Connect with us

America

Debates over a civil war in America: ‘The Disunited States of America’

Published

on

A fear of an internal conflict is rising in the United States, where almost 2 years are left until the next presidential elections. The divide between the Republicans and the Democrats in the country is moving towards a point of no return, both and among government institutions and among the people themselves. The Economist journal, which carried the issue over the cover of the week’s issue, took its place with the headline “The Disunited States of America”.

The ‘lurking danger of a civil war’ is widely spoken in the US, where the resonations of the bloody raid of Congress building, after the November 2020 presidential elections, are still heard. And the number of Americans who believe the country is facing the threat of a civil war and a nationwide disaccord, is growing by each day. According to poll results published by YouGov and The Economist, two out of every five American citizens think that a civil war is very likely over the next decade, while three out of every five American citizens expect an increase in political distress within the next few years. Also two thirds (66%) of the American population, believe that the political divisions in this country have gotten much worse since the beginning of 2021.

According to the Newsweek report, another poll by Quinnipiac University, the results of which were released last Wednesday, 67 percent of Americans believe that their democracy is in danger of collapsing. There is a 9 percent increase in this when compared to a similar poll also conducted by Quinnipiac University in January.

After the FBI raid on the residence of the former US President Donald Trump in Florida, the FBI and the US Department of Homeland Security issued a joint statement warning of internal threats that are named, such as a bomb attack on the FBI headquarters, or other internal threats such as a “civil war” or an “armed revolution”.

An expert on civil conflicts at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Rachel Kleinfeld, told the Guardian: “Countries with democracies and governments as strong as America’s do not fall into civil war. But if our institutions weaken, the story could be different”.

A professor of political sciences at the University of California in San Diego Barbara F. Walter, who is also an expert in political violence, warned that the United States was heading towards a major uprising that could be a form of a civil war, saying all possible symptoms of a civil war are showing up in the country.

A loss of hope, trust and the sense of belonging within the general public

The Washington Post also took the matter of a ‘civil war’ possibility, by publishing an article with the headline “Is the United States headed for civil war?”. Stating that there are very different opinions on this issue, the article also explained that “the pervasive loss of trust, hope and sense of belonging in a severely damaged society”, is more dangerous than the sporadic bursts of violence. And it was emphasized that both sides in the civil war debate, agree on this social crisis.

This stressful atmosphere in the country was also felt in the speech broadcasted on live television, by the US President Joe Biden, who addressed his citizens behind a bulletproof glass protection in Pennsylvania. Blaming the Republicans for the growing political violence and divisions in the country, Biden said that his Republican rivals led by Trump, “pose a threat to this country’s democracy.”

Former President Trump on the other hand, described Joe Biden as an “enemy of the state” in his campaign speech also in Pennsylvania one day earlier. Trump, who accused Biden of using the FBI as a tool against him, called this investigation a “witch hunt” against himself and all Republicans.

‘Two different states of mind’

In the aforementioned article of The Economist magazine, which put the picture shown above on its cover, and is titled ‘The Disunited States Of America’, it is told that there is ” two very different states of mind” in the country, and examples from both Republican and Democrat extremes are given; “On August 25th California banned the sale of petrol-powered cars from 2035, a move that will reshape the car industry, reduce carbon emissions and strain the state’s electricity grid. On the same day in Texas a “trigger” law banned abortion from the moment of conception, without exceptions for rape or incest”.

The Article states that the struggles between the red (Republicans) or blue (Democrats) states are divisive, while these battles “all entrench the notion that red and blue America cannot rub along despite their differences”.

‘The political violence will only get worse’

The Economist article states that the biggest worry is that “partisanship could undermine American democracy itself”. It is also commented that there could be more debates and disagreements over the prosecution of the votes from some states to be overridden in November’s midterm elections, just as it did in 2020, and that the current political violence could be proliferated.

Call for more centralization

Asserting that this dysfunction of America also poses a risk to ‘the world order that depends on it’, the article defends the idea that the US federal government should stop neglecting its responsibilities and be more effective and take important decisions on a national level, rather than local. At the end of the article, voters are urged to “act responsibly” and choose what is already available, on the grounds that “alternative is ever greater disunion, and that does not lead anywhere good”.

Experts share the view that the two-party system in the US, has now become dysfunctional and has caused a tension in both the institutions and the general public, rather creating a competitiveness. And with the socio-economic problems in the country are surfacing, the political divide is increasing more than ever. While the urbanized coastlines are represented by the Democrats, the traditional countryside is represented by the Republicans. Political hostilities are rising towards each other, both on a state level and among the general public.

Polarization, extremism and radicalization…

The Washington-based think tank named Brookings Institution, which is another American institution that has raised the issue, has warned that the political violence issue must be taken seriously.

While the article states that America faces a dangerous polarization, extremism and radicalization today, the people see their political opponent as enemies, and many do not even trust the motives or actions of their opponent political leaders.

Stressing that the political violence has increased significantly, the article calls on the Department of Homeland Security to combat ‘domestic terrorism’, the FBI to ‘increase its enforcement actions’, the intelligence agencies to ‘be alert regarding possible foreign support of extremist groups’ and the social media companies to take their censorship further.

America

Pentagon and Justice Department form joint task force to combat media leaks

Published

on

US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced on Monday that the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice have established a joint task force as part of efforts to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information to the public.

Hegseth stated that the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) of the Department of Defense will have the authority to request and receive all information, support, and records across the Pentagon related to media leak investigations.

The Defense Secretary noted that all departments and personnel within the ministry will prioritize these requests. He added that a complete and comprehensive response to any instruction issued by the OGC under this authority must be provided within two days of the submission of the request.

“Leaked information risks lives. These new tools and processes will greatly assist us in protecting our collective strength. Our nation’s security cannot be a bargaining chip for those chasing instant headlines,” Hegseth said in an approximately two-and-a-half-minute video message published on the social media platform X.

Hegseth also stated, “Access to classified and confidential information is a sacred trust, and those who betray this trust will face the full force of the law.”

The announcement of the task force came a few days after the Department of Justice issued subpoenas to four New York Times reporters. The journalists, summoned to testify before a federal grand jury, had reported on security concerns regarding President Donald Trump’s flight to Türkiye for a NATO summit on an aircraft donated by Qatar.

The subpoenas drew sharp criticism from The New York Times and press freedom advocates. Opponents argue that the government is attempting to intimidate news organizations.

“Our journalists report the facts and defend the American public’s right to know how their government operates and how taxpayer dollars are spent,” New York Times attorney David McCraw said in a statement. “This brazen action is nothing less than an attempt to deter journalists from doing their jobs, thereby preventing the public from learning what is happening in the country.”

Hegseth has been taking steps to prevent leaks to the press since the beginning of his tenure at the Pentagon. Last year, the department launched investigations into personnel alleged to have leaked classified information to the media and threatened to administer polygraph tests.

Leak allegations were also directed at some of Hegseth’s advisers last year. Former senior adviser Dan Caldwell and former deputy chief of staff Darin Selnick are among those individuals. Caldwell, Selnick, and Colin Carroll, the former chief of staff to Deputy Secretary of Defense Stephen A. Feinberg, were first suspended and subsequently dismissed from their positions and removed from the Pentagon as part of the internal leak investigation.

A government official, speaking to The Hill in mid-March, stated there was no evidence that Caldwell, who began working at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) earlier this year, had leaked information from the Pentagon.

Defense Secretary Hegseth has previously been the target of criticism himself for allegedly sharing sensitive information. Last year, Hegseth discussed planned US strikes against the Houthis in Yemen in a Signal group chat to which an editor of The Atlantic magazine had been mistakenly added. A report published in December by the Pentagon’s Office of the Inspector General determined that Hegseth had compromised military security and violated department policy by using the Signal application on his personal mobile phone.

“It is highly ironic that Hegseth himself shared sensitive national defense information with his wife over Signal last year and faced no consequences, yet now speaks of the need to protect this information,” said former Pentagon spokesperson John Ullyot. “In 2012, CIA Director David Petraeus resigned from his post for a similar situation involving his girlfriend, and was sentenced in federal court to two years of probation and a $10,000 fine.”

Ullyot, who also served as the spokesperson for the National Security Council during Trump’s first term, told The Hill on Monday: “The President deserves better from his national security leaders. Hegseth should start holding himself accountable before holding others accountable.”

Reporters have been largely blocked from entering the Pentagon after Hegseth revoked access to most of the facility. Pentagon correspondents returned their press credentials in October, refusing to sign a new media policy that required a commitment not to solicit unauthorized materials.

Hegseth and his supporters argue that the policy will protect national security by preventing the leak of classified information. Press freedom groups and critics, conversely, characterize the practice as a violation of the constitutional rights of journalists.

Most recently, the department further restricted press access by declaring the Pentagon building a classified space and banning journalists from entering.

Offering historical references in his statement on Monday, Hegseth said, “Leaking sensitive national defense information and secrets is a betrayal of the men and women who wear the uniform of our country. This is a principle as old as the history of warfare, reaching back to the founding of our republic in the United States. George Washington himself combated leaks, insider threats, and espionage.”

Continue Reading

America

SpaceX shares fall 40% from peak to approach IPO floor as regulatory scrutiny weighs

Published

on

Shares of the American aerospace company SpaceX fell to as low as $136.78 at the trough of the trading session on Monday, July 13, representing a 5.87% decline compared to the close of trading on July 10. According to data from the US-based NASDAQ exchange, this retreat marks a depreciation of approximately 40% from the company’s historic peak of $225.64, which was recorded on June 16. With this latest decline, the company’s shares have approached their initial public offering (IPO) price threshold of $135.

As of 21:25 Moscow time on the trading day in question, the shares continued to trade at $137.4, down 5.4%.

The downward trend in the shares was driven by reports that the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had concluded its investigation into the emergencies and malfunctions during the May 22 launch of Starship, the largest and most powerful rocket model developed by SpaceX.

According to CNBC, the agency reviewed and approved the findings and corrective measures submitted by the company following its internal investigation into the incident.

The Starship project, a massive, reusable rocket designed to carry crew and cargo to the Moon and Mars and to perform other space missions, is considered one of the most critical elements of Elon Musk’s space program.

In a statement issued by the FAA, it was noted that following the approved corrective actions, SpaceX is permitted to begin preparations for the Starship Flight 13 flight, provided that the company meets all safety requirements and licensing conditions.

The FAA had previously issued a statement regarding the malfunction during the launch attempt at the end of May. The statement noted: “The anomaly occurred during the Super Heavy booster’s flip maneuver over the Gulf of America.”

The region referred to as the Gulf of America by US authorities in official correspondence is commonly known as the Gulf of Mexico.

According to official data, the booster parts fell within the boundaries of pre-established hazard areas. Six flights were delayed and five aircraft remained in holding patterns for a period due to the incident, though no changes were made to flight routes.

SpaceX shares, which began trading on the NASDAQ exchange at the beginning of June, gained 25% at the opening. As part of the initial public offering, the company offered 555.6 million shares for sale at a fixed price of $135 per share.

The SpaceX IPO was recorded as the largest initial public offering in financial history. The company initially raised $75 billion, and the total funds raised reached $85.7 billion after consortium members exercised their over-allotment option to purchase an additional 83.3 million shares.

In a statement to his employees, company founder Elon Musk stated that going public was necessary to generate capital during a phase of rapid growth. It was announced that the proceeds would be used to complete the development process of the Starship rockets, bring them to commercial readiness, and expand the Starlink satellite network.

The post-IPO surge in SpaceX shares had briefly made Elon Musk the world’s first trillionaire. Bloomberg had estimated Musk’s wealth at $1.05 trillion, while Forbes valued it at $1.1 trillion.

However, with the decline in share prices and the company’s market value that began in late June, Musk lost his trillionaire title after holding it for 12 days.

According to an analysis by Bloomberg, the decline was driven by SpaceX’s preparations to issue at least $20 billion in bonds to finance artificial intelligence projects, alongside the signing of a multi-billion-dollar agreement with AI startup Reflection AI to provide computing resources.

Assessments by S&P Global projected that SpaceX will continue to incur expenditures without generating revenue until at least 2029.

Continue Reading

America

Trump notifies Congress of renewed war with Iran, resetting War Powers clock

Published

on

US President Donald Trump has formally notified lawmakers that the country is back at war with Iran, according to an official notification sent to Congress over the weekend.

In the letter dated July 10 and obtained by Politico, Trump stated that airstrikes beginning on July 7 constituted “military actions consistent with my responsibility to protect Americans and US interests both at home and abroad.”

The notification triggers a new 60-day statutory window under which the US administration can utilize military force in the region without prior congressional approval.

The conflict, which has repeatedly paused and restarted over control of the Strait of Hormuz—a crucial chokepoint for global energy supplies—has become a persistent challenge for the Trump administration.

Trump has expressed frustration over the failure to secure a peace agreement with Iran, while congressional Republicans remain concerned about being blamed for rising fuel prices ahead of the upcoming midterm elections.

On Monday, Trump intensified military pressure on Tehran, declaring that the US would reimpose a blockade on the region, seize control of the Strait of Hormuz, and levy fees on transiting vessels.

Ceasefire process officially ends

The notification to Congress follows Trump’s announcement that a two-month-old ceasefire with Iran has officially ended.

The ceasefire, originally declared in April, had been fragile from the outset due to reciprocal attacks by both nations. Despite the friction, the Trump administration had previously maintained that a full-scale war had not resumed.

Officials from US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that US forces have struck more than 300 Iranian military targets over the past week in retaliation for Tehran’s hostile actions in the Strait of Hormuz.

On Monday, CENTCOM released a statement confirming that US forces had conducted additional airstrikes against Iran “at the direction of the Commander-in-Chief.”

“These strikes will continue to impose heavy costs on Iranian forces, degrading their capability to attack innocent civilians and commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz,” the statement read.

War powers debate

Trump had previously notified Congress that the war, which began in February, had “ended” in May, thereby resetting the 60-day statutory clock that would otherwise require the cessation of military operations without congressional authorization.

With the April ceasefire intended to run indefinitely, the White House argued that the timeline mandated by the War Powers Act had been paused.

However, anti-war lawmakers in Congress challenged this interpretation. They argued that the government was misapplying the law, noting that even when major combat operations subsided, the US Navy maintained its blockade to exert pressure on Tehran.

The new notification complicates ongoing efforts within Congress to limit military action against Iran. Last month, the Senate passed a symbolic resolution calling for an end to the hostilities, signaling waning support for Trump’s military campaign against Tehran.

The resolution, which passed 50 to 48 after four Republican senators voted with Democrats, sought to make congressional approval a requirement for continued military operations.

A similar measure had previously passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 215 to 208, also drawing the support of four Republicans.

The legislative impact of these measures remains limited, however, as joint resolutions are not sent to the president for signature, and any bill seeking to restrict executive war powers would face a certain White House veto.

In his letter to Congress, Trump emphasized that US military forces remain deployed to counter threats against allies.

“United States Armed Forces remain postured to take additional steps, as necessary and appropriate, to address further threats or attacks against the United States, its allies, or its partners, and to ensure that the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran ceases to pose a threat to the United States and its partners,” Trump wrote.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey