Heathrow Airport has turned its first profit since 2019, as 79.2 million passengers flew through the West London hub
Day: February 21, 2024
Azerbaijan actively engages in matters related to water diplomacy, said permanent representative at the German Embassy in Azerbaijan Heiko Schwarz during the conference on “Reconstruction of Water and Wastewater Infrastructure in Karabakh Region,” according to Azerbaijan in Focus, reporting Trend.
“The significance of water diplomacy is increasing annually due to the growing impact of water scarcity on both people and countries. Azerbaijan, being a downstream country, is confronted with these challenges. Germany also acknowledges the importance of water and water management. Last year, Germany hosted a visit from nine water experts representing the South Caucasus countries: Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia. This collaborative effort reflects our belief that addressing these issues requires collective action. Azerbaijan deserves recognition for its proactive role in addressing and resolving these challenges,” he noted.
Meanwhile, a conference on the Reconstruction of Water Supply and Sanitation Infrastructure in the Karabakh Region was held, with the goal of bringing together stakeholders from Germany and Azerbaijan to find solutions for efficient water supply and wastewater treatment in Western Azerbaijan.
The main topics of the conference were the development of approaches to improve water quality and water treatment for drinking water supply and agriculture in West Azerbaijan, with a special focus on the environmental problems of transboundary rivers such as the Kur, Araz, and Okchuchay.
To note, in addition to water supply and wastewater companies, the task force includes environmental consultants and research institutes, as well as experts from related industries such as agriculture, construction, and mining.
The post Heiko Schwarz: Azerbaijan actively engages in matters of water diplomacy appeared first on Azerbaijan In Focus.
In Arabic, the word Jihad is a noun meaning the activity of “striving and/or persevering.” According to Prophet Muhammad there are two types of Jihad: minor and major. Once when Muslims were returning from a military expedition, which for Prophet Muhammad was a minor jihad. He said to the fighters that now they had to go through the major jihad. When Prophet Muhammad was asked what he meant by major jihad, he said it was the spiritual jihad.
On another occasion, he said the real mujahid is the one who declares jihad against his/her carnal soul. (Tirmidhi). Exercising self-control and using willpower and reason to overcome one’s anger is described by Prophet Muhammad as “the major jihad.” Overcoming our own feelings of hatred, revenge and anger is much more difficult than overcoming our enemies.
In today’s world of fanaticism and extremism the words of Al-Ghazali, a 12th century Persian Muslim theologian, need to be repeated by all the world’s religious and political leaders: “Declare your jihad on thirteen enemies you cannot see – Egoism, Arrogance, Conceit, Selfishness, Greed, Lust, Intolerance, Anger, Lying, Cheating, Gossiping and Slandering. If you can master and destroy them, then you will be ready to fight the enemy you can see.”
Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib says, “From the river to the sea is an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate.” I say we can make it truly aspirational by making it focus on both people first and the land second. “From the river to the sea Palestinians and Israelis should be freed of hatred and suffering by ‘a two state for two peoples sharing of the land peacefully.’”
But the Hamas’ 2017 charter states that in principle, it “rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea.” Hamas opposes a two state solution, wants all the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan, and violently opposed the Oslo peace accords negotiated by Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in the mid-1990s. If the war ends with Hamas eliminated, and with a new Israeli government elected; there is the hope that the miracle of the Yom Kippur War may be repeated.
On October 27, 1978, only five years after Egypt started the Yom Kippur War with a surprise attack on Israel, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin were named winners of the Nobel Peace Prize for their progress toward achieving a Middle East accord. The Yom Kippur War was followed six years later by a Peace Treaty between Egypt and Israel.
Could the same process follow the defeat of Hamas, and its opposition to a two state solution? The only possible chance for avoiding more wars is the two state solution. To establish a Palestinian state alongside Israel. That will not be possible with the current leaders on either side. Extremists, both Israeli and Palestinian, will do all they can to sink the idea, as they have done since the 1990s. If this war does not deliver enough of a shock to break deeply-held prejudices and to make the idea of two states viable, nothing will. And without a mutually-acceptable way of ending the conflict, more generations of Palestinians and Israelis will be sentenced to more wars.
Although it might seem impossible now, I do believe that within a decade or two Muslims will visit Jerusalem and pray together with Jews as Prophet Isaiah states: “In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria. The Assyrians will go to Egypt, and the Egyptians to Assyria. The Egyptians and Assyrians will worship together. On that day Israel will join a three-party alliance with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing upon the heart. The LORD of Hosts will bless them saying, “Blessed be Egypt My people, Assyria My handiwork, and Israel My inheritance.” …(Isaiah 19:23-5) And then “Nation shall not lift sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore. (Isaiah 2:4)
For more than seven decades political nationalist leaders in Israel and Palestine have failed to find a way to end the conflict between their two peoples. Perhaps it is time for religious leaders who understand the religious importance of repentance, humility, forgiveness, compromise and hope for peace in overcoming more than seven decades of pain and anger. As the Qur’an states: “Perhaps Allah will put, between you and those to whom you have been enemies among them, affection. And Allah is competent, and Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (60:7) Then the words of the Qur’an will be full-filled “From the depths of Darkness into the Light; for Allah is very kind and merciful to you.” (Qur’an 57:9)
There is much about the Gaza war that we still don’t know: how long it will last, what the death toll will be, how many hostages can be rescued or returned, and how successful Israel will be in its declared objective of destroying Hamas.
But so far the most important fact is that Iran isn’t getting what it wanted from the war. The real goal was to disrupt the gradual deepening of the strategic ties between Israel and its most important Arab neighbors. Tehran’s support for Bashar al-Assad in Syria is responsible for many times more deaths and refugees than all the Israeli-Palestinian wars combined. Indeed, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh that Iran would not enter Hamas’ war with Israel; and accused the terror group of not giving Iran any prior warning of the October 7 attacks.
Dr. Mohamed Chtatou, a Professor at a university in Rabat, Morocco writes: “After the current (Hamas-Israel) war, Israel’s ultra-nationalist coalition will undoubtedly be undermined by public opinion, and probably by a commission of inquiry. If the Palestinian Authority were to agree to take over Gaza – backed by the international reconstruction aid that would inevitably arrive – and if a centrist coalition government were to emerge in Israel, everything would once again be possible. Two difficult “ifs”? Perhaps, but there is no serious alternative.”
The Qur’an refers to Prophet Abraham as a community or a nation: “Abraham was a nation/community [Ummah]; dutiful to God, a monotheist [hanif], not one of the polytheists.” (16:120) If Prophet Abraham is an Ummah; then fighting between the descendants of Prophets Ishmael and Isaac is a civil war and should always be avoided. And prior to the 20th century Arabs and Jews never did make war with each other. Even the surprise attack by Egypt and Syria of the Yom Kippur War was followed six years later by a Peace Treaty between Egypt and Israel. Could the same process follow the defeat of Hamas?
If all Arabs and Jews can live up to the ideal that ‘the descendants of Abraham’s sons should never make war against each other’ is the will of God; we will help fulfill the 2700 year old vision of Prophet Isaiah: “In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria. The Assyrians will go to Egypt, and the Egyptians to Assyria. The Egyptians and Assyrians will worship together. In that day Israel will join a three-party alliance with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing upon the heart. The LORD of Hosts will bless them saying, “Blessed be Egypt My people, Assyria My handiwork, and Israel My inheritance.”…(Isaiah 19:23-5)
Prophet Muhammad said: “Should I not tell you what is better in degree than prayer, fasting, and charity.” They (the companions) said: “Yes.” He said: “Reconciling people, because grudges and disputes are a razor (that shaves off faith).” (Ahmad, Abu Dawood, and At-Tirmithi)
This is an excellent guide to dealing with the three-generation old Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Rather than focusing mostly on what the other side did to us, we all should focus on how the conflict has hurt all of us, and how much better our future would be if we could live next to each other in peace. If the descendants of Prophet Isaac and Prophet Ishmael negotiate a settlement that reflects the religious policy that “…there is no sin upon them if they make terms of settlement between them – and settlement [reconciliation and peace] is best.” (Quran 4: 128)
Three thousand Hamas gunmen invaded southern Israel on October 7 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking another 253 back to Gaza as hostages. As of February 19, 2024, 30,000 Palestinians, including about 12,000 Hamas fighters killed in Gaza since Israel launched a major military campaign in response.
If Hezbollah attacks Israel there will be two to three times more deaths. A Hamas official based in Qatar told Reuters that the terror group estimated it had lost 6,000 fighters during the four-month-old conflict, well below the 12,000 Israel says it has killed. The comments were a rare acknowledgment from the Hamas terror group that it has suffered significant losses and appeared to mark the first time that Hamas has differentiated between combatants and civilians in a death toll from the war.
Iran has warned its proxy Hezbollah not to give Israel cause to launch a full-scale war along the Israel-Lebanon border, fearing it would risk gains it believes Iran has made in the region since Hamas’s October 7 massacres in southern Israel.
The Nakba (catastrophe), the displacement of Palestinians during the 1948 establishment of the State of Israel and the War of Independence, could have been avoided if the Palestinian leadership had accepted the UN two state solution. Indeed, if the Palestinian leadership had accepted the British 1937 two state solution; millions of Jews would have been able to escape the Holocaust (catastrophe). Hopefully, the Palestinians will not make an all or nothing mistake again.
A mid February national poll by Channel 12 news indicated that the current opposition, along with Benny Gantz’s National Unity party (previously in the opposition but now a member of the emergency government), could secure 75 of the Knesset’s 120 seats if elections were held today, with the bloc loyal to Prime Minister Netanyahu far behind at 45. Israel will be ready for a two state solution if the Palestinians desire an honest peace, meaning a total Peace to end the 83 years of conflict.
Alexei Navalny, a famous Russian politician, could have chosen to live in exile, like the businessman Mikhail Khodorkovsky or Leon Trotsky before him. But Navalny chose his own path, which was tragically interrupted last week by Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
On the day of Navalny’s death, Putin spoke on state TV. He seemed unusually delighted, commenting about how successfully his economy was surviving under the pressure of Western sanctions. He didn’t mention Navalny, but his joy was poorly hidden.
Kremlin-controlled media and propagandists didn’t ignore death of Navalny, Russia’s most popular opposition politician, but reacted in their usual way, blaming the “Collective West” and Russian opposition for the death of the most guarded prisoner in Russia’s worst jail.
“The immediate reaction of NATO leaders to Navalny’s death in the form of direct accusations against Russia is self-exposing,” commented Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova. Pro-Putin TV-show propagandist Anatoly Kuzichev insisted that “there was no point in killing” Navalny because he was “safely forgotten even by his associates.”
The Russian opposition and Western leaders agree that, whether it was a murder or a natural death caused by prior poisoning and inhumane conditions in prison, Putin should be held completely accountable. However, the death has all the hallmarks of a Stalinist approach to opposition and is consistent with the more recent history of political assassination in Russia. Moreover, in the current presidential election campaign, Putin has not tolerated any real opposition candidates, and Navalny in prison still represented at least a hypothetical alternative.
Even if an opposition figure is long forgotten by everyone, Russian intelligence operatives will still pursue him, regardless of how harmless he might be to the current Russian state. Recall the story of Leon Trotsky, assassinated in Mexico at the age of 61 after being followed for four years by Russian agents.
Navalny’s story, however, speaks for itself and does not require historical analogies. In 2020, he was poisoned with a military material known as Novichok but survived. Putin’s hand was also likely behind this attempted assassination.
Today, the Russian authorities aren’t trying very hard to cover their tracks, Several details point to the Kremlin.
The official version of Navalny’s death contains strange inaccuracies. The ambulance reportedly reached the penal colony in seven minutes, having covered 35 kilometers—the distance from Labytnangi to the village of Kharp—at a speed of almost 186 miles per hour.
Additionally, the official date and cause of death changed from February 15 to February 16 and from “blood clot” to “sudden death syndrome.” Doctors usually associate the second with infant death. The first diagnosis, meanwhile, cannot be established before an autopsy, and it is usually given to victims of torture in Russian prisons to justify the sudden death of a healthy person. Navalny really looked cheerful and healthy the day before his death, as shown in the video for a courtroom appeal on Thursday.
According to the testimony of one of the prisoners the day before Navalny’s officially announced death, a strange bustle began: the prisoners were locked in the barracks earlier than usual, and the same night some cars began to drive into the territory of the colony. In the morning, total searches took place, and mobile phones were confiscated from prisoners. Navalny’s family and his lawyer have still not been given his body.
There is also an American factor. A Russian Telegram channel associated with self-declared ex-officers of Russian foreign intelligence claims that the Kremlin allegedly tried to offer Navalny to the United States in exchange for Vadim Krasikov, jailed in Germany in connection to the murder of a former Chechen fighter, but the United States did not agree to act as a negotiator in this process. Along with Putin’s electoral paranoia, this non-action by the United States allegedly prompted the Kremlin to eliminate Navalny.
However far-fetched, the American factor in this whole story should not be underestimated. Former President Donald Trump’s statement encouraging Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” to NATO allies and the persistent reluctance of House Speaker Mike Johnson to put to a vote a bill on financial assistance to Ukraine could be interpreted by the Kremlin as a clear call to action. Putin, like an old judoka, takes advantage of his enemy’s soft spots, especially those that he himself has been weakening persistently.
Given Navalny’s death and the ongoing Russian attack on the whole Ukrainian front line, it is risky to underestimate Putinism. A number of Western politicians, and even Russian opposionists like Navalny, thought that Putin wouldn’t act like an outright mafioso by killing his opponents outright. But then came the destruction of the plane carrying former Wagner Group head Yevgeny Prigozhin. And now Navalny’s death. Putin’s goals of a wider invasion have moved into a sphere similar to that of Adolf Hitler or Vladimir Lenin. Putin’s imperialist Russia wants to absorb Europe or, his jingoist supporters put it, “to expand Russia from sea to sea.” This vision has nothing in common with Navalny’s Beautiful Russia.
This article was published at FPIF
In a speech on Tuesday, Hizbullah leader Seyed Nasrallah said that the Party will continue the border offensive until at least the Gaza massacre stops. The war in Gaza however, is far from over. And Nasrallah warned that even were a ceasefire to be reached in Gaza, “should the enemy perform any action, we will return to operating according to the rules and formulas that existed before. The purpose of the resistance is to deter the enemy, and we will react accordingly.”
Israel’s Defence Secretary Gallant has underlined that contrary to international consensus expectations, he too expects the war in Lebanon to continue. Gallant said the military has stepped up its attacks against Hizbullah by one level out of ten:
“The Air Force planes flying currently in the skies of Lebanon have heavier bombs for more distant targets. Hizbullah went up half a step, whilst we, a full one … We can attack not only at 20 kilometres [from the border], but also at 50 kilometres, and in Beirut and anywhere else.“
It is not clear what “red line” Hizbullah would have to cross for Israel to significantly escalate its response to much higher levels; Israeli leaders have suggested that an attack on a strategic site; or an attack leading to major civilian casualties; or a substantive barrage on Haifa might constitute the breaking point.
Nonetheless, with three military divisions rather than the usual one now deployed in the north of Israel, the IDF has more forces poised for action on the northern border than it has preparing for an incursion into Rafah – at this point. It is clear, as Chief of Staff Halevy has specified, that Israel is “preparing for war” against Hizbullah (more than preparing for Rafah).
Is the threat to Rafah a bluff to put pressure on Hamas to concede on the deal and hostages? One way or another, both Israel’s political and military chiefs are adamant: The IDF will incurse into Rafah – “at some point.”
The qualitatively different Hizbullah’s strike on Safed on Israel’s northern regional command HQ on Wednesday – which that resulted in 2 dead and 7 further casualties – is being treating in Israel as the gravest attack since the start of the war, with Ben Gvir calling it a “declaration of war.” Subsequent Israeli attacks killed 11 people, including six children, in a barrage of strikes on villages across southern Lebanon, in retribution for the Safed blitz – with the fierce exchange of fire still continuing.
The “Safed Strike” deep into the Galilee very likely was intended to signal that Hizbullah is not about to capitulate to western demands that it provide Israel with a ceasefire that is intended to facilitate evacuated Israelis to return to their homes in the north. As Nasrallah confirmed in a scathing attack on those external (Western) mediators who serve only as Israel’s lawyers, and neglect to address the massacres in Gaza:
It is easier to move the Litani River forward to the borders, than to push back Hezbollah fighters from the borders, to behind the Litani River … They want us to pay a price without Israel committing to a thing.
In these circumstances, Nasrallah clarified that residents of northern Israel will not return to their homes – warning that even more Israelis risk being displaced:
‘Israel’ must prepare shelters, basements, hotels and schools to house two million settlers who will be evacuated from northern Palestine, [were Israel to expand the war zone].
Nasrallah outlined what is clearly the agreed Axis of resistance’s overarching strategic plan. (There has been a flurry of meetings between senior Axis principals over the last week, across the region, for which Nasrallah is speaking):
We are committed to fighting Israel until it is off the map. A strong Israel is dangerous to Lebanon; but a deterred Israel, defeated and exhausted, is less of a danger to Lebanon.
The national interest of Lebanon, the Palestinians, and the Arab world is that Israel leaves this battle defeated: Therefore, we are committed to Israel’s defeat.
Put bluntly, the Axis has its vision of the conflict’s outcome. And it is a “deterred, defeated and exhausted” Israeli State. By implication, it is an Israel that has relinquished the Zionist project – one that is reconciled to the notion of living as Jews between the River and the Sea – albeit with rights no different to others living there (i.e. Palestinians).
On the other side, the western strategic plan, as the Washington Post reports – which the U.S. and several Arab countries hope to present within a few weeks – is a long-term plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, including a “time frame” for the establishment of a provisional de-militarized Palestinian “state”:
Imperatively, it begins with a hostage deal accompanied by a six-week cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. While it may be termed ‘cessation of hostilities’ or an ‘extended humanitarian pause,’ such a cease-fire will signal the de facto end of the war along the lines and scale that it has been fought since 7 Oct.
The plan addresses “Post-war Gaza,” in terms already well-known. As senior Israeli commentator, Alon Pinkas, affirms:
Parallel to the announcement U.S., Britain and possibly other countries will consider and eventually make a joint statement of intent by recognizing a provisional, demilitarized and future Palestinian state – without delineating or specifying its borders.
Such a recognition does not necessarily contradict Israel’s legitimate and reasonable demand to have overriding security control over the area west of the Jordan River in the foreseeable future … [it constitutes] a practical, timebound, irreversible path to a Palestinian state living side-by-side in peace with Israel … whose recognition could also be submitted to the UN Security Council – as a binding resolution. Once the Arab countries sign off on such a framework, the U.S. believes that neither Russia nor China would veto it …
Within the “regionalization” phase however, the Americans will craft a regional security cooperation mechanism. Some in Washington imagine a reconfigured region with a new “security architecture” as a harbinger to a gradual Mideast version of the European Union, with greater economic and infrastructure integration.
Ah – the New Middle East again!!!
Even Alon Pinkas, an experienced former Israeli diplomat, concedes: “If the plan seems too fantastical to you: You’re not alone.”
The basic improbabilities to this plan simply are disregarded. Firstly, Israel’s Finance Minister Smotrich responded to the reported American-Arab plan, saying: “there’s a joint American, British and Arab effort to establish a terrorist state” next to Israel. Second, (as Smotrich further notes): “They see the polls. They see how the absolute majority of Israelis oppose this idea [of a Palestinian State]”; and thirdly, some 700,000 settlers were installed in the West Bank – precisely to block any Palestinian State.
Is the U.S. really going to impose this onto a hostile Israel? How?
And, from the Resistance perspective, “a provisional, demilitarized and future Palestinian “state,” without delineated or specified borders, is not a state. It is truly a Bantustan.
The reality is that when a Palestinian State might have been a real prospect (two decades ago), the international community turned a willing “blind eye” – for decades – to Israel’s successful and complete sabotage of the project. Today, circumstances are much changed: Israel has moved far to the Right and is in the grip of an eschatological passion to establish Israel on the entire “Land of Israel.”
The U.S. and Europe have only themselves to blame for the dilemma in which they now find themselves. And a policy stance – such as outlined by Biden – plainly said is doing untold strategic damage to the U.S. and its compliant European allies.
Even on the Lebanon track, let us be plain too, Israel’s demands from Lebanon go far beyond a mutual ceasefire. There is no guarantee, even should a ceasefire be reached in Gaza as part of a comprehensive hostage/end-of-war deal, that Nasrallah will agree to withdraw all his forces from the border with Israel, or conversely, that Israel will comply with its commitments.
And with the U.S. defining its Palestinian “solution” as an improbable, provisional, disarmed and wholly impotent Palestinian entity, nestled within a fully militarised Israel, exercising “full security overlordship from the River to the Sea,” it would not be surprising were Hizbullah rather, to opt to pursue the Axis’ plan of a defeated, exhausted post-Zionism.
Israeli commentator, Zvi Bar’el, writes:
Even were the American assumptions to become a working plan, it is still unclear what policy Israel will adopt on Lebanon. Even pushing Hezbollah back so that Israeli communities are no longer within the range of its anti-tank missiles does not remove the threat of tens of thousands of medium and long-range missiles. The deterrence equation between Israel and Hezbollah will continue to determine [the true] reality along the border.
[The current U.S. working assumption, as presented by the Administration’s special envoy Amos Hochstein in his previous visits to Lebanon], “is that a border demarcation agreement between Israel and Lebanon will result in final and full recognition of the international border and thus deny Hezbollah the formal basis for justifying its continued fight against Israel to liberate occupied Lebanese territories. At the same time, it allows the Lebanese government to order its army to deploy its forces along the border in order to assert its sovereignty over its entire territory and demand that Hezbollah forces pull back from the border.”
This is just more wishful, “fantastical” thinking. And it contains a flaw: Hochstein’s work plan does not include an agreement on the Sheba’a Farms, but only on the “Blue Line” – the border agreed in 2000, but which is not recognized by Lebanon as an international border. If the issue of the Sheba’a Farms is not settled, Hezbollah will not be bound by a limited demarcation accord that omits the Sheba’a area.
Since Hamas’s attack on Israel on 7 October, every stratagem and protocol, dug from some musty West Wing cupboard, and upon which the U.S. leant, has failed. What was supposed to be a limited and compartmentalized military operation in Gaza by the IDF has turned into a regional firestorm. Aircraft carriers sent to deter other actors from getting involved failed with the Houthis; U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria became targets, with attacks on U.S. bases continuing, despite U.S. attempts at delivering deterrent “punches.”
Quite clearly, Netanyahu is ignoring Biden, and “defying the world” – as this week’s headlines attest:
“Defying Biden, Netanyahu Doubles Down on Plans to Fight in Rafah” (Wall Street Journal)
“As Israel corners Rafah, Netanyahu defies the world” (Washington Post)
“U.S. won’t punish Israel for Rafah op that doesn’t protect civilians” (Politico)
“Egypt Builds Walled Enclosure on Border as Israeli Offensive Looms: Authorities are surrounding an area in the desert with concrete walls as a contingency for possible influx of Palestinian refugees” (Wall Street Journal).
Netanyahu has vowed to forge ahead, saying on Wednesday that Israel would mount a “powerful” operation in the city of Rafah, once residents have been “evacuated.” Israelis explicitly say the White House is not opposed to the Rafah blitz, provided Palestinians are given the opportunity to “evacuate” (to where, is left unsaid). (Meanwhile, Egypt is building a refugee camp inside its border, surrounded by concrete walls …).
At this point, all of the U.S.’ various problems – the political polarization, widening war, funding for wars, the alienation amongst the swing-state Arab constituencies and Biden’s sinking ratings – are beginning to feed into, and reinforce, each other. What began as a foreign-policy issue – Israel defeating Hamas – has become a significant domestic crisis. Dissatisfaction within the U.S. at Israel’s conduct of the war is fuelling the growth of significant protest movements. Who can truly believe that yet another trip by Blinken to the region will solve anything at this point, asks Malcom Kyeyune?
It is hard to say where things in the region will stand, a couple of months from now. We have entered a period of breakdown and violence, as the forces pulling apart the old status quo cascade and mutually reinforce one another.
This article was published at Strategic Culture Foundation.
Recent storms knocked out the power in Sacramento, home to California’s High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA). People across the state—already told not to charge their electric cars on high-demand days—had to wonder what would have happened if the vaunted “bullet train” had been in operation.
That was supposed to be the case by 2020, with the train speeding passengers from Los Angeles to San Francisco at more than 200 miles per hour. Four years later, passengers have yet to board, but taxpayer dollars have not been in short supply.
Last December, federal Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg gave the CHSRA a grant of more than $3 billion “for continued progress on the country’s first electrified 220-mph high-speed rail system.” CHSRA CEO Brian Kelley called the money “just a great leap forward,” and “Speaker Emerita” Nancy Pelosi, issued a “thank you to President Biden and Secretary Buttigieg for their recognition of the importance of high-speed rail to California and to our nation.”
Pelosi’s one-time nephew Gov. Gavin Newsom proclaimed, “this show of support from the Biden-Harris Administration is a vote of confidence in today’s vision and comes at a critical turning point, providing the project new momentum.” Taxpayers across the nation have a right to wonder about the status of the project at this “critical turning point.”
The original $10 billion bond issue from 2008 is long gone, with little progress on the rail side. In 2021, Secretary Buttigieg went on record that the project could be funded through the pending $2.3 trillion infrastructure program. At the time, the CHSRA had yet to acquire more than 500 pieces of property from the rightful owners.
UCLA economics professor Lee Ohanian could see where it wasn’t going: “There is no path to completion for the fantasy rail system that was falsely sold to voters 15 years ago. The only reasonable decision is to end a project that should never have begun.”
Yet Biden and Buttigieg want to keep the boondoggle rolling. Both men have their issues with rail, which is not trouble-free.
On February 16, Biden is slated to visit East Palestine, Ohio, site of a train derailment that spilled toxic chemicals and forced evacuations. Biden’s visit comes more than a year after the February 3, 2023 incident.
Transportation Secretary Buttigieg took three weeks to make the scene and said he was “proud” of what the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) had done. On his own performance the Secretary was rather vague, telling one reporter he was “taking some personal time.”Biden boasts of riding Amtrak but Secretary Buttigieg prefers private jets funded by taxpayers. By early January, 2023, the Secretary had taken at least 18 trips on private jets, including a trip to Montreal to receive an award.
The Secretary has no problem sending $3 billion to a train project better described as bureaucracy. No path to completion and no passengers, but the CHSRA boasts a Sacramento headquarters and three regional offices. That works for ruling-class types such as board member Lynn Schenk, a former member of congress and chief of staff for California Gov. Gray Davis.
Meanwhile, Californians are not panting for transportation that is slower and more expensive than air travel, and still doesn’t get people where they need to go. The state would do better to build more lanes on Interstate 5 through the central valley and beyond.
This article was also published in The Orange County Register
Categories