Mexico Overtakes Canada as No. 2 U.S. Exporter

Mexico is overtaking Canada as the No. 2 exporter of goods to the U.S. this year, in large part due to car manufacturing. It’s a sign of how economic ties have deepened between the two countries even as the relationship is being questioned by President-elect Donald Trump.

Shipments from Mexico totaled $245 billion in the first 10 months of the year, according to Commerce Department figures released Tuesday, ahead of Canada’s $230 billion. If the trend continues, it would be the first time ever the U.S. bought more imports from its neighbor to the south. The two countries ended 2015 tied in exports to the U.S.

The trend of catching up to Canada puts China and Mexico as the top two exporters to the U.S. just as Trump prepares to take office in January, reflecting the strong pull of lower cost jurisdictions for the U.S. economy. Canada, which has one of the highest cost bases in the Americas, has seen its share of U.S. imports fall to about 13 percent from around 20 percent two decades ago.

“Integration with Mexico has become more solid than with Canada,” said Marco Oviedo, chief Mexico economist for Barclays Plc. “Manufacturing continues to be very competitive in terms of wages and location to other U.S. producers and suppliers.”

The growing links between Mexico and the U.S. hinge on motor vehicles. Mexico has won new factories over the past six years from Toyota Motor Corp., Volkswagen AG’s luxury Audi unit, Kia Motors Corp. and BMW AG — up to $25.9 billion in new auto investments since 2010, according to the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Michigan — fueling car shipments totaling $90 billion in the first 10 months. That’s versus $54 billion from Canada. (Read more from “Mexico Overtakes Canada as No. 2 U.S. Exporter” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

That Japanese Investment Money Trump Announced Today? Turns out It’s from Saudi Arabia!

On Tuesday afternoon, President-elect Donald Trump excitedly announced that telecommunications giant SoftBank Group has pledged to invest $50 billion in the U.S. and create 50,000 new jobs.

Of course, Trump made sure to give credit where credit was due.

The deal sounds great on the surface. After all, who could possibly argue with a $50 billion infusion and 50,000 jobs gained in the U.S. economy?

Now, what if you were told that the money was actually coming from the government of Saudi Arabia?

Here’s what Trump left out of his grand announcement:

According to the Wall Street Journal, the majority of the investment will come from a $100 billion investment fund that SoftBank set up in partnership with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

The Saudi Arabia Public Investment Fund, which is controlled by the Saudi royal family, is the fund’s lead partner, the report added. This means that most of the money Mr. Son is going to invest in America is actually coming straight from Riyadh, and not through his Japan-based conglomerate.

The fund is overseen by Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz. Notably, the Saudi royal, who is the most powerful member of the family (outside the king himself), made sure to congratulate Trump on his election victory in November.

While on the campaign trail, Donald Trump rightfully demanded that Hillary Clinton return the investments the Clinton Foundation received from Saudi Arabia and other foreign governments.

“Hillary wrote that the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia are ‘providing clandestine and financial and logistical support to ISIL.’ Yet, in that same year, Bill and Hillary accepted a check from Saudi Arabia,” Trump said. “I think she should give back the $25 to $35 million she’s taken from Saudi Arabia. And she should give it back fast.”

Trump again castigated Clinton in June for taking money from the oil-rich kingdom.

“Saudi Arabia and many of the countries that gave vast amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation want women as slaves and to kill gays. Hillary must return all money from such countries!” Trump said on Facebook.

Saudi Arabia is a strict Islamic fundamentalist society. The country does not protect the unalienable human rights of its citizens. Women are forced to wear burkas, and are not allowed to travel freely without a male guardian. No religion other than Islam is recognized by the state, and apostates and atheists are often sentenced to death.

The United States and Saudi Arabia have almost zero shared values. The Washington, D.C. foreign policy establishment wants to preserve the monarchy there, but only to ensure that the unknown (e.g. a nefarious terrorist group) does not acquire control over the oil-rich territory.

The Saudis have utilized the wealth of their massive oil revenues to pursue influence operations in foreign countries, such as the U.S. Studies have shown that Riyadh’s campaigns to infiltrate American institutions, such as the media, academia, and Big Business, has had success in shaping a more pro-Saudi policy. The coming $50 billion Saudi-Japanese infusion into America will undoubtedly come with plenty of strings attached.

For the entirety of Trump’s presidential campaign, he forwarded a nationalist vision of putting American interests first — impervious to foreign and outside influences. And his “America first” messages garnered him a fiercely loyal following. Now that Donald Trump is the president-elect, he appears ready to abandon America’s interests for some decent publicity, betraying his electoral platform and base along the way. (For more from the author of “That Japanese Investment Money Trump Announced Today? Turns out It’s from Saudi Arabia!” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Japanese Prime Minister’s Pearl Harbor Visit Will Further Reconciliation

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe announced he would travel to Pearl Harbor later this month, the first Japanese leader to do so.

Abe commented he would accompany President Barack Obama to “pay tribute [and] comfort the souls” of those who died from both countries during World War II.

He emphasized his intent to “send messages about the importance of reconciliation” between the U.S. and Japan, former wartime enemies who became strong allies.

Abe’s visit, if not a quid pro quo for Obama’s visit to Hiroshima in May, makes a fitting counterpart to that trip, marking the alpha and omega of World War II in the Pacific.

In that sense, the two trips serve the same purpose as the USS Missouri, the location of the August 1945 signing of the treaty ending World War II, which is now moored next to the wreck of the USS Arizona, which was sunk during the December 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor.

Abe’s remarks at Pearl Harbor will be scrutinized for indications of Japanese remorse for its wartime hostilities. But Abe has already made several speeches striking a contrite tone.

During an April 2015 visit to Washington, he commented on his visit to the World War II Memorial, highlighting the battles of Pearl Harbor, Bataan, Corregidor, and the Coral Sea.

The prime minister expressed “eternal condolences” and “deep repentance” for the “lost dreams and lost futures of those young Americans.” Abe acknowledged “our actions brought suffering to the peoples of Asia, and vowed again to “uphold the views expressed by the previous prime ministers.”

In August 2015, Abe commemorated the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II by releasing a statement to make amends to Japan’s neighbors. Abe went further in acknowledging Japan’s wartime actions.

In December 2015, Abe and South Korean President Park Geun-hye were able to forge an agreement that provided a foundation for reconciliation of difficult historic issues arising from Japan’s 1910-1945 occupation of the Korean Peninsula.

America is often accused of having a short memory. But World War II remains a bedrock historic era and a lodestar for America’s sense of who we are as a country.

Pearl Harbor made clear that isolationism was not a viable way to avoid the dangers of the world. Withdrawing from the world and raising the drawbridge did not deter America’s enemies. The same is true today.

The United States arose phoenix-like from the devastation of Pearl Harbor and America’s “Greatest Generation” endured the crucible of war to bring peace and stability to the Pacific.

The U.S. and Japan overcame the animosity of conflict to become enduring partners and allies. That dichotomy is both a realization of Thomas Jefferson’s warning that “the price of freedom is eternal vigilance” and a symbol of what democracies can achieve together. (For more from the author of “Japanese Prime Minister’s Pearl Harbor Visit Will Further Reconciliation” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Next Brexit? Italy ‘No’ Vote Empowers Populist Revolt Against Establishment

Daniel Hannan, a British politician and a leading campaigner of Brexit, recognizes the forces that he says inspired Sunday’s referendum result in Italy, where the center-left prime minister resigned after voters rejected his proposed reforms.

“The obvious parallel with these elections is you carry a tremendous handicap if you are associated with the old regime in any sense,” Hannan told The Daily Signal. “Voters understandably feel patronized and lied to and ignored and disdained and they responded in this way.”

In a year when Britons voted to leave the European Union and Americans chose Donald Trump as president, the global populist movement claimed its latest victim Sunday when Prime Minister Matteo Renzi resigned after Italian voters rejected constitutional changes backed by his government.

Renzi had proposed to reduce the power of the Senate, the upper house of Parliament, to streamline the political system, create more stability, and accelerate growth in Europe’s fourth-largest economy. Italy has had 63 governments in 70 years.

But critics, empowered by an opposition campaign waged by the upstart, euroskeptic Five Star Movement party, said Renzi’s plan would put too much power in the prime minister’s hands.

The opposition capitalized on similar discontent that fueled the results in Britain and the U.S.

Italy is plagued by low growth, and its banking system has been in crisis for a decade. The country’s youth unemployment rate is around 35 percent, and young people soundly rejected Renzi’s reforms.

Italy is also contending with a tide of refugees and migrants from North Africa (more than 170,000 people have arrived in Italy so far in 2016).

While Renzi’s fall will not lead to the immediate takeover of Italy by a populist figure or party like the Five Star Movement, experts say the result of the election will reverberate across a European Union already shaken by anti-establishment anger.

“I certainly think there are common elements here,” said Robert Kahn, a senior fellow for international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations, in an interview with The Daily Signal, adding:

This populist wave we are seeing—by which I mean frustration, alienation, and rejection of mainstream politicians and institutions—was certainly part of the ‘no’ vote. While there are a constellation of factors, part of this is Italians using the referendum to lodge a protest vote against their government and policies. In that sense, it does rhyme with Brexit.

Change in Italy will be slow in coming since Renzi’s center-left Democratic Party remains in control of Parliament and national elections do not have to be called until 2018.

Though the Five Star Movement—which leans left, not right—advocates a referendum to determine whether Italy should give up its eurozone membership, observers say it would be difficult for the party to gain the power to make that happen. That’s because Italy’s mainstream political parties may aim to change voting laws to make it tougher to rule without a wide coalition.

The Five Star Movement and its leader, Beppe Grillo, a comedian-turned-politician, have said they won’t govern in a coalition government with traditional political parties.

Yet even without an immediate shake-up in Italy, 2017 promises to be an important year in determining the future of the European concept of integration.

European Union members Germany, France, and the Netherlands have elections next year with euroskeptic and populist candidates in the running.

Last week, President Francois Hollande of France, a socialist, said he won’t seek re-election in 2017, opening up the race to succeed him, which will include Marine Le Pen of the rising far-right populist National Front party.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has presided over Europe’s strongest economy since 2005, will run for a fourth term in next year’s election. But she and her Christian Democratic Union party are under siege because of her decision to accept almost 1 million refugees and migrants from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, and other countries.

“In France and even in Germany, you have alternative parties that have extremely different visions of what Europe should be,” Kahn said. “It’s dramatic, it’s scary, and it’s threatening to the current union.”

Some say there are limits to the influence of anti-establishment anger.

They point to another election result on Sunday, where a center-left presidential candidate in Austria easily defeated his far-right challenger.

Andrea Montanino, director of the Global Business and Economics Program at the Atlantic Council and a former board member of the International Monetary Fund, says talk of Italy leaving the euro and the downfall of the union is premature.

“It’s important to differentiate this event from the rest,” Montanino told The Daily Signal in an interview. “This is part of the Italian normal legislative process. It will of course impose some instability for a while, but this is not a Brexit.”

On Monday, the day after the referendum in Italy, financial markets recovered from an initial scare that Renzi’s departure would lead to political stability, with stocks and the euro both rebounding in value.

Hannan, one of the architects of Brexit, said “there are too many uncertainties” to predict Italy will leave the euro.

But he said voters, like in Britain, sent a powerful message.

“The lesson is if you give people a choice between corporatist euro technocrats and angry populists, you aren’t going to like their verdict,” Hannan said. (For more from the author of “The Next Brexit? Italy ‘No’ Vote Empowers Populist Revolt Against Establishment” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Is the Chinese Economy Hitting Stagnation?

For roughly three decades, the Chinese economy registered a staggering annual growth rate in the vicinity of 10 percent. Over the past four years, however, it has clearly slowed from that breakneck speed.

There has also been increased skepticism about the reliability of the old growth figures, and even whether today’s slower pace of expansion can be maintained. These signs and others suggest that China may be entering a period of stagnation.

Is this true?

While China’s economy recorded its slowest growth in 25 years in 2015, its official number was still a respectable 6.9 percent.

Many who follow China are increasingly relying on microeconomic data to assess the direction of China’s economy. This includes electricity consumption, passenger traffic, service sector spending, freight volume, and credit growth.

Here, the data is mixed. For example, in 2015, the number of international passengers traveling to and from China reached 42 million—a new record. The service economy has also been growing briskly, at an 8-9 percent pace in recent years.

On the other hand, the volume of rail freight traffic has declined for two consecutive years and electricity consumption has risen only 0.5 percent during the past year.

These microeconomic factors point to an economy growing in the 4-5 percent range.

Most importantly, much of the recent growth has been manufactured by enormous credit growth. Despite the authorities’ goal of wanting to trim total debt, total social credit growth is advancing close to the pace it was during the 2008-2009 global financial crisis.

Much of the rise in debt has been at the corporate level. According to the Bank for International Settlements, Chinese companies have accumulated $18 trillion in debt, equivalent to approximately 170 percent of gross domestic product.

The loans have come from the banking sector, which are now very vulnerable in the event of heavy defaults. State-owned companies account for over 55 percent of that debt.

Moreover, Chinese are issuing far more short-term debts. In the third quarter of 2016, 82 percent of Chinese corporate bonds had maturities of less than three years, compared with just 36 percent in the same quarter of 2010.

China’s two steadfast pillars of growth, exports and domestic investment, clearly show cracks in their veneers. China’s exports for October slumped 7.3 percent from the previous earlier, despite the yuan’s depreciation during the past year.

This is reflected in the stock of foreign exchange reserves, which peaked over a year ago at $4 trillion but have now fallen to $3.1 trillion.

Imports have also been falling—clear evidence that domestic demand has slowed more than the authorities or headline numbers acknowledge. Despite stringent capital controls, capital flight has clearly accelerated as affluent Chinese have lost confidence in the domestic economy.

Fixed asset investment is still running at 45 percent of GDP, leading to significant excess capacity in industries ranging from steel to solar panels.

Earlier objectives to lay off 6 million workers in state-owned enterprises early in President Xi Jinping’s term have not materialized, and state-owned banks continue directing credit to prop them up.

So, is the Chinese economy entering a period of stagnation?

Because the credit spigots cannot gush indefinitely and much of the mounting debt will likely go bad, it appears reasonably likely. And the window to solve these problems is quickly closing. (For more from the author of “Is the Chinese Economy Hitting Stagnation?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

UN Honors Fidel Castro With ‘Minute of Silence’

The President of the United Nations General Assembly and ambassadors from around the world stood for a “minute of silence” earlier this week to honor the deceased Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.

Peter Thomson of Fiji called for the minute of silence Tuesday, beginning the session with what Thomson called his “sad duty to pay tribute to the memory” of the former Cuban president:

“I’m deeply saddened by the passing of Fidel Castro … [O]ne of the iconic leaders of the 20th century, with a great love for his homeland and the Cuban people, he dedicated his life to their welfare and development. A tireless advocate for equity in the international arena, he was an inspirational figure for developing countries in particular. His dedication to their advancement, especially in the fields of education and health, will long be remembered.

Thomson then invited the other representatives to stand with him in observation of the minute of silence . . .

A Legacy of Tyranny

Nearly a week has passed since Castro died at age 90. Even as Cuban exiles in Miami celebrated his death and the end of his tyrannical reign over Cuba, numerous world leaders lauded him — largely ignoring the countless atrocities committed against Cubans during his near half-century in power.

Perhaps most notable was Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s statement expressing “deep sorrow” over Castro’s death and describing him as a “larger than life leader who served his people for almost half a century.” An international backlash against those comments led Trudeau to acknowledge Castro as “a polarizing figure” whose leadership led to “significant concerns around human rights.”

Those familiar with Castro’s autocratic 50-year regime were less sanguine. Mike Gonzalez, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and veteran international correspondent, wrote last week that over 8,000 political arrests were made during the first eight months of 2016, and over 50,000 Cubans fled to the United States last year. While the number of exiles has recently increased, Cubans have been fleeing to America’s shores for years, braving shark-infested waters and sometimes dying along the way.

In a Miami Herald piece published in response to Castro’s death, Armando Salguero, a Cuban immigrant, details the harrowing story of his family’s escape from Castro’s rule, which resulted in a three-year separation from his father. They were eventually reunited.

Stream Senior Editor John Zmirack told the story of his high school best friend, a Cuban exile, whose father had been tortured in prison camps under Castro’s rule and who said the only reason Cuba so heavily emphasized literacy — a point many world leaders have praised — was because “They wanted everyone to be able to read their propaganda … so there was no excuse for disobedience.”

And another Cuban-American, Ana Quintana, recalled this week her grandfather’s stories of life under Castro:

Religion was criminalized, dissent was violently punished, and Cuban citizens became property of their communist state. Fidel’s rule brought the world to its closest point of nuclear war during those fateful 13 days in 1962. He indoctrinated hate and pushed millions out of their country.

World Leaders’ Reactions to Castro’s Death

After Castro’s death, President Barack Obama said that “History will record and judge the enormous impact of this singular figure on the people and world around him.”

British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn acknowledged Castro’s “flaws” but also called him a “champion of social justice.”

In a telegram to Raul Castro, Castor’s younger brother, Russian President Vladimir Putin said, “Free and independent Cuba, which he (Fidel Castro) and his allies built, became an influential member of the international community and became an inspiring example for many countries and nations. Fidel Castro was a sincere and reliable friend of Russia.”

The Associated Press reported statements from other world leaders after Castro’s passing. Like those issued by Trudeau, Putin and Corbyn, the statements mostly consisted of praise for the dictator:

Salvador Sanchez Ceren, the president of El Salvador, said he felt “deep sorrow … of my friend and eternal companion, Commander Fidel Castro Ruz.”

Mexican president Enrique Pena Nieto tweeted that “Fidel Castro was a friend of Mexico, promoting bilateral relations based on respect, dialogue and solidarity.”

“India mourns the loss of a great friend,” Indian Prime Minister Nerendra Modi said on Twitter.

The country’s president, Pranab Mukherjee tweeted: “Heartfelt condolences on sad demise of Cuba’s revolutionary leader, former president & friend of India, Fidel Castro.”

Peter Hain, a former member of the British Cabinet and anti-apartheid campaigner, tempered praise for Castro with criticism of some aspects of his long rule.

“Although responsible for indefensible human rights and free-speech abuses, Castro created a society of unparalleled access to free health, education and equal opportunity despite an economically throttling USA siege,” Hain said. “His troops inflicted the first defeat on South Africa’s troops in Angola in 1988, a vital turning point in the struggle against apartheid.”

A statement from the Spanish government hailed Castro as “a figure of enormous historical importance.”

“As a son of Spaniards, former president Castro always maintained close relations with Spain and showed great affection for his family and cultural ties. For this reason Spain especially shares the grief of Cuba’s government and authorities,” the government statement said.

“Fidel Castro in the 20th century did everything possible to destroy the colonial system, to establish cooperative relations,” former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev was quoted as telling the Interfax news agency.

“Fidel survived and strengthened the country during the most severe U.S. blockade, while there was enormous pressure on him, and still led his country out of the blockade on the road of independent development.”

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro recalled Castro’s departure from Mexico on the yacht Granma with his brother Raul and several dozen supporters to start their revolution.

“Sixty years after the Granma sailed from Mexico, Fidel sails toward the immortality of all those who fight their whole lives,” Maduro tweeted. “Onward to victory, always!”

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, however, refused to sing Castro’s praises. Calling him a “brutal dictator who oppressed his own people for nearly six decades,” Trump said in a statement, “Fidel Castro’s legacy is one of firing squads, theft, unimaginable suffering, poverty, and the denial of fundamental human rights.” (For more from the author of “UN Honors Fidel Castro With ‘Minute of Silence'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Has North Korea Reopened an Old Prison Camp?

Recent satellite images reveal that a North Korean political prison camp, former Camp 18, may have been reopened.

It is unclear when and why this may have happened. The time lag in obtaining detailed information from North Korea means this could be somewhat dated information. But even the possibility that the camp has reopened raises red flags—political prison camps in North Korea have been home to some of the most egregious human rights violations in modern times.

Camp 18, also known as Pukchang political prison camp, was approximately 28 square miles and could hold roughly 27,000 prisoners. It used to be one of the five biggest political prison camps in North Korea. Camp 18 was situated just across the Taedong River from Camp 14, a similar prison camp. Combined, the two camps held an approximate total of 50,000 political prisoners and their families.

Camp 18 was supposedly shut down sometime around 2006. But since 2011, satellite imagery has shown substantial housing growth in the area.

Recent imagery from Google Earth provides evidence that the camp has in fact been reopened. Images show that a substantial number of houses have been razed and a new security perimeter with guard barracks has been built. ”Immortality Tower,” a statue dedicated to North Korea’s founding dictator Kim Il-Sung, had long been an essential element of the residential area, but it has now been removed.

All of this points to the likelihood that either Camp 18 has been reopened, or Camp 14 is expanding.

North Korea has long denied the existence of political prison camps in the country, but various reports on North Korea have confirmed they indeed exist and have been the focus of grave human rights abuses.

In 2014, the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in North Korea (COI) released a report describing “unspeakable atrocities” being committed in North Korea. It attests that the North Korean regime is responsible for crimes such as “deliberate starvation, forced labor, executions, torture, rape and the denial of reproductive rights enforced through punishment, forced abortion and infanticide.”

The North Korean government uses political prison camps as a means of keeping the North Korean people in check, often sending as many as three family generations to the camps for committing alleged crimes against the state.

Since the release of the COI report, the international community—including the United States—has admonished North Korea to “dismantle” its prison camps and release political prisoners. Yet, according to analysis by Amnesty International, Pyongyang “is continuing to maintain, and even invest, in these repressive facilities.” Other new satellite imagery verifies this, confirming “the sustained, if not increased importance of the use of forced labor under Kim Jong-un.”

The United States took a positive step forward in 2016 by sanctioning North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-Un and other known human rights violators in North Korea, but much more can and should be done. The issue of prison camps must be addressed as both a strategic and humanitarian consideration. The U.S. and the international community should develop a feasible plan to hold North Korea accountable for crimes against humanity. (For more from the author of “Has North Korea Reopened an Old Prison Camp?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘We Need to Know We’re Not Alone’: Ukraine’s Soldiers Carry the Burden of a Nation at War

As the war in Ukraine nears its third calendar year, Ukrainian troops remain entrenched along a static front line in eastern Ukraine where they exchange small arms and artillery fire with combined Russian-separatist forces every day.

More than 21 months after it was signed, the cease-fire is a charade. The war may be at a lower intensity due to the cease-fire’s loosely adhered-to rules—but there is still very much a war in eastern Ukraine.

Combat is ongoing and intense throughout the Donbas—Ukraine’s embattled southeastern territory on the border with Russia. And civilian and military casualties still occur daily.

For many Ukrainian soldiers, war has become a way of life.

“I am at home now, this is my family,” Andriy, a 30-year-old soldier in the Ukrainian army’s 92nd Mechanized Brigade, told The Daily Signal from a front-line position in the embattled town of Marinka.

Andriy has continuously served in combat since the war began in spring 2014. He asked that his last name not be used due to security concerns.

The Ukrainian troops believe in the justice of their cause, yet, there is a pervasive sense of disappointment, bordering on betrayal, expressed by many front-line soldiers toward their civilian leadership in Kyiv.

“We are fighting for our land, to defend every centimeter of our country,” Dimitry Karamushka, a 30-year-old soldier in the 92nd Brigade, told The Daily Signal in Marinka. “We are not fighting for our government.”

The 92nd Brigade recently rotated to Marinka from a previous combat deployment outside the separatist stronghold of Luhansk. The unit comprises a mix of both draftees and volunteers, with some soldiers having served continuously in combat, with only periodic breaks of a week or two to go home, since spring 2014.

Ukrainian forces are dug in, battle-hardened, and better equipped and armed than they were a year ago. Conditions have improved, but supply shortages are still common, and the Ukrainian troops are still largely left to fend for themselves to provide many basic necessities—such as electricity.

“More than ammunition, we need to know we’re not alone,” Andriy said. “We are fighting two wars. One against Russia, and the other against the government in Kyiv.”

Casus Belli

Ukraine’s deployed troops remain committed to their cause, and treat the war as an existential fight for the country’s independence against what they call a Russian invasion of their homeland.

“We can’t leave the war and go to Kyiv,” Karamushka said. “It would mean surrender to Russia. And what would it mean to all the people who died?”

“We are standing for our territory,” said Alexandr Chernov, a chaplain in the 92nd Brigade. “Everyone wants peace. But peace will only come after victory.”

Chernov paused, smiled, and then added: “And when [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is gone.”

Ukraine’s military has been locked in a static, frontal war against a combined force of pro-Russian separatists and Russian regulars since the second, current cease-fire—called Minsk II—was signed in February 2015.

Today, at some places in and around Marinka, less than 300 meters (about 1,000 feet) of no man’s land divide the opposing camps.

“The situation here is stabilized,” said Vsevolod Chernetskyi, a 22-year-old soldier and Raven drone operator, in near perfect English. “We are in the same positions as a year ago, the Russians and us. It’s mostly artillery now.”

The war has killed about 10,000 Ukrainians and displaced about 1.7 million people, according to various reports from humanitarian organizations.

The conflict began in spring 2014 when Russian-backed separatists formed two breakaway republics in the Donbas.

Despite denials from Moscow, numerous news reports have shown that Russian troops are fighting among the separatists, that Russian military commanders command and control separatist forces, and that Russian weapons and ammunition continue to feed the war effort.

Through binoculars from the roof of the 92nd Brigade’s outpost in Marinka, this correspondent observed a Russian flag flying over a building across no man’s land on the combined Russian-separatist side of the contact lines.

According to Ukrainian military intelligence estimates, there are about 5,000 to 7,500 Russian troops currently deployed in the Donbas. About 55,000 Russian military personnel are also forward deployed to locations within Russia near the Ukraine border.

Combined Russian-separatist forces in eastern Ukraine currently control more tanks than Germany’s armed forces, and the Donbas is replete with Russian surface-to-air missile systems.

“I don’t feel we are winning,” Chernetskyi said. “The Russian forces are much stronger than ours. They can always provide more artillery than us, better tanks, more drones.”

During breakfast, this correspondent remarked to Chernetskyi how the shooting had stopped in time for both sides to take their morning meal.

Chernetskyi replied that the combined Russian-separatist forces operate on Moscow time, one hour ahead of Kyiv’s time zone.

“They eat an hour before us,” he said.

He paused a beat and then added: “They’re always one step ahead of us.”

Differences

The corner of an artillery-blasted apartment building in Marinka is marked by a spray-painted word in Russian. In English it translates to “For what?”

Approximately 5,000 civilians have fled Marinka since the war began, comprising about half of the town’s pre-war population of 10,000.

Daytime is usually relatively peaceful here. Civilians mill about outdoors, pedestrians are on the sidewalks. There’s an outdoor market where one can buy goods ranging from produce to clothing.

Across town, there is the sound of hammering as workers repair buildings damaged by shelling. They replace shattered windows and reconstruct crumbled walls.

There is a daily rhythm to the war, which conceals the brunt of the fighting from the intergovernmental organization responsible for overseeing the cease-fire.

Monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, or OSCE, do not travel through the war zone at night due to security restrictions.

At night, consequently, the war begins in earnest.

“There is almost no artillery during the day, because the OSCE is here,” Chernetskyi, the 22-year-old Raven operator, said.

Winter sunsets in eastern Ukraine come early, around 4:30 p.m. As darkness falls there is, at first, only the occasional sound of a mortar explosion or an artillery shot, and the every-so-often burst of a machine gun or Kalashnikov.

As the hours pass, the pace and intensity of the shooting slowly builds like the different sections of an orchestra chiming in.

At the nocturnal peak of the fighting, typically around midnight, tracers cut across the night sky, the flashes and booms of mortar and artillery explosions come several times a minute, and there is a nearly constant background din of small arms fire.

This correspondent witnessed such a scene in Marinka on the night of Nov. 21. The Ukrainian soldiers on scene, as well as several civilians from the area, said the intensity of the fighting on that night was “normal.”

While casually smoking a cigarette in the night, one soldier jokingly recommended that this correspondent return “when things really get hot.”

Spartan

When U.S. troops go to war, they usually enjoy the support of specialized units—such as the Army Corps of Engineers, the Navy Seabees, or Air Force Civil Engineers—dedicated to building and maintaining base infrastructure, even in the most austere locations.

For deployed Ukrainian troops, however, this task is a collective effort, in which the diverse skills each soldier brings to the war are identified and utilized for the common good.

One example. A 92nd Brigade soldier with a university electrical engineering degree illegally tapped into the local power grid to provide electricity for the outpost in Marinka—effectively stealing electricity from the same government that had sent him to war.

The power still frequently goes out, however. Wood-burning furnaces provide heat to stave off the winter cold and cook food.

Soldiers say the military has improved on its deliveries of basic necessities such as water and foodstuff during the past year.

Yet, non-essential food items like honey, sugar, and coffee are still provided by civilian volunteers. As are other more vital supplies, including most soldiers’ body armor, boots, and winter underwear.

Weapons and ammunition are not a problem, although the soldiers complain about the quality of their armaments—some of which date back to World War II, almost all of which are Cold War vintage.

The soldiers in Marinka still lack basic sanitation. They use a wooden outhouse as a toilet—a miserable proposition in eastern Ukraine’s frigid winters.

The soldiers’ diets mainly comprise traditional Ukrainian foodstuff—including copious amounts of buckwheat, bread, potatoes, and salo (cured slabs of pork fat). Sweetened condensed milk is another troop favorite.

At night, the soldiers sometimes enjoy a moonshine popular throughout the front lines called Avatar; a reference to one’s facial complexion after over-indulging.

Nearly everyone smokes. At night, as the not-too-distant battles rages, the soldiers stand casually outside for as long as they can tolerate the cold to enjoy a cigarette or two. They are desensitized to the war, able to instantly and instinctively tell when the shooting is near enough to pose a real threat.

As at other front-line Ukrainian positions across the war zone, the items hung on the interior walls are a testament to the life stories of these men at war.

Kalashnikovs and body armor hang beside Orthodox religious icons, and posters of soccer stars and beautiful women. Letters from home share tabletops with grenades and bullets.

Outside the few scattered buildings in which the soldiers are holed up, a collection of tanks and armored personnel carriers are scattered under concealment.

At dawn, this correspondent joined a brief patrol into no man’s land in an armored personnel carrier from the 1970s called a BMP. The foray was cut short when the Ukrainian driver spotted enemy forces.

The ebb and flow of life here is likely not too different than it was for the soldiers who fought for this land in World War II.

Except for the presence of smartphones and a few laptops—and the U.S.-made Raven UAV the unit operates—the war-fighting technology and the circumstances of day-to-day life here would not be out of place seven decades ago.

“We want people to know that this war could happen in other places in Europe,” Chernov, the chaplain, said. “We have to stop Russia here.”

Red to Blue

The soldiers (the majority of whom are millennials) reject their country’s Soviet military heritage in favor of closer ties with the U.S. and NATO.

On Soviet battle maps, red icons (for the Red Army) symbolized friendly forces, and enemy forces were blue.

After the current war in the Donbas began, Ukrainian forces flipped the colors of their icons to match NATO maps, in which the colors are reversed.

The move was a practical step in bringing Ukraine’s military in line with NATO standards (part of a larger effort to foster closer ties with the Western alliance), but it was also a symbolic pushback against Russia.

The soldiers consider the United States to be an ally, and they want American military support. Many, however, oppose the idea of direct U.S. military intervention.

“American help is OK,” Andriy, the 30-year-old soldier from Kharkiv, said. “But we need to learn how to do this on our own. We shouldn’t rely on other countries for help. We need to fight this war on our own.”

There is a symbolic value to U.S. support that the soldiers exploit to rattle their enemies.

The Punisher skull symbol—a comic book emblem made popular among soldiers by Navy SEAL Chris Kyle of “American Sniper” fame—is painted on Ukrainian armored fighting vehicles in Marinka.

As at other locations along the front lines, the Ukrainian soldiers in Marinka did not have encrypted communications. They shared the airwaves with their enemies on off-the-shelf walkie-talkies.

A common Russian propaganda line is that U.S. troops are deployed and fighting alongside the Ukrainians. (There are, in fact, no U.S. troops fighting in the Ukraine conflict.)

Sometimes, as a joke, a Ukrainian soldier fluent in English will speak on the open airwaves, pretending to be a Navy SEAL, or a U.S. Marine. The gag usually elicits a flurry of incensed responses from their enemies, the Ukrainian soldiers said.

The Raven

One overt sign of U.S military support for Ukraine is the 92nd Brigade’s use of the U.S.-made Raven drone. The small drone is tossed in the air like a giant paper airplane.

The U.S. gave 24 Ravens in all to the Ukrainian military, and the drones are scattered throughout various units.

Chernetskyi trained on the Raven with the U.S. Army for three weeks in Huntsville, Alabama.

The Raven is a non-offensive weapon, but Ukrainian forces use it for artillery spotting.

While not a game-changer on the battlefield, the Raven does afford the Ukrainians some advantages over the modified off-the-shelf drones they also use.

“It’s useful mostly because it can fly at night,” Chernetskyi said.

The Raven is still susceptible to Russian jamming, however.

“The Russians can jam it, no problem,” Chernetskyi said. “It was made for Afghanistan, and the Taliban didn’t have jamming.”

Defenders of the Motherland

Some soldiers expressed frustration that their commanders were stuck in antiquated habit patterns from the Cold War, making them resistant to commonsense changes implemented from the bottom up, which could streamline the war effort.

Andriy brought out a thick stack of worn paper maps of the Marinka area. Each map was thoroughly marked in pen and marker notations, indicating enemy and friendly positions.

The troops complained that this pile of maps, enough to fill a wheelbarrow, could be condensed into a single app for a tablet or a file on a laptop.

An electronic version could be continuously updated and overlaid with other information, such as weather or locations where civilians are observed, the soldiers said.

Perhaps most frustrating of all for the front-line troops is the disconnect between life on the front lines and the rest of the country, where daily life seems to carry on unaffected by the war.

While front-line soldiers shiver in sub-zero temperatures, enduring artillery and sniper fire, in Kyiv—a 9-hour journey from the front lines by car and rail—there were Black Friday sales going on at the city’s many shopping malls last weekend.

(Ukraine does not celebrate Thanksgiving, yet Black Friday is a major shopping event.)

Over the weekend, the malls in Kyiv were crammed with bargain-hunting patrons in stores like The Gap, Columbia Sportswear, and Zara. Christmas lights and trees are going up around town.

Bars and restaurants in Kyiv remain busy. At more popular places, you can’t get in without a reservation on the weekends. The city’s trendy speakeasy-style, craft cocktail bars are always packed. One would hardly know this is the capital city of the country home to Europe’s only ongoing land war.

“Everyone should know our story,” Chernetskyi said.

The soldiers are not generally resentful that life is going on outside the war. In fact, many say that’s what they’re fighting for; a sign that the Russian threat has been kept at bay.

Yet, the head-spinning contrast with life on the front lines sparks feelings of unequally shared sacrifice among the troops and combat veterans.

“It is war here,” Evgeniy Varavin, a 27-year-old soldier from Kharkiv, said from Marinka.

“Some civilians look at soldiers and don’t understand why we’re fighting,” Varavin, who was a construction worker before the war, continued. “I don’t pay attention to what civilians say. My parents are proud of me, but they’re worried. They don’t understand why I came back for the second time. But how can I work back home in Kharkiv when there is war, and while my comrades are here? My soul is here.” (For more from the author of “‘We Need to Know We’re Not Alone’: Ukraine’s Soldiers Carry the Burden of a Nation at War” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Revival in Iran: ‘You Can See What the Holy Spirit Is Doing’

The Islamic Republic of Iran is experiencing a revival of faith in a big way, said Rahman Salehsafari, a house church pastor who ministers there as well as worldwide via Skype, in a CBN News interview. The Holy Spirit’s work in Iran is evident in the large numbers of people accepting Jesus, he said.

“Right now you can see the results of the Holy Spirit. [In] 1994, there were about 100,000 believers,” he explained. “Right now, there are 3 million. You can see what the Holy Spirit is doing with the people.”

For some, the experience that drew them to Christ was nothing short of miraculous. “I had a dream a long time back and every time that Jesus was with me,” said a young man named Reza. “In all of my life He was helping me and I didn’t know who is this person. Suddenly, Jesus Christ was over there and He said, ‘Come to Me.’ Then I came to that side and He accepted me.”

Becoming a Christian was not something they took lightly — they knew they would have difficulty living out their new-found faith in their homeland.

Many of the new Christians had to flee Iran because of religious persecution and ended up in Turkey. They noticed a marked difference in the freedom to practice their faith. Afshin, an Iranian who lives in Turkey now, said the contrast is extreme. “[It’s] totally different from Iran,” he explained. “I can privilege [speak about] God’s Word to other guys. I can freely praise the Lord. I can easily go to church. It’s really completely different.”

Afshin, who attended Pastor Saeed Abedini’s church before Abedini’s 2012 arrest, said he fled Iran because it was getting progressively difficult each day to live as a Christian and he felt it was too much of a risk. Afshin said he had to leave his home because he believed the intelligence service would recognize it as a home church. Others fled in fear for their lives.

A young woman named Raizal, along with her brother Reza, fled Iran for fear they would be killed. “Even if I say ‘Jesus Christ,’ they may kill me,” she said. “They tried to kill me,” said Reza, who also had problems with his health and at his job because he was a Christian. “Then I start (sic) to run away.”

Many of the Iranian believers in Turkey hope to one day achieve refugee status and immigrate to other countries.

Even with the persecution, the threats on their lives, the uprooting and fleeing to another country and the unstable residency status, these Christians maintain their joyfulness and love of Christ. They clap and cheer as new brothers and sisters in Christ are baptized. They worship the Lord with praise songs and laughter.

Their desire now is that their brothers and sisters around the world would pray for Iran and the Church there. “I’m just begging really from other believers, from the other sisters and brothers from all over the world to pray for Iran,” said Afshin. “To all the people of Iran, to be familiar with God, with Jesus Christ.”

See the full interview here:

(For more from the author of “Revival in Iran: ‘You Can See What the Holy Spirit Is Doing'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Better Late Than Never: Germany’s Chancellor Decides to Deport 100,000 Refugees

Following a year of the chaos and facing a reelection challenge in the coming year, German Chancellor Angela Merkel seems to finally be rethinking her open-borders refugee policy, and is making plans to start deporting thousands.

According to the Daily Mail:

Germany is planning to return 100,000 rejected asylum seekers to their home countries after Angela Merkel admitted: ‘It cannot be that all young people from Afghanistan come here’.

About 60,000 will be returned under voluntary repatriation programmes while the rest face compulsory deportations, the German chancellor revealed.

Of course, the decision won’t be cost neutral for the German people, as the deportees will be given both a plane ticket and some startup money to help them get back on their feet in their homelands.

And this took a while. Since September of last year, Merkel has stood firmly in her open-borders stance, which allowed over an estimated 1 million unvetted migrants to enter the European country. What followed in the months afterward was a year of chaos, including innumerable sexual assaults, multiple jihadist attacks, and concerns of jihadist infiltration into refugee populations as well as the military. At one point, German officials were even considering putting troops on the streets to address increased security problems.

And who can forget when migrants burned down a refugee center in Düsseldorf earlier this month, claiming there wasn’t enough Nutella and sweets?

The chancellor has invited criticism even from members of her own party, which has suffered in state and local elections in recent months. She faced further challenge recently, after announcing her run at her national party conference.

“With your truly unparalleled ‘laissez-faire’ refugee policy you have burdened us with something that we will not get rid of any time soon,” party member Ulrich Sauer said, according to Reuters. “Step down now before the damage you have done becomes even greater.”

Now, it would seem that after months of electoral hits, intra-party damage, and falling poll numbers, Frau Merkel is finally listening to the will of her own people, but only time will tell if this is the true beginning of a return to normalcy for them.

If the reversal succeeds electorally, Merkel will not have to learn the difficult electoral lesson as the anti-Brexit crowd did in the U.K. or that pro-amnesty Democrats and Republicans learned in the U.S. this year, giving her the chance to eclipse her mentor Helmut Kohl as Germany’s longest-serving postwar chancellor.

As it turns out, when you remove the ability of the body politic to control its own sovereignty, the body politic tends to get ticked off and vote you out of power (especially when they’re being shot, stabbed, blown up, or dealing with artificially deflated wages as a result). Borders are important, as is prioritizing the concerns of your own citizens first.

The world is still dealing with the greatest refugee crisis since the Second World War, but as policymakers like Angela Merkel and others have learned, answering this crisis with charity unbalanced by prudence is a good way to lose the support of your people rather quickly. (For more from the author of “Better Late Than Never: Germany’s Chancellor Decides to Deport 100,000 Refugees” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.