a similar scenario occurred when he interviewed with the Broncos for their head-coaching job in 2019. Flores says that then-Denver general manager John Elway, among others, arrived to the interview an hour late and hungover -- alleging they had been "drinking heavily the night before."

The Giants, Dolphins and Broncos responded separately to the allegations Tuesday.

The Giants said they were "pleased and confident" with their hiring process.

"We interviewed an impressive and diverse group of candidates," the team said. "The fact of the matter is, Brian Flores was in the conversation to be our head coach until the eleventh hour. Ultimately, we hired the individual we felt was most qualified to be our next head coach."

The Dolphins "vehemently" denied the allegations against them" while noting they are "proud of the diversity and inclusion throughout our organization."

"The implication that we acted in a manner inconsistent with the integrity of the game is incorrect," the team said.

And the Broncos detailed their Jan. 5, 2019, interview with Flores, saying it started promptly at 7:30 a.m. in Providence, Rhode Island, lasted 3½ hours and was conducted with five team executives.

"Pages of detailed notes, analysis and evaluations from our interview demonstrate the depth of our conversation and sincere interest in Mr. Flores as a head coaching candidate," the team said. "Our process was thorough and fair to determine the most qualified candidate for our head coaching position.

"The Broncos will vigorously defend the integrity and values of our organization -- and its employees -- from such baseless and disparaging claims."

Denver ultimately hired Vic Fangio for the position.

In the lawsuit, Wigdor Law LLP, the firm representing Flores, said the coach hopes to "shine a light on the racial injustices that take place inside the NFL." Among the areas Flores said he would like to see addressed:

* Increase influence of Black individuals in hiring

* Increase "the objectivity" of hiring/terminating GMs, head coaches and coordinators

* Increase the number of Black coordinators

* Incentivize hiring/retention of Black GMs, head coaches and coordinators

* Transparency of pay for GMs, head coaches and coordinators

The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages from the NFL, which called the claims "without merit" Tuesday.

"The NFL and our clubs are deeply committed to ensuring equitable employment practices and continue to make progress in providing equitable opportunities throughout our organizations," the league said in a statement. "Diversity is core to everything we do, and there are few issues on which our clubs and our internal leadership team spend more time. We will defend against these claims, which are without merit."

Flores, who turns 41 later this month, had been tied to head-coaching vacancies with the Houston Texans and New Orleans Saints since his firing by the Dolphins. New Orleans interviewed him for its head-coaching vacancy Tuesday, according to ESPN's Mike Triplett.

"God has gifted me with a special talent to coach the game of football, but the need for change is bigger than my personal goals," Flores said in a statement put out by the Wigdor firm. "In making the decision to file the class action complaint today, I understand that I may be risking coaching the game that I love and that has done so much for my family and me. My sincere hope is that by standing up against systemic racism in the NFL, others will join me to ensure that positive change is made for generations to come."

Douglas Wigdor, a lawyer for Flores, told The New York Times that Wigdor Law LLP is looking into allegations from other coaches who could be part of the class-action suit. He noted that Flores reached out to the firm on the same day he received the Belichick text messages.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Flores sues NFL, teams, alleges racism in hiring

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Among Brian Flores' allegations: Dolphins owner Stephen Ross offered him $100K for every loss in 2019 to help with draft position and the Giants conducted a "sham" in-person interview with him to comply with the Rooney Rule after deciding on Brian Daboll.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Critical race theory is a buzzword that is at the center of a heated debate on what children learn in classrooms.

The only problem -- what does it mean?

Some parents and Republican legislators say educators are "indoctrinating" students with certain lessons on race that make students feel "discomfort" or "shame."

They say critical race theory seeks to blame white students for the actions of people in the past and teach that "the United States is fundamentally racist or sexist," according to a 2020 executive order from former President Donald Trump.

Critical race theorists, educators and some parents say that some opponents are actively distorting what the theory is in order to reverse progress made in diversity and racial equity. They say it's also a way to rile up voters in a collective fight against perceived reverse discrimination.

The theory isn't being taught in K-12 classrooms, they say, but rather in law schools and higher education courses.

As a result, attempts to teach race, diversity and systemic racism -- no matter the scope or context -- are being villainized in public schools, a reaction, experts say, against people of color speaking up for civil rights. They also say that vague language in recent legislative efforts -- including those that punish teachers or expressly forbid some subjects -- could infringe on educators' ability to teach students basic U.S. history.

This gulf, and urge to understand critical race theory have made it a hotly searched term on Google in 2021.

And so, the debate rages on: at least 35 states have introduced anti-critical race theory legislation so far.
Where the debate began
Controversy over critical race theory took shape in 2020, following months of calls for racial equality and anti-racism efforts.

Many industries and institutions vowed to respond to the calls for a racial reckoning. For some, that meant implementing lessons on diversity and oppression to improve equity in the workplace and in schools.

That September, then-President Donald Trump responded by banning any diversity training for the federal workforce that included lessons on "white privilege" or "critical race theory," according to an Office of Management and Budget memo.

The White House directed federal agencies to "cease and desist" funding for race and diversity training, according to the memo.

According to the memo, OMB director Russell Vought said that certain racial bias training efforts are "un-American" and "divisive" and that Trump wanted to end it.

Later that month, Trump issued an executive order to that effect, without mentioning critical race theory. In it, he argued that the "pernicious and false belief that America is an irredeemably racist and sexist country" was undercutting the notion of the Founding Fathers that all men are created equal.

The anti-critical race theory movement gained traction when Christopher Rufo, a conservative activist and reporter, began amplifying reports and allegations in 2020 against agencies and schools that held training on "white privilege," "antiracism" and how white people perpetuate systems of oppression. He appeared on Fox News to discuss his findings shortly before Trump declared his attacks on the theory.

He told ABC News in a Jan. 28 interview that "all children should be protected by civil rights laws and if teachers are using their power to scapegoat, stereotype, demean or abuse them, that should stop" regarding critical race theory.

"Everyone supports teaching a full, accurate and honest account of American history. Critical race theory is not a historical discipline," he argues. "We're not fighting about history, we're fighting to restrict abusive practices that violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964."

From September 2020 onward, the vast majority of national news stories about critical race theory came from conservative news sources, with mainstream news sources and liberal news sources falling behind, according to recent research from UCLA and UC San Diego.

The research found there were more than seven stories from national conservative news sources about critical race theory for every one story from a national liberal media source. In conservative media sources, news of the theory was paired with phrases like "Marxism," "oppression matrix," "state-sanctioned racism," "oppressor and oppressed," and "collective guilt."

The study also noted incendiary language used in school board arguments against critical race theory that called it "child abuse" and "the cancer" of school districts.

In March 2021, Rufo tweeted: "We will eventually turn it toxic, as we put all of the various cultural insanities under that brand category. The goal is to have the public read something crazy in the newspaper and immediately think 'critical race theory.'"

And this effort to attack education on race and diversity has worked, researchers say, through the waves of legislation and debate.

"This was an event that was manufactured," said Gloria Ladson-Billings, a critical race theorist, former professor and former president of the American Educational Research Association. "Any discussion of race, racism, diversity, equity, inclusion, whiteness, social-emotional learning, slavery, school segregation -- any of that is now called critical race theory."
Re-shaping critical race theory
Critical race theory, scholars say, is a discipline that seeks to understand how racism has shaped U.S. laws and how those laws have continued to impact the lives of non-white people.

Justin Hansford, a law professor at Howard University, says that critical race theorists, as most philosophers, have many different analyses concerning racism in the U.S. and there isn't one way of teaching or looking at things.

"[This] campaign thrives on caricature - on often distorting altogether both scholarship and K-12 educators' efforts at accurate and inclusive education, deeming it (and particularly K-12 efforts to discuss the full scope of racism in our nation) wholly inappropriate for school," said UCLA and UC San Diego researchers in a study on the impact of anti-CRT campaigns.

Hansford says critical race theory has been made into a boogeyman for all lessons that aim to discuss current issues of racism and inequality in a time when institutions have begun to address racism.

"There's long-term resentment against people of color speaking up for civil rights," Hansford adds. "If you don't see race, that doesn't really help anybody. It's ignoring the truth."

Legislators and anti-CRT advocates like Rufo have said that most Americans oppose teaching critical race theory in schools.

But researchers from Monmouth University found in a November 2021 study that study that respondents seem to approve of education on race, but not when the question is phrased asking about "critical race theory:"

When asked about teaching "the history of racism" in schools, 75% supported the idea. However, when asked about teaching critical race theory, only 43% supported it.

"Whoever controls the message controls how the public will react," said Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute. "As the huge differences in the poll questions on teaching race show, a negative visceral message can be very powerful in reframing an issue in the public's mind."
Legislative efforts continue
Still, there have been several bills across the nation that broadly target race education through arguments against critical race theory.

The majority of them look almost identical and many have no actual mention of critical race theory in their text, including bills signed into law in Texas, Oklahoma, and New Hampshire.

They list restrictions that say school employees can not teach lessons that include that:

"one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;

an individual "is inherently racist, sexist or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;

"any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex" and more.

This legislation coincides with an ongoing effort to ban from schools with diverse learning content on race, gender and sexuality that some parents say are explicit or obscene.

Some educators fear that not only are their jobs on the line because of these policies but the education and future preparedness of their students are also at risk.

"You cannot hide this from students forever," Ladson-Billings said. "I would have students come to the university level and when they would begin the search for history, they were angry, right? Why didn't my parents ever tell us this? Why weren't we ever taught this?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Critical race theory thrust into spotlight by misinformation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Critical race theory is a buzzword that is at the center of a heated debate on what children learn in classrooms. The only problem -- what does it mean? Some parents and Republican legislators say educators are "indoctrinating" students with certain lessons on race that make students feel "discomfort" or "shame."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Protesters call for Minneapolis police chief’s resignation after Amir Locke killing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Police shot and killed the 22-year-old Black man while executing a no-knock search warrant last week. Protesters called for the resignation of the chief and the officer they say shot Locke.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
California's civil rights agency has informed Tesla that it has grounds to file a civil complaint against the automaker following an investigation into "undisclosed allegations of race discrimination and harassment at unspecified Tesla locations" in the state.

Tesla revealed the notice from the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing in a financial filing published on Monday. Tesla received the notice on Jan. 3, the filing said.

While Tesla moved its headquarters to Austin, Texas, last year, Elon Musk's electric vehicle and solar business still operates many facilities throughout the state of California. Tesla operations there include its first U.S. vehicle assembly plant in Fremont, a research and development hub in Palo Alto, a design center in Hawthorne, a foundry and a factory where the company makes energy storage systems in Lathrop, and other subassembly plants, warehouses, and distribution centers, including in Lathrop and Martinez.

The DFEH notice to Tesla follows a string of complaints from current and former Tesla workers in the state.

In October last year, a jury in a San Francisco federal court decided that Tesla should pay a former worker, Owen Diaz, around $137 million after he faced a hostile work environment in which, he told the court, colleagues used epithets to denigrate him and other Black workers, told him to "go back to Africa," and left racist graffiti in the restrooms and a racist drawing in his workspace.

Tesla said in its financial filing on Monday, "The Company does not believe that the facts and law justify the verdict" and said it would appeal the matter if it could not otherwise get the damages reduced in court.

Another former Tesla worker, Melvin Berry, was awarded $1 million in arbitration after he complained about similar experiences while working for Tesla from 2015 to 2016. After the decision, he told Black Enterprise that a supervisor frequently used racial slurs, and when Berry complained, he was forced to work longer hours with heavier equipment.

More suits have been filed alleging racial harassment and discrimination at Tesla since Berry and Diaz filed their complaints. Last week, Kaylen Barker, a former Tesla worker who is a gay Black woman, said in a suit that she was assaulted and verbally abused by a co-worker at a Tesla facility in Lathrop where she worked inspecting brake parts.

The company and DFEH did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tesla braces for a possible race discrimination lawsuit from California's civil rights agency

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
California's civil rights agency has informed Tesla that it has grounds to file a civil complaint against the automaker following an investigation into "undisclosed allegations of race discrimination and harassment at unspecified Tesla locations" in the state. Tesla revealed the notice from the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing in a financial filing published on Monday.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Good morning. I'm Paul Thornton, and it is Saturday, Jan. 22, 2022. The United Nations has begun a monthlong period of Holocaust remembrance events, including International Holocaust Remembrance Day on Jan. 27. With that in mind, let's look back at the week in Opinion.

Close readers of The Times' Opinion pages have probably picked up on the increasing frequency with which some of our letter writers are drawing comparisons, mainly spurred by the Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol, between the U.S. political situation now and what happened in Germany before the Nazis came to power in 1933.

Are these comparisons appropriate? Over the years we've published some letters from readers who identified themselves as Holocaust survivors - so as The Times' letters editor, I decided to ask them what they think.

To be clear, what these comparisons have not done is equate the mass murder and devastation of World War II to what's happening here right now. What these letter writers have worried about is that the United States may be backsliding toward authoritarianism in ways similar to pre-Nazi Germany, which was a representative democracy (albeit a young, unstable one) with a vibrant intelligentsia before the fascists came to power. The embrace of racist autocracy and the marginalization and dispossession of German Jews were not enabled because of any single, sudden change - rather, it took long-existing antisemitism along with years of conspiracy theorizing, fear mongering and violence to set the stage for what would culminate in the murder of 6 million Jews less than 80 years ago.

It is that pre-fascist period of setting the stage for catastrophe that has been the subject of comparisons to our political situation now. Some readers bristle at this kind of commentary, saying it is based more on partisan hysteria than historical fact.

These are excerpts of what some of the Holocaust survivors to whom we reached out have to say. For videos featuring the survivors, produced as a part of our Hear Me Out series by my colleague Karen Foshay and her team at L.A. Times Studios, and the full essays, click here.
'Never again' is now
My parents left Germany for France in 1935; I was born there in 1938. Too many of our relatives were less fortunate, and they were gassed in the camps.

For a time I wanted to believe that the Nazi era was a 'never-again' episode orchestrated by some twisted fascist monsters. I wanted to believe that America had saved Europe from the worst evil in modern times.

Alas, "never again" is now.

I fear not enough good people remember history. Why are so many Republicans on board with Trump, even a year after the Jan. 6, 2021, coup attempt? I worry about political things such as the large number of judges Trump has appointed, but there are also other changes that deeply concern me.

I wonder about doctors who refuse to call COVID-19 the killer that it is, especially of poor Americans and people of color. My grandmother was a victim of the Nazification of medicine. She had leukemia. It was treatable with transfusions that she received regularly at a blood bank in Frankfurt. After the Nuremberg Laws, she was denied pure Aryan blood. Her oldest son stayed in Germany to donate blood to her even though he had received an exit visa to America. She feared he wouldn't get out in time.

My grandmother stopped eating so her son would leave. She died.
- Josie Levy Martin, Santa Barbara Jan. 6 brought back terrible memories
For 84 or 85 years, these memories buried themselves in the back recesses of my brain. Jan. 6, 2021, caused a tsunami of memories to come back to the forefront.

Terror, insecurity, fright - will America's Constitution and freedoms be overturned? Will we become a dictatorship?

Tyrants thrive on chaos, incitement to overthrow government, fraud, mass hysteria, lies, manipulation and rallies. That is their playbook. I can still hear Hitler's rallies with thousands yelling, " Sieg Heil," until our radio was confiscated. Will the legislators who have blatantly ignored their oath of office let their conscience guide them?
- Marianne Bobick, Gainesville, Ga. The comparisons get so much wrong
What comparable state of affairs exists in America? Instead of the Weimar splinter parties, our current moment is Manichean - each of our two parties thinks it is the democratic one and the other elitist, racist or sexist.

And consider the anarchy today! At the moment, schools seem to be barely functioning; some close regularly because there are not enough teachers. This is the antithesis of Hitler's Germany, where regimented children, marching into the classroom, were indoctrinated into fascism. For Hitler, discipline was the order of the day, whereas the Trump administration was curiously disorganized, firing its own personnel left and right. At the same time, the Biden administration seems to be paralyzed when it comes to education.

Finally, it should be made clear that democracy is not just a voting issue. One can, after all, vote in, fairly and squarely, a fascist party. It has happened all over Latin America. Rather, as Alexis de Tocqueville warned, democracy only works when you have a reasonably educated public. Today, when we have eighth-graders who can't read and write, when civics courses have disappeared and when geography is literally untaught, it is very hard to have a meaningful democracy in the U.S.

Our first aim should be to restore primary education as well as a meaningful media in which there is real discussion of the issues. As for antisemitism, how can it be avoided at the same time Israel has become such an object of hatred?
- Marjorie Perloff, Pacific Palisades Too few Americans know about the Holocaust
Much in today's world concerns me. I sympathize deeply with refugees trying to flee poverty and violence south of the U.S. border. They want to come to the United States for a better life, but how can this country take in millions of people who would come here if they could? This is a difficult question to ask that is just as difficult to answer.

I am also concerned that fewer and fewer people are learning about the Holocaust. My father, mother, sister and I fled Europe before the mass killing began, and I have fond memories of our journey across the Atlantic, a period that my mother recalled as the best vacation of her life. But I also remember my mother and father begging their parents to flee. My grandparents died in the concentration camps.

My immediate family was not killed, but the Holocaust still happened to us. We lost everything we had in Germany and were forced to make new lives for ourselves. I feel it is important for people to know about this, the different ways Jews were victimized. Even though my parents did not talk about the Holocaust with us much at all, and though I am proud to be an American, I believe we must know about this history today.
- Betsy Kaplan, Covina

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Asking Holocaust survivors what they think about America today

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Good morning. I'm Paul Thornton, and it is Saturday, Jan. 22, 2022. The United Nations has begun a monthlong period of Holocaust remembrance events, including International Holocaust Remembrance Day on Jan. 27. With that in mind, let's look back at the week in Opinion.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
U.S. Added Back 467,000 New Jobs In January—But Unemployment Rate Ticked Up To 4%

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite a record wave of Covid-19 cases, the job market performed much better than economists expected in January.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Billionaires have had a great pandemic.

And poor people haven't.

Those are two of the key points in a new report, called " Inequality Kills," from Oxfam, a charitable organization based in the U.K. that seeks to wipe out poverty.

But there's another assertion in this report.

The wider-than-ever inequality gap is not just unfair, the authors of the report say. They believe that this growing economic divide is leading to death - from starvation, from lack of health care, from climate disasters, from gender-based violence exacerbated by financial pressures.

To describe these consequences, they use the term "economic violence," a term used in academic circles to describe the harm caused by, for example, taking away someone's income or damaging their property.

"What we're saying is if the world was more equal, at least 21,000 fewer people could be dying each day," says Irit Tamir, director of Oxfam America's Private Sector Department. Because in an equal world, Oxfam says, the rich wouldn't be able to get quite so rich and governments would have more funds to stop "economic violence."

That sounds like a controversial assertion. (Elon Musk, the world's richest man, doesn't seem to agree, based on a recent interview. We'll have more on his perspective later.)

Here's why Oxfam is making the claim about inequality - and what other analysts have to say about it.

First, the economic data

To understand Oxfam's thesis, you first have to look at the data on wealth and poverty, which Oxfam gathered from public sources like the Forbes Billionaires List and the World Bank.

During the pandemic, billionaires experienced the "biggest surge" in wealth since public records began tracking it, according to the report. The world's 10 richest men saw their wealth double from $700 billion to $1.5 trillion. Elon Musk alone saw a more than 1,000% increase in his wealth based on Forbes' estimates, from $26 billion pre-pandemic to $294 billion in November 2021.

Why did that happen? According to the report, when governments injected trillions of dollars into their economies to prevent a global recession, it sparked a stock market boom (in spite of the recent downs there have been plenty of ups). And further, says Francisco Ferreira, a professor of inequality studies at The London School of Economics, other assets of the wealthy, like their homes, also saw a boom in value.

Ironically, says Ferreira, many of the critics of billionaire wealth were supportive of bank policies, like zero interest rates, to encourage borrowing and spending. They thought these moves would increase credit to farms, for example, and thus, curb unemployment. Whether that has actually happened remains to be seen, he says.

Meanwhile, Oxfam determined, based on World Bank data, that 99% of the world lost income and more than 160 million people were pushed into poverty during the pandemic. These personal losses were often due to lockdowns that prevented daily wage earners and those in informal jobs from working, factory shutdowns and layoffs in sectors heavily impacted by physical distancing and travel restrictions, like tourism.

Although many governments rolled out social protections, like stimulus checks and short-term jobs, Ferreira says that in some cases government assistance to corporations greatly outweighed what it gave to workers. And some of that money to corporations "did not actually help create or keep any jobs but just contributed to profits," he says.

Then again, that was to be expected, say some researchers.

Dr. Mohammad Zaman, a professor of biomedical engineering and international health at Boston University, says the findings in the report are "troubling but unfortunately, not surprising."

"Some people have been saying that the pandemic is a great equalizer - that everybody feels it the same way, but that's just not true," says Zaman. "That's never true in infectious diseases."

Are billionaires to blame?

That's a question to debate. Oxfam says that programs to help the poor - food aid, unemployment insurance, health-care reimbursement, unemployment insurance - are underfunded even as the wealthy and powerful lobby for policies, such as tax loopholes and monopolies, that will add to their coffers.

It's not quite that simple, suggests Ferreira. "I think [economic violence] exists. Billionaires may be to blame for some of that, but they're not alone," he says. For instance, "a lot of voters in rich countries support the absence of climate policies. So yes, blame the billionaires, but not alone."

And of course, people aren't directly being killed because billionaires gain more wealth.

But the Oxfam report does point to a tragically broken system, says Zaman.

"There's a failure on the part of the system that allows some people to get obscenely rich, while others do not have the basic commodities to survive from one day to the next," he says. "Lacking two meals a day leads to disease and malnutrition, but someone else is able to double their wealth and get away with paying absolutely no or very little taxes. That is, I think, extremely morally objectionable."

The pandemic offers concrete examples of how this inequality plays out, says Oxfam. The world has the ability to manufacture enough vaccines for everyone, says Tamir - but one reason that's not happening is that certain pharmaceutical companies aren't sharing their vaccine recipe to maintain their monopoly and profits.

Tax the rich now, says Oxfam. 'Patriotic millionaires' agree

The first step to solving this problem, according to the report, is to "claw back extreme wealth" through taxes.

Ferreira agrees: "I think it's certainly appropriate that we should focus on how extremely rich people are able to navigate loopholes and tax designs so that they end up paying very little taxes."

More than 100 billionaires and millionaires agree.

"Most of us can say that, while the world has gone through an immense amount of suffering in the last two years, we have actually seen our wealth rise during the pandemic - yet few if any of us can honestly say that we pay our fair share in taxes," a group of 102 ultra-wealthy individuals, including Disney heiress Abigail Disney, said in an open letter on January 19 to the Davos attendees at the virtual version held this year.

"Tax us, the rich, and tax us now," the signatories, who call themselves "Patriotic Millionaires," demanded.

According to the report, a one-time tax of 99% on the newly accrued pandemic wealth of just the 10 richest men would raise $812 billion - enough to make vaccines for the whole world and help 80 countries fund universal health care and other social-safety-net programs, gender-based violence interventions and climate measures. Such a tax would still leave the group $8 billion richer as a whole than they were before the pandemic, and every one of them would still be a billionaire, says Oxfam.

Not every billionaire agrees. In a December 2021 interview with Time, Musk expressed doubt in the government's ability to actually use money from a wealth tax wisely "for the good of the people."

"You want those who are managing capital to be good stewards of capital. And I think the government is inherently not a good steward of capital," Musk told Time.

He also said that people shouldn't be upset with the ultra-rich as long as they're doing something helpful for humanity. What he thinks should upset people is if billionaires are spending excessively on luxuries for themselves.

"In terms of things I think people should perhaps get upset about ... I think ... excess consumption is a thing to get upset about, you know, somebody just wasting money on personal luxuries in a crazy way," Musk told TIME.

Ferreira also notes that "fighting inequality isn't about reducing the egregious income and wealth at top for its own sake." Instead, he says we should fight inequality for two reasons: to generate resources to help people at the bottom of society and to make sure that governments don't become controlled by a small group of elites who hold all the resources.

"When elites become too rich and too powerful, they dictate the way governments work," says Ferreira.

But Tamir says that billionaires should know that the inequality they're benefitting from now is not good for anybody in the long term - including them.

"When you have discontent among the masses, and the masses feel that a privileged class is getting away with different rules and benefits than the rest of society, it creates social unrest," says Tamir. "It's why Marie Antoinette ended up at the guillotine."

Joanne Lu is a freelance journalist who covers global poverty and inequity. Her work has appeared in The Guardian and on Humanosphere, Global Washington and War Is Boring. Follow her on Twitter: .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Oxfam blames the rich for the pandemic plight of the poor. It's a controversial claim

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Billionaires have had a great pandemic. And poor people haven't. Those are two of the key points in a new report, called " Inequality Kills," from Oxfam, a charitable organization based in the U.K. that seeks to wipe out poverty. But there's another assertion in this report.