Walmart teams with Nuro’s robot cars to deliver groceries in Houston

For much of this year, Nuro, a Silicon Valley robotics company, has been delivering groceries and pizza to customers in Houston using its autonomous delivery vehicles. Company officials claim they are in the early phases of a long-term effort to make robotic delivery via self-driving vehicles a staple of daily life in cities across the country. This week, Nuro took a giant step in that direction by announcing a grocery delivery partnership with Walmart — the big-box behemoth and the nation’s largest employer. For now, the company said, the partnership will remain a pilot program and be focused on Houston, where Nuro is already delivering merchandise across the sprawling metropolis from major brands like Kroger and Domino’s. The Walmart delivery service will be available to a select group of Nuro customers, but will expand to the general public in 2020. “Walmart is committed to serving our customers whenever and however they choose to shop,” Tom Ward, Walmart’s senior vice president of digital operations, said in a statement. “We are excited to work with Nuro and continue to learn as we are incorporating self-driving technology in our delivery options, learning more about our customers’ needs, and evolving Walmart’s future delivery offerings.” In a statement posted on Medium Walmart says customers can order groceries online and pick them up at nearly 3,100 locations. The company already offers delivery at more than 1,600 stores around the country using human “associates” to drop off groceries. Though the current delivery system relies on the company’s employees, Walmart has invested heavily in robotics in recent years, introducing thousands of automated shelf scanners, box unloaders, artificial intelligence cameras and other machines. By filling roles traditionally left for human workers, critics say the changes have come at the expense of workers’ job satisfaction and security. “Walmart has invested heavily in its Grocery Delivery service, making it available to customers across the country,” Nuro’s statement added. “Partnering with Walmart gives Nuro a new opportunity to improve and expand our delivery services for the public, and represents an important moment for us as we continue to expand our reach and serve more customers.” The Walmart delivery service will be carried out using Nuro’s self-driving Toyota Priuses, as well as R2, Nuro’s futuristic-looking, autonomous delivery vehicle that carries only products, with no onboard driver or passengers. For months now, as Nuro’s robotically piloted Priuses have been making deliveries across Houston, the


The United States is about to sanction Assad, Russia and Iran for Syrian war crimes

More than three years after it was first introduced, landmark legislation that would provide for U.S. sanctions against the Assad regime, Russia and Iran for past and ongoing war crimes in Syria is on the verge of finally passing in Congress. Expected to become law, the “Caesar Bill” could offer not only for some justice and accountability for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s victims — it could also give the United States leverage in seeking a political solution to the Syrian war. President Trump is expected to sign the National Defense Authorization Act of 2020 after Congress passes it, as early as this week. With bipartisan and bicameral agreement, Congress added to it the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2019, which authorizes sanctions on top Syrian government officials, military leaders and anyone else responsible for more than eight years of Assad’s mass atrocities, war crimes against innocent civilians and crimes against humanity. The bill also would extend sanctions to several major sectors of Syria’s state-driven economy and to any government or private entity that aids Syria’s military or contributes to the reconstruction of Syria — until there’s accountability and justice for Assad’s victims. That means the Russian military, its contract mercenaries in Syria and its energy companies seeking Syrian oil business could be sanctioned if they helped the Damascus regime in any way — and the same goes for Iranian paramilitary forces assisting Assad. The Trump administration is on record in support of the legislation and is expected to enforce it. The legislation is named after “Caesar,” the pseudonym of a Syrian military photographer who defected in 2013 and released to the world more than 55,000 photographs of the torture and murder of thousands of civilians in Assad’s notorious prisons. The photos, which have been verified by the FBI and shown around the world, represent just a small portion of what then-State Department War Crimes Ambassador Stephen Rapp called the worst “machinery of cruel death” since the Nazis. Caesar, who has visited Washington four times to plead for justice and attention for the victims, told me today he cried tears of hope and optimism when he heard the bill is about to become law. “After more than eight years, the victims of Assad’s brutality and their families are one step closer to justice and accountability,” he said. “I am grateful to the people of the United States represented by Congress


Afghanistan Papers trigger demands for similar accountability in Europe

BERLIN — When The Washington Post released confidential U.S. government documents about the war in Afghanistan this week, European allies watched the reactions closely. For one, many European troops fought and died alongside Americans, despite doubts on both sides of the Atlantic about rosy military pronouncements that are now proved to have been misleading. But The Post’s three-year legal battle over the documents also bore echoes of Europe’s own fights over the analytical legacy of the war in Afghanistan. Norway and Sweden are among the few countries, apart from the United States, that have produced their own country-specific comprehensive reports on their involvement in the war in Afghanistan. In the countries that undertook such efforts, the conclusions were often similar to those of their U.S. counterparts, even though their mandates vastly differed from those of the United States’ Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR). In interviews with SIGAR, key actors in Afghanistan revealed how Western officials hid evidence that the war had become unwinnable. Among other issues, some interviewees said the United States had regularly supported corrupt actors and fueled widespread graft. Some of those conclusions sounded strikingly familiar to Bjørn Tore Godal, a former foreign and defense minister for Norway who headed the country’s Afghanistan commission, which interviewed about 350 people. Between 2001 and 2014, Norway spent an estimated $3.16 billion, according to the 2016 Afghanistan commission report; the country still maintains 58 troops in Afghanistan, according to NATO. When the commission’s report was submitted in 2016, Godal said, it was received “with astonishment” about the extent to which the mission had failed to meet the objective of building a more stable Afghanistan. But its conclusions nevertheless received bipartisan respect, Godal said, and are likely to be considered in future decision-making to prevent a repeat of mistakes. Elsewhere in Europe, however, similar attempts proved to be more complicated. Concerns about the political effect of such reports and practical difficulties were among the key hurdles. In some key European NATO member states such as Germany, lawmakers in favor of a Norway-style approach didn’t get far, even though some less expansive attempts to draft reports were pursued. Denmark initially opened an independent Iraq and Afghanistan commission but later shut it down. Analytical attempts to draw comprehensive lessons from Afghanistan faced similar challenges there, too, said Peter Viggo Jakobsen, an associate professor with the Royal Danish Defense College,


Aung San Suu Kyi, former democracy icon, defends Myanmar against genocide allegations

The Hague, the seat of the court, to defend Myanmar against the charges filed last month by Gambia. She became the first national leader to answer directly before the court while genocide is still alleged to be unfolding. She is also the first recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize to be called to account for grisly crimes such as rape, murder, the burning of babies and the large-scale removal of an ethnic group. She was awarded the prize in 1991, for leading the opposition to the ruling military junta and calling for a nonviolent transition to a democratic society. Her decision to appear in court put her in the position of defending military leaders she battled during her 15 years of house arrest. But the move appeared to reflect a calculation that taking matters into her own hands would boost her at home ahead of elections next year. Her appearance underscored what would be Myanmar’s main defense: that Gambia, which brought the case, does not have sufficient evidence to warrant the charges of genocide, one of the worst crimes under international law, and that the military was simply responding to a security threat. She conceded that military officials may have crossed a line in responding to attacks by militants and used “disproportionate force.” But she said Myanmar’s justice system was addressing these allegations. “Please bear in mind this complex situation and the challenge to sovereignty and security in our country when you are assessing the intent of those who attempted to deal with the rebellion,” she said. “Surely, under the circumstances, genocidal intent cannot be the only hypothesis.” Rohingya Muslims said they took comfort in the fact that Suu Kyi and other top Myanmar officials were in the court under the watchful eyes of impartial judges. The hearings “legitimized our pain,” said Yasmin Ullah, a Rohingya activist attending the hearings as a guest of the Gambian side. “The fact that Aung San Suu Kyi has to sit through all of those allegations — I’m sure no one had ever held them to account to that magnitude.” Myanmar, also known as Burma, stands accused of “genocidal acts” that were “intended to destroy the Rohingya as a group, in whole or in part, by the use of mass murder, rape and other forms of sexual violence, as well as the systematic destruction by fire of their villages, often with inhabitants locked inside


U.S. heaps more sanctions on Iran, days after successful prisoner exchange

In a clear signal that economic pressure on Iran will continue despite a prisoner swap last weekend, the United States hit the Islamic Republic on Wednesday with sanctions on its largest shipping company and airline. The State and Treasury departments imposed sanctions on Mahan Air and a state shipping network over its role in transporting lethal aid from Iran to Yemen and weapons of mass destruction proliferation. It also targeted a Shanghai-based shipping company involved in transporting missile parts to Iran. “Today’s destinations put the world on notice [that] those who engage in illicit transactions with these companies will risk exposure to sanctions themselves,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said. The sanctions were the first official action against Iran since a prisoner swap Saturday in which Princeton graduate student Xiyue Wang was exchanged for Massoud Soleimani, an Iranian biologist imprisoned in the United States on charges of sanctions violations. Some administration officials had cautioned against imposing more sanctions on Iran just days after Tehran released Wang, who had been held for three years on espionage charges that the United States considered bogus. But the new measures were designed to send the message that the U.S. campaign of maximum pressure would continue unless Iran’s theocratic rulers reverse course on several issues, including its nuclear program, missile testing and support for militia groups in neighboring countries. “The message is: Don’t confuse successful hostage negotiations with our campaign of maximum pressure, which will continue. You’re hurting and we intend to up the pain level,” said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator who is a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Behnam Ben Taleblu, an Iran analyst with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the new sanctions are a response to Iran’s continuing support for Shiite proxies in Yemen, Iraq and Lebanon, even as the country has faced weeks of anti-government protests. “The prisoner swap only means that the administration is capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time,” he said. “It can negotiate with Iran to release those unjustly detained while also keeping its foot on the pressure pedal.” In recognizing the heightened risk to Americans visiting Iran, Pompeo warned travelers — particularly those with dual nationality — that Americans face a high risk of kidnapping, arrest and imprisonment in Iran. But he also expressed a small degree hope that the two governments can negotiate more


U.S. officials failed to devise a clear strategy for the war in Afghanistan, confidential documents show

[President Hamid] Karzai himself, are bringing this up constantly even in the earlier parts of 2002,” What they said in private Oct. 21, 2014 By late 2002, Afghanistan had become yesterday's war in the eyes of the Bush administration. It was already preparing for a much bigger invasion, that of Iraq. On Oct. 21, after spending several hours at the White House in meetings about Iraq, even Rumsfeld seemed taken aback by how much Afghanistan had receded from Bush’s mind, according to a previously unpublished memo that the defense secretary wrote later that day. Just before 3 p.m., Rumsfeld got a few minutes alone with the commander in chief. Rumsfeld asked Bush whether he wanted to arrange a meeting with Army Gen. Tommy Franks, the head of the U.S. Central Command, and Army Lt. Gen. Dan McNeill, who had been serving as commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan for the past six months. Bush was perplexed. “He said, ‘Who is General McNeill?’ ” The memo was obtained as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the National Security Archive, a nonprofit research institute based at George Washington University, which shared it with The Post. For his part, McNeill told government interviewers that he was given little strategic guidance. He said the Pentagon mainly cared about keeping a lid on the number of U.S. troops. “There was no campaign plan in [the] early days,” At the time, McNeill commanded about 8,000 troops — a tiny fraction of the number that would ultimately go to Afghanistan. A few contrarians in the Bush administration pushed to do more. Richard Haass, a senior diplomat who served as the Bush administration’s special coordinator for Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks, told government interviewers that he floated a proposal to deploy 20,000 to 25,000 U.S. troops, alongside an equal number of allied forces. But he said his plan was shot down. “I couldn’t sell the idea. There was no enthusiasm. There was a profound sense of a lack of possibility in Afghanistan,” He added: “It was seen as too much and that is ironic given where we ended up. In retrospect, it looks like a bargain.” By keeping troops to a minimum in Afghanistan, the Bush administration was looking to claim swift victories on two fronts at the same time. On May 1, 2003, while standing under a “Mission Accomplished” banner on an aircraft carrier,


Confidential documents reveal a secret history of the war in Afghanistan

[This story has been optimized for offline reading on our apps. For a richer experience, you can find the full version of this story here. An Internet connection is required.] For 18 years, America has been at war in Afghanistan. As part of a government project to understand what went wrong, a federal agency interviewed more than 400 people who had a direct role in the conflict. In those interviews, generals, ambassadors, diplomats and other insiders offered firsthand accounts of the mistakes that have prolonged the war. The full, unsparing remarks and the identities of many of those who made them have never been made public — until now. After a three-year legal battle, The Washington Post won release of more than 2,000 pages of ”Lessons Learned” interviews conducted by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. Those interviews reveal there was no consensus on the war’s objectives, let alone how to end the conflict. To augment the previously undisclosed interviews, The Post also obtained hundreds of confidential memos by former defense secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld from the National Security Archive, a nonprofit research institute. Known as “snowflakes,” the memos are brief instructions or comments that the Pentagon leader dictated to his underlings as the war unfolded. Together, the interviews and the Rumsfeld memos reveal a secret, unvarnished history of the conflict and offer new insights into how three presidential administrations have failed for nearly two decades to deliver on their promises to end the war. Read the stories in this series: Below are four revelatory themes from the documents. See this statement in the original document The Lessons Learned interviews contradict years of public statements by presidents, generals and diplomats. The interviews make clear that officials issued rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hid unmistakable evidence the war had become unwinnable. Several of those interviewed described explicit efforts by the U.S. government to deliberately mislead the public and a culture of willful ignorance, where bad news and critiques were unwelcome. See this statement in the original document At first, the rationale for invading Afghanistan was clear: to destroy al-Qaeda. But once that had been largely accomplished, officials said the mission grew muddled as they began adopting contradictory strategies and unattainable goals. Those running the war said they struggled to answer even basic questions: Who is the enemy? Whom can we count on as allies? And, how will


Responses from people featured in The Afghanistan Papers

For the project, The Washington Post attempted to contact everyone whom it was able to identify as having given an interview to the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction for its Lessons Learned program. The documents disclosed by SIGAR identified 62 interviewees by name. Through additional reporting, The Post independently identified 33 other people who were interviewed, including several former ambassadors, generals and White House officials. Many of those interviewed by SIGAR declined to comment or said they wanted to read the Afghanistan Papers before commenting. Some could not be reached. Below are reactions from those individuals who wanted to respond further. (All were emailed statements except where noted.) John Allen, former commander of U.S. and NATO forces Quoted in UNGUARDED NATION: For almost two decades, U.S. military commanders have assured the public they are making progress on the cornerstone of their war strategy: to build a strong Afghan army and police force that can defend the country on their own “The Afghan forces are better than we thought they were,” Marine Gen. John Allen told Congress in 2012. Allen’s additional comment (from a Post interview): “I want to acknowledge my homage to the Afghans for their sacrifices. [While I was commander] there were so many Afghans killed fighting every week for their country. . . . That deserves to be acknowledged, because sometimes it is just lost.” Quoted again in UNGUARDED NATION: Marine Gen. John Allen, who served as commander of all U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan from 2011 to 2013, defended the Afghan local police (ALP) and described them as a major success. “The ALP stood their ground 80 percent of the time they were attacked,” Allen’s additional comment: Gert Berthold, former manager for anti-corruption task force Quoted in CONSUMED BY CORRUPTION Gert Berthold, a forensic accountant who served on a military task force in Afghanistan during the height of the war, from 2010 to 2012, said he helped analyze 3,000 Defense Department contracts worth $106 billion to see who was benefiting. The conclusion: About 40 percent of the money ended up in the pockets of insurgents, criminal syndicates or corrupt Afghan officials. “And it was often a higher percent,” Berthold said the evidence was so damning that few U.S. officials wanted to hear about it. “No one wanted accountability,” Berthold’s additional comment: “There were many estimations put forward by varying groups of 25-30%


D.C. man indicted in 1998 fatal shooting

THE DISTRICT A 48-year-old man has been indicted on murder and robbery charges in connection with a shooting that happened more than two decades ago in the Eckington neighborhood of Northeast Washington. Police said Kenneth “Kennyman” Bryant Jr., of Northeast Washington, has not yet made an appearance in D.C. Superior Court, and an attorney could not be located. Authorities released few details of the case and did not describe what led detectives to Bryant after so many years. The victim was identified as James Lane, 35, of Southeast Washington. The shooting occurred shortly after 5 p.m. on Aug. 10, 1998, in the 200 block of S Street NE. Lane died at a hospital. The indictment filed in D.C. Superior Court charges Bryant with first-degree murder while armed and robbery while armed. It alleges that Bryant took money and drugs from Lane and then shot him. — Peter Hermann A man who was severely wounded during a robbery in the Brightwood Park neighborhood in July has died, according to D.C. police, who said his death has been ruled a homicide. Authorities arrested two 17-year-old males in the robbery. Police said they have not filed charges yet, and the case remains under investigation. The juveniles were not identified. Police also have not made public the name of the 40-year-old victim, saying they have not been able to find his family. Authorities said that the attack happened July 22 and that the victim died Dec. 4. — Peter Hermann MARYLAND Chief Baltimore Circuit Judge Wanda Heard received medical attention Wednesday after a defendant threw a metal water pitcher at her as she presided over his sentencing hearing, striking her “somewhere around the middle of her forehead,” court and sheriff’s officials confirmed. Heard immediately recessed the courtroom to seek medical attention as the defendant, Travis Burroughs, was taken into custody to face new charges, court officials said. Maj. Sabrina Tapp-Harper, a spokeswoman for the Baltimore Sheriff’s Office, said Heard had just sentenced Burroughs, 36, to life in prison, with all but 70 years suspended. Court records show the sentencing follows convictions last month on charges of sodomy and false imprisonment. Burroughs was convicted and sentenced last year to decades in prison for second-degree rape, assault and false imprisonment, records show. An attorney for Burroughs could not immediately be reached for comment. — Baltimore Sun


If you’re surprised by what’s in the Afghanistan Papers, you haven’t been paying attention

On Monday, The Washington Post published the Afghanistan Papers, a major years-long investigation into the costs and conducts of the U.S. war in Afghanistan. These papers largely consist of more than 400 interviews conducted by the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR)'s for its Lessons Learned project. Taken together, those interviewed paint a picture of senior political and military leaders as either systematically deluded or intentionally misleading others about both the true costs and consequences of the U.S.’s longest war and of the odds of eventual victory. The butcher’s bill is staggering: an estimated 43,000 Afghan civilians killed, surely an undercount, along with more than 45,000 Afghan soldiers and police, approximately 42,100 Taliban fighters, 2,300 U.S. military personnel, 3,814 U.S. contractors and 1,145 NATO and coalition troops. The financial toll for the United States has now exceeded $1 trillion. Yet none of these revelations are surprising. The title suggests that these are modern-day Pentagon Papers — the encyclopedic 43-volume history that documented a systematic campaign of lying about progress in Vietnam. That’s unfortunate. The actual Pentagon Papers were highly classified volumes smuggled from Rand; the Afghanistan Papers, by contrast, are based on SIGAR reports already publicly available. Many, if not all, of those interviewed have already published their thoughts on the war elsewhere. Scores of journalists have also worked in Afghanistan, providing rich accounts of electoral fraud, corruption, human rights abuses, battlefield setbacks and failed reconstruction. In short, if you’re surprised by the Afghanistan Papers, you haven’t been paying attention. Scholars, too, have been sounding the alarm for years. Many of the issues reflected in the Afghanistan Papers have been long-standing subjects of active research. Here are five issues where attention to scholarly research would have improved decision-making. 1. Many Yet scholars know a great deal about the Taliban’s organizational structure, its propaganda, its ideology, its efforts to govern locally and how it deals with civilians. All this evidence points to a far more resilient, and far stronger, foe than the one found in official statements. The Taliban has proved capable of enforcing order within its ranks, of quashing leadership challenges and of adapting to Western tactics. Policymakers pinned their hopes on the mistaken belief that the Taliban would crack under sustained bombing and military operations. But the Taliban was built to take losses while eroding government control of targeted districts. In hoping to destroy the


Financial regulators propose overhaul of anti-redlining law

credit under the law. The proposal would clarify what would qualify for CRA credit, expand the potential options and potentially give banks more flexibility around what parts of the country the lending would be done in. Banks would also be encouraged to make loans to lower-income borrowers based on where their customers are rather than where the bank has physical branches. Modernizing the CRA “will enable banks to invest more in communities across the country,” Richard Hunt, chief executive of the Consumer Bankers Association, said in statement. “Increasing transparency, reducing subjectivity and ensuring timely examination results are all important issues addressed in the proposal.” But Van Tol warned that broadening the definition of what counts toward compliance with CRA could allow banks to focus on projects with the most profit. They “would rather finance a billion-dollar hospital facility than make mortgage loans to low- and moderate-income people,” he said. “The motivations and incentives are going to go places where you can make the most money.” The existing law should be modernized and simplified, consumer advocates say. But the new proposal would only benefit banks and dilutes the original intention of the law to address redlining, they say. Redlining persists in 61 metro areas — including Detroit, Philadelphia, Little Rock and Tacoma, Wash., according to the Center for Investigative Reporting. The proposal also comes at a time when research shows that banks are closing down physical branches in black neighborhoods — including high-income ones — faster than in the rest of the country. Since 2010, the number of bank branches in majority-black areas has shrunk 14.6 percent compared with 9.7 percent in all other communities, according to an analysis by S&P Global Market Intelligence. At JPMorgan Chase, the country’s largest bank, the number of bank branches in majority-black areas fell by 22.8 percent compared with an overall decline of less than 1 percent, the data showed. The proposal was spearheaded by Joseph M. Otting, the comptroller of the currency, who said Thursday that it would “help ensure CRA remains an effective and relevant tool to encourage more lending, investment, and services in the communities banks serve.” Otting has previously cited his experience as a banker for prioritizing a remake of the CRA. During the global financial crisis, Mnuchin, a former Goldman Sachs banker, led a team of investors that purchased IndyBank and hired Otting to lead it. But when they tried


The British election is about more than just Brexit. It’s about tribalism.

LONDON — Many Americans think of Britain and England as synonymous. That’s not so, and today’s election in the United Kingdom can only be understood if one sees the nation accurately: It is a collection of countries and political tribes. The U.K. includes four distinct nations. England is by far the largest in terms of territory and population and has always dominated the others. Wales has been been ruled from London since 1283, but the Welsh language and Welsh nationalism continue to flourish in some parts. Scotland only became formally part of the U.K. in 1707 and remains linguistically and culturally distinct. Finally, Northern Ireland consists of the six northern counties of Ireland, which remained part of the U.K. after the rest of Ireland became independent in 1922. Each nation has its own separate party structure arising out of different political questions. The dominant question in Northern Ireland is whether the nation should remain part of the U.K. or rejoin Ireland. “Republicans” favor Irish unity while “Unionists” favor the current structure. This division falls largely on religious lines, with Catholics being Republicans and Protestants being Unionists. England’s main parties won’t even contest the election here, with the battle instead taking place between two Republican parties (Sinn Fein and the Social Democratic and Labour Party), two Unionist parties (the Democratic Unionist Party and the Ulster Unionist Party), and a small fifth party, the Alliance Party, that attempts to transcend the divide. Scotland’s politics are driven by the question of Scottish independence. The Scottish National Party has become dominant since the failed Scottish independence referendum in 2014 and is running on an anti-Brexit, pro-independence platform. The Conservative Party is officially the Conservative and Unionist Party, and hence has emerged as the party that attracts Scots opposed to independence regardless of feelings on Brexit. Labour once dominated Scottish politics because of the working-class vote in places such as Glasgow, Dundee and Aberdeen, but has now sunk to a poor third place in Scottish polls. As a result, Labour’s leader, Jeremy Corbyn, can only become prime minister if he strikes a deal with the SNP, and its leader, Nicola Sturgeon, says the price of that deal will be another Scottish independence referendum. These nationalist disputes are not troubling England or Wales much, although the latter has its own small nationalist party, Plaid Cymru, which will likely win three or four of Wales’ 40 seats.


Friday night lights: Geminid meteor shower to dazzle

need to worry about is finding a big chunk of open sky. The more interstellar real estate you can cover, the better your chances of seeing something out of this world. Your best bet is to isolate yourself from city lights. Check the weather forecasts ahead of time — odds are you’ll want to bundle up, especially if you’re planning to spend a good chunk of time outside. (I always throw a sleeping bag and a blanket in my pickup truck, and then camp out on the tailgate facing upward.) Beaches, ballfields and farmland are the best locations to choose. Wide-open spaces with panoramic views of the sky will afford the best viewing. Also important is remembering to ditch the phone. Every time you take it out or look at it, you’re forcing your eyes to rapidly adjust out of dark mode. Realistically, if you’re in a clear, dark area, you’ll probably be able to see 20 to 40 meteors per hour. That’s a few less than other years, but this time around we’re contending with a 98 percent illuminated moon. And there’s no escaping it. It rises in the east at 6:17 p.m. in Washington and doesn’t set until after sunrise Saturday morning. We’re just going to have to live with it. But that’s no reason to skip out on the show! Although the moon will outshine a few of the fainter meteors, the Geminids are a notorious producer of fireballs, and slow-moving ones at that. You’ll have ample opportunity to spot some big green meteors drifting for a few seconds across the sky. For many, clouds and rain could hamper efforts to enjoy the spectacle. That’s especially true in the East, where a large storm system will spread low clouds and showers up and down the Atlantic coast. In the West, a nose of moisture may aim at northern California and southern Oregon, spreading cloud cover all the way through the northern Great Basin of Nevada and into parts of the Intermountain West. Elsewhere, there’s a decent chance of enjoying the show! For the Mississippi Valley and much of the Midwest, it’s looking marginal. In the Lone Star State and desert Southwest, however, you’re in for a treat! No weather woes look to be heading your way. And if you’re one of the lucky ones on a night flight Friday, you’ll definitely want to select a window seat.


'Get Brexit done': Boris Johnson's effective but misleading slogan in the British election

about moving Brexit along, without actually getting too tangled down in all the problems that their position actually involves.” Indeed, while Conservatives have been fond of saying they will get Brexit done, they have been less keen to explain how exactly they will do that. Even if Johnson wins a majority, there’s no guarantee that his Brexit deal will get a thumbs up by Parliament. If it does, then Britain simply moves into a transition period and complicated trade negotiations. Johnson has said he will not extend the transition period beyond the end of 2020, leaving a year for Britain to negotiate a trade deal with the E.U. “That looks, well, heroic,” Usherwood said. “They say it would be easy because the U.K. and E.U. have the same rules now. But that’s not the problem. The problem is what happens when the U.K. wants to have different rules, which is the whole point of the exercise.” Michael Heseltine, a former deputy Conservative prime minister, told a rally in central London last week: “‘Get Brexit done’ — this is the greatest delusion of them all; a Tory majority simply opens the door to protracted negotiations.” Nicola Sturgeon, leader of the Scottish National Party, told the BBC on Wednesday that the phrase was the “biggest con of the election.” “A more honest rendition would be, ‘Getting Brexit started,’” Tony Travers, a politics expert at the London School of Economics, said in an interview. “We don’t know that much more about Brexit than we did before” the election, Travers said. He noted that there have been “impossible-to-follow” debates between politicians on whether there will be customs checks between Northern Ireland and the rest of Britain. “If people who are really interested in politics can’t work out the truth, whether papers are needed to move stuff backwards and forwards between mainland Britain and Northern Ireland, you can see how remote we are from facts.” One fact is clear: Whoever wins the election, the Conservatives or Labour, will be tasked with the next phase in Britain’s Brexit journey. The Conservatives’ slogan is “all talk” said Ellie Medlock, 29, who works in events and on Thursday cast her ballot for the Liberal Democrats. “‘Get Brexit done,’ yeah, you can say it, but no one is going to follow through on that anytime soon. I think I will be well into my 30s before that happens.” karla.adam@washpost.com


Liberty and law are under attack worldwide. Consider the impeachment crisis in that context.

Israel, which boasts of being a stable democracy in a sea of dictatorships, appears paralyzed and polarized as it heads into its third election in a year. More disturbing, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and members of his party have launched an extraordinarily vicious attack on the Israeli justice system, which they claim has been plotting against him. In fact, Netanyahu faces indictment on charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust because the attorney general, who is from Netanyahu’s party and was chosen by Netanyahu, was following existing laws and procedures. Yet the prime minister and his followers accuse prosecutors and police of engineering an “attempted coup” against him. In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who has spoken openly about building an “illiberal democracy,” has pushed for laws to make it harder for opposition lawmakers to band together and to protest legislation. He has also moved to curtail the power of local governments after his party suffered a severe setback in municipal elections. At the International Court of Justice, nearly 30 years after she was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize as a pro-democracy dissident, Myanmar’s Aung San Suu Kyi staunchly defended her government against charges of genocide against its Muslim minority, the Rohingya. In 2017, a military crackdown against the Rohingya led more than 700,000 of them to flee for their lives into bordering Bangladesh. United Nations investigators found evidence of mass murder, gang rape and arson, with “genocidal intent.” The United States has since slapped sanctions on several of Myanmar’s senior military leaders. And this is all just in this week! If you broaden the lens, we are living through what Stanford University’s Larry Diamond has called a “democratic recession.” Except it might be turning into a depression. For 13 consecutive years, the international human rights watchdog group Freedom House has registered a decline in global freedom — fair elections, free press, individual and minority rights, etc. Freedom House has long monitored democracy in far-flung places, so one of its key findings last year was unusual: “The United States retreated from its traditional role as both a champion and an exemplar of democracy amid an accelerating decline in American political rights and civil liberties.” This is the context in which to consider the United States’ impeachment crisis. The facts of the case are blindingly clear. Trump pressured the new Ukrainian government to investigate the Bidens, as described in sworn


British voters care more about Brexit than about party loyalties

important than party identity. The sample was recruited online through Prolific UK and is nonrepresentative. The findings are based on differences between survey answers given by respondents to different sets of information. Each randomly assigned subset of respondents received different information before answering the same questions as did all other survey respondents. We analyzed the differences between these answers and found, for instance, that respondents were more predisposed toward information from politicians who shared their Brexit position but not their party than they were to politicians of their party who did not share their stance on Brexit. For instance, we asked respondents to decide if a newspaper commentary that criticized their Brexit position in a hateful manner should be published online. The text involved strong accusations. If the text criticized their own views, only 13 percent of respondents supported its publication. However, when the text criticized the other side, 49 percent of respondents supported its publication. This suggests Brexit has made voters biased. They do not approve of hateful speech when it is about their views, but they are more likely to approve its publication when it is about those who have a different stance on Brexit. Similarly, voters were more willing to tolerate their side’s breaking campaign laws than the other side’s infractions. They were asked to react to information about how one side broke laws during the 2016 referendum campaign and was fined for it. The fine given was supported by 54 percent of respondents when it was issued to those whose Brexit views they shared. The fine was supported by 77 percent of respondents when it was given to those with the opposing opinion about Brexit. Indeed, a recent survey by political scientists Ailsa Henderson and Richard Wyn Jones even found that a majority of respondents say the risk of violence against members of Parliament would be a “price worth paying” to reach their preferred Brexit outcome. We analyzed views on police violence and did not find Brexit stances created a strong bias. Respondents were about 7 percentage points more likely to disapprove of police violence when it would harm people who share their Brexit views than when it would harm those on the other side of the Brexit debate. However, respondents favored working together with people who shared their views on Brexit. We invited a subset of the same survey respondents that we recruited via Prolific


D.C. man charged with murder in 2018 shooting

A D.C. man was charged with murder Wednesday in a fatal shooting last year in Northeast Washington, police said. At around midnight on Dec. 18, 2018, officers responded to the 1700 block of West Virginia Avenue NE for the report of a shooting, D.C. police said in a statement. They found 25-year-old Donald Lewis of Northeast, who had been shot several times. He was taken to a hospital and was pronounced dead, the statement said. On Wednesday, police said 22-year-old Brandon Wiggins of Northeast was arrested and charged with first-degree murder while armed in the shooting. Police said the case remains under investigation. justin.moyer@washpost.com


At stake in the U.K. election: Brexit and Britain’s place in the world

within six months, another national vote on whether to stay or go, with the option to call the whole thing off. Labour has also been hammering away on a theme that the prime minister and his party “just don’t care” about the beloved National Health Service — and are readying to sell it off to the Americans if they win. While Brits who really want to remain in the E.U. might pivot to support Corbyn’s promised “do-over” referendum, or a smaller anti-Brexit party, many voters say they are burned out on Brexit and just want to see the pain end. YouGov’s constituency-by-constituency poll While Brexit has dominated the election, the two main party leaders have also been dogged by questions about character, particularly their trustworthiness. “As British elections have become more presidential, the question of the leader is now important,” said Tony Travers, a politics professor at the London School of Economics. Johnson has a reputation as someone with a loose relationship with the truth. He was fired from his first journalism job for making up a quote. He became a Brussels correspondent known for outrageous and factually questionable dispatches. In the Brexit referendum campaign, he promoted a highly inflated number on how much Britain contributes to the E.U. That reputation may have been reinforced during this election campaign as Johnson evaded questions — on the impact of his Brexit deal on Northern Ireland, on how many hospitals his government would build, on his relationship with American entrepreneur Jennifer Arcuri, who accused him of ghosting her like “some fleeting one-night stand.” On the final day of campaigning, Johnson was reported to have dodged an interview by hiding in a refrigerator. And then there’s Corbyn, a European-style socialist, who has been mocked for years by Conservative news media as a “red menace.” When Labour released its campaign platform last month, the tabloid Daily Mail labeled it “the Marxist Manifesto.” Corbyn has additionally been criticized for refusing to be pinned down in his position on Brexit and for failing to root out anti-Semitism in his party. It’s notable that many Labour and Conservative candidates make zero mention of their party leaders on their websites and leaflets, presumably because they think they have a better chance of winning without the association. Looking back on the campaign, there have been several potentially pivotal moments. The Conservatives got a boost when Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party


It’s almost 2020, and 2 million Americans still don’t have running water, according to new report

an urban-rural divide. While the lead-contamination crisis in Flint, Mich., highlighted the perils of aging infrastructure in the nation’s cities, rural communities face special challenges, often lacking the economies of scale to upgrade systems and the local expertise to operate them. The situation is so dire in parts of rural America that experts liken it to that in the developing world. “The cultures are different, but the experiences are similar,” said Brett Gleitsmann, a water supply and sanitation engineer with the Rural Community Assistance Corp. who worked on projects in Africa and South Asia before coming to Native American lands. “Always people are hauling water — from a well, from a relative who has water or a public water station.” The United States does not have a comprehensive means of tracking the number of people living without piped water, according to George McGraw, founder and CEO of the nonprofit DigDeep. Harder still is to calculate how many people cannot afford water even if they can access it, said Radhika Fox, CEO of the U.S. Water Alliance, a policy-focused nonprofit group that partnered with DigDeep to produce the report. “That number is much larger than 2 million,” she said. The report was produced by collating federal data sets, including 2014 data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau’s annual American Community Survey, which asks a small representative sample of residents whether they have running water. DigDeep and the U.S. Water Alliance identified six communities with poor access to running water and wastewater services, including the Navajo Nation, and spent more than a year assessing how residents’ lives are affected. In the Navajo Nation, the country’s largest Indian reservation, where water has long been held sacred, about one-third of the population of more than 300,000 does not have a tap or flushing toilet. “Water is life,” the Navajo say. “Tó éí ííńá.” Its cultural importance echoes in the place names — Lake Valley, Whippoorwill Springs, Indian Wells. Here in Sweetwater, or Tó likon, 15 miles south of U.S. 160 on largely dirt roads, the spring water was known for its bracing mineral taste. “People couldn’t get enough of it,” Wagner said. But the springs no longer flow — one of several changes that residents of this drought-prone region attribute to climate change and environmental degradation. The seeps that used to ooze up before daybreak to refresh grazing sheep and goats have disappeared. Rains


The UAE talks a big game on promoting peace. Its recent behavior tells a different story.

war crimes. In 2013, UAE leaders were primary backers of the coup d’etat that ended Egypt’s democratic transition and culminated in the 2013 Rabaa Massacre and the subsequent imprisonment of up to 60,000 Egyptians on political charges. Tunisian ex-president Mohamed Moncef Marzouki has suggested that they also tried to derail Tunisia’s democratic transition. They barely took the trouble to hide their more recent efforts to subvert Sudan’s move toward democracy. Closer to home, the UAE has been a primary driver behind the 2017 Qatar Crisis, when (again in close coordination with Saudi Arabia) they unilaterally severed ties with Qatar, expelling its citizens (splitting many families), ending trade and business ties, and effectively blockading the country. Meanwhile the UAE has one of the world’s worst records on freedom of speech and press freedom. The Internet is tightly censored, blocking access to several human rights organizations, petitions and even news. Access to information is not only restricted but also even criminalized — as we’ve seen in the case of British graduate student Matthew Hedges. He was arrested on espionage charges, tortured and made to sign a forced confession before his government intervened to secure his release. The authorities respond to civic activism and calls for political rights with extreme harshness. We know this firsthand: In 2014, one of us was detained without charge and expelled from the country in which he had lived for his entire life. Others have suffered worse. In 2017, Nasser bin Ghaith, an economist, received a 10-year prison sentence for comments he’d made on Twitter. In 2018, Ahmed Mansoor, an award-winning human rights activist, was also sentenced to a decade in prison for social media posts. In 2012, Emirati security forces arrested 94 citizens who had signed a petition calling for reforms; they were sentenced to lengthy prison terms in closed trials. Family members who criticized the process were also later jailed, and some were later stripped of their citizenship. The UAE’s suppression of civil society activism extends beyond its borders. In 2018, in coordination with the Saudi regime, Emirati police arrested Loujain al-Hathloul, a leading Saudi women’s rights activist whom they had been spying on, and sent her back to her homeland. A few weeks later she was charged with treason. Reports from Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch say she has been tortured and sexually abused. Like Mohammed bin Salman, the UAE’s leadership is attempting a


How The Post unearthed The Afghanistan Papers

The path to The Afghanistan Papers started with Michael Flynn. In the summer of 2016, as the retired Army general became renowned for his fervent support of GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, The Washington Post received a tip that Flynn had given a lengthy unpublished interview railing about the war in Afghanistan. Flynn had granted the interview to staffers from the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) as part of its Lessons Learned project. The general had served in the war zone as chief of military intelligence and carried a reputation for speaking his mind. What did he have to say about the longest armed conflict in American history? It seemed like something the public ought to know. On Aug. 24, 2016, The Post filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for a transcript, recordings and other documents from Flynn’s interview. At first, SIGAR staffers were helpful and indicated the records might be released in a few weeks. Then, on Nov. 8, Trump won the election. Afterward, lawyers for SIGAR would not respond to a reporter’s phone calls and emails. A SIGAR spokeswoman complained she was being kept in the dark by her own agency’s attorneys. “I’m sorry, I’m as frustrated as you by the walls I’ve been hitting,” Jennifer George-Nichol said in an email to a Post reporter. Weeks passed. On Jan. 24, 2017, Trump announced that Flynn would serve as his national security adviser — a highly influential White House job. The next day, SIGAR finally reached a decision in The Post’s four-month-old FOIA case. It denied the request for Flynn’s interview materials, citing an exemption in the law that protects government records generated during the “deliberative process.” It did not elaborate. The denial escalated into a three-year public records battle between The Post and SIGAR that continues to this day. The fight over the Afghanistan interviews has not set any legal precedents, unlike the Pentagon Papers, the landmark 1971 case in which the Supreme Court upheld the press’s right to publish a secret government study of U.S. involvement in Vietnam. But the two cases share a common theme — a challenge to the government’s attempts to conceal the truth about strategic failures in a faraway war. The Post’s efforts to obtain the Afghanistan documents also illustrate how difficult it can be for journalists — or any citizen — to pry public information


Why the State Department rejected a plan to train Saudi intelligence

The State Department recently rejected a proposal by DynCorp to train the Saudi intelligence service because of fears that the kingdom doesn’t yet have proper safeguards to prevent lawless covert operations like the killing last year of Post contributing columnist Jamal Khashoggi. What has disturbed State Department and CIA officials, and led them to argue against the proposal, are reports that Saudi Arabia is continuing abusive practices, including attempts to force dissidents back to the kingdom, surveillance abroad of Khashoggi’s family and arrests of human rights activists. U.S. officials worry that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman still hasn’t recognized that intelligence accountability and reform are necessary to stabilize the U.S.-Saudi relationship. Officials are upset, for example, that Saud al-Qahtani, a close adviser to the crown prince named by the Treasury Department as an organizer of the operation that killed Khashoggi, still hasn’t been charged — and continues to operate behind the scenes. Among the abuses this year that concerned U.S. officials was an effort to lure a young Saudi dissident living in the United States back to the kingdom. A U.S. official said the FBI concluded that he would be arrested if he returned home and warned him against traveling; the official wouldn’t identify the Saudi. The official also cited reports that Khashoggi’s fiancee, Hatice Cengiz, and one of his sons were under Saudi surveillance in London last summer. Modernizing the General Intelligence Presidency, or GIP, as the Saudi spy service is known, is a goal widely supported by current and former U.S. officials. They argue that the security of both the kingdom and the United States would benefit from better management, ethical standards and performance at the GIP. The question is how to achieve this good goal without enabling bad behavior. “We want the GIP to be stronger, but we don’t think this is the way,” said a State Department official, confirming that the DynCorp proposal was rejected. State must review and certify all major foreign military and security sales or training programs. The State Department, responding to strong Saudi requests to reverse the rejection of the training program, is studying alternatives that might provide better oversight and controls on intelligence activities, as a condition for licensing the training program. The goal is to help the kingdom, while ensuring that U.S. training doesn’t unintentionally enable lawless operations, as appears to have happened in the Khashoggi murder. Controlling intelligence


John Crowley continues an uncharacteristically prolific period with the singular ‘And Go Like This’

Throughout his career, John Crowley has been among the most painstaking and fastidious of major American novelists. His magnum opus, the Aegypt tetralogy, took more than two decades to complete, and his readers, a patient and faithful bunch, have become grudgingly accustomed to the long intervals between books. Lately, though, Crowley has been on a creative binge, and the results have been impressive. Recent publications include his rendering of “The Chemical Wedding,” a 17th-century prototype of the science fiction novel; “Ka,” a major fantasy novel; “Totalitopia,” a slender compendium of fiction and nonfiction; and the newly published “Reading Backwards,” a generous collection of essays on subjects both literary and non. Now, we have one more major addition to the list: “And Go Like This,” Crowley’s first collection of short fiction since 2004’s “Novelties & Souvenirs.” The intervening years have yielded 13 new stories ranging in length from a one-page vignette — a child’s impressions of a visit to the Tom Mix Museum — to full-scale novellas. Given Crowley’s reputation as a literary fantasist, surprisingly few of these stories contain overtly fantastic material. “Flint and Mirror” is a tale of war and magic set in the 17th-century Ireland of Hugh O’Neill, Earl of Tyrone, but is presented as an unpublished work by the fictional historical novelist Fellowes Kraft, a familiar figure to readers of the Aegypt sequence. The Edgar Award winner “Spring Break” takes place in a future Yale and uses an experimental style to tell a surprising story of mass murder in an Ivy League setting. In “Anosognosia,” a high school student named John C. suffers a serious head injury and awakens from a three-day coma into a world — and a life — now subtly different. He will come to believe that he has the power to return to a point in his past life and redirect his future along a different path. Is he supernaturally gifted or merely trapped in a complex personal mythology? That is the story’s central question. Anosognosia (and no, I didn’t know what it meant either) refers to a condition in which the sufferer is “incapable of recognizing an illness,” no matter how obvious or life-altering. Thus, the title itself suggests an alternative to John C.’s vision of his peculiar history. The result is a witty, nicely ambiguous variation on one of Crowley’s central fictional notions: There is more than one history of the


The Washington Post to sponsor Aspen Institute Sports & Society’s 2019 Future of Sports series

Update: The Washington Post and the Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program will host its second discussion in the Future of Sports conversation series, “Future of College Sports: Government’s Role in Athlete Pay,” on Tuesday, Dec. 17 from 12:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. at the Aspen Institute (2300 N St. NW, Washington, D.C.). Discussions will explore a potential national solution to the college athlete pay debate, what the implications would be for NCAA and college athletes and what interest Congress has in stepping in to potentially create federal law instead of a state-by-state approach. In the first conversation, Aspen Institute Sports & Society editorial director Jon Solomon will be joined by NCAA president Mark Emmert. In the second conversation, Washington Post Sports and Media Reporter Ben Strauss will be joined by National College Players Association Executive Director Ramogi Huma, former University of Texas Women’s Athletic Director Donna Lopiano and University of New Hampshire sports law professor Michael McCann. In the final conversation, Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program executive director Tom Farrey will be joined by Rep Mark Walker (R-NC),Rep. Donna Shalala (D-FL) and Rep. Joe Tate (D-MI). To learn more and watch online, click The Washington Post today announced it will join the Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program as a media partner for its Future of Sports conversation series. The quarterly series creates a venue for sports industry leaders and stakeholders – from athletes to coaches to policymakers and beyond – to discuss the future of the latest innovations and ideas in sports. Washington Post journalists will participate in these conversations as moderators and panelists throughout the series. The first discussion in the series, “Future of the U.S. Olympic Movement: Reimagining Goals Beyond Medals,” will take place on May 22, 2019 from 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. ET at the Aspen Institute in Washington, D.C. (2300 N St. NW, Washington, D.C.). The Aspen Institute’s Tom Farrey will speak with Sarah Hirshland, CEO of the U.S. Olympic Committee, about what’s next for the U.S. Olympic movement as reforms are introduced following the slew of sexual abuses that emerged in USA Gymnastics. Following the discussion with Hirshland, a panel consisting of Cindy Boren, Washington Post sports reporter; Shannon Miller, seven-time Olympic gymnastics medalist; Han Xiao, chair of USOC Athletes’ Advisory Council and former table tennis player; and Max Cobb, National Governing Bodies Council chair and U.S. Biathlon CEO will dive


Finally, the truth about the war in Afghanistan

to light what the troops on the ground in Afghanistan have known for years: “Senior U.S. officials failed to tell the truth about the war in Afghanistan throughout the 18-year campaign, making rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hiding unmistakable evidence the war had become unwinnable” [“At war with the truth,” front page, Dec. 10]. As a Marine Corps combat adviser, I served in Afghanistan from 2014 to 2015. On Jan. 1, 2015, we awoke to the new world of Resolute Support and “the end of combat operations.” In terms of threats we faced, nothing had changed, but the context within which we faced them changed drastically. When submitting operations for approval, we now had to state that Afghans were in the lead, with U.S. troops providing support. This rhetorical absurdity did not reflect the situation. Afghan troops remained woefully inept, under-resourced and corrupt, and they certainly were not capable of taking the lead. Yet, because of an arbitrarily imposed deadline, we began to lie to ourselves, hoping in some convoluted way that these lies would change reality. I sincerely hope this reporting serves as a wake-up call. Rather than lying to ourselves, we would be better served by having an open debate about the true objectives of our use of force. Lacking this discussion, we will continue to fight for the sake of fighting, with no overarching purpose. Maurice L. Naylon IV The writer is a Marine combat veteran of Afghanistan and author of “The New Ministry of Truth: Combat Advisors in Afghanistan and America’s Great Betrayal.” The reporting on the Gen. George S. Patton Jr. read the whole of the Koran on the ocean crossing leading to his Operation Torch in Morocco in 1942, the first allied amphibious campaign against Nazi Germany. The North Africans were not his enemy, but he still felt a personal requirement to know who were the people he was likely to encounter and what made them tick. Fast-forward to today. How many individuals of any rank, from commander in chief down, have even considered reading the Koran? That would seem to be the first order of business for knowing the enemy. The current caliber of our leadership, political and military, is a pale shade of what it has been in our storied past. We can only hope to rise there one day again. Rocky Semmes Read more letters to the editor.


Second arrest made in November killing in Southeast Washington

THE DISTRICT D.C. police arrested a District man on Thursday on a first-degree murder charge in the killing of a 28-year-old man during a triple shooting in Southeast Washington the day after Thanksgiving, officials said. Authorities said Terell Kevonte Blackman, 25, of Northwest, was taken into custody on a charge of premeditated first-degree murder while armed in the Nov. 29 killing of Michael Cunningham. Blackman was the second person charged in the case. Officers found Cunningham, of Northeast, wounded and unresponsive after a shooting was reported in the 3000 block of 30th Street SE about 10:51 a.m. Investigators also located two other shooting victims, a man and a woman, who were expected to survive. On Dec. 2, police announced they had arrested Devin Hill, of Southeast, on a charge of first-degree murder while armed and assault with a dangerous weapon in connection with the killing. — Clarence Williams A man who died recently from injuries suffered in a July robbery in Northwest Washington’s Brightwood Park neighborhood has been identified as a 40-year-old from the District. Police said Jose Martinez-Coto was robbed about 11:25 p.m. on July 22 in the 5200 block of Georgia Avenue. Authorities said one person assaulted him and two others took his property. Martinez-Coto died Dec. 4, and the medical examiner’s office ruled the case a homicide. Authorities arrested two male 17-year-olds in the robbery. Police said they have not yet filed charges in the killing, and the case remains under investigation. — Peter Hermann THE REGION A trio of janitorial managers at the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority scammed the agency out of a quarter of a million dollars by pretending to buy cleaning supplies, according to prosecutors in Alexandria federal court. Brian Carpenter, the owner of a janitorial contracting firm, was arrested this week over alleged fraud that prosecutors say happened in 2014 and 2015. According to an indictment unsealed Friday, two assistant supervisors and a manager on Metro’s custodial staff used agency credit cards to pretend to buy cleaning supplies from Carpenter, who split the cash with them and never delivered the products. Carpenter would make up fake invoices for the purchases, according to prosecutors, which the custodial supervisors involved would fraudulently certify as having been delivered. The agency’s inspector general began investigating the alleged scheme more than five years ago, according to court records. The three Metro employees implicated in the alleged scheme


The Daily 202: Boris Johnson triumphs by bulldozing Labour’s ‘red wall,’ as U.K. election results show realignment

of blue-collar whites who voted twice for Barack Obama but felt left behind by globalization and uncomfortable with the leftward lurch on cultural issues like transgender bathroom access and gun rights. It’s called the “red wall” in the U.K. because that’s the color of the Labour Party. Fun fact: When American TV networks began using color-coded maps during the 1970s, the Democrats were initially red and the Republicans blue. -- Johnsonlargely united those who want to leave the European Union while his opponents, and those who wish to remain, splintered. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party got just 2 percent of the overall vote nationally and did not win a single seat. In some of those “red wall” constituencies, candidates from Farage’s slate pulled double digits and thereby tipped the race to the Conservative candidate. In his victory speech at Westminster early Friday, the prime minister spoke directly to the many working-class folks who voted Conservative for the first time in their lives. Notably, just as Democrats have made gains among center-right suburban voters (especially women) in the Trump era, Labour improved its numbers in several affluent suburban districts around London that have long been Conservative strongholds. -- The U.K. itself remains at risk of coming apart, as nationalist parties saw another election with big gains in Scotland and Northern Ireland. On this side of the pond, the United States continues to experience the growing pains that always come with realignments. -- Johnson’s gamble to call a national election, which could have made him one of the shortest-serving prime ministers in British history, paid off handsomely. -- Trump celebrated Johnson’s win: -- Just like -- Fleet Street is blown away by some of the places that the Tories picked up. “Nearly 35 years after the end of the miners’ strike and the ensuing closure of the country’s pits, angry, frustrated voters in seats such as Blyth Valley, in Northumberland, have been prepared to elect a Conservative MP to end the Brexit wrangling,” the Guardian notes. “Blyth Valley has only elected Labour MPs since it was created in 1950, apart from a brief period when an independent Labour member represented the seat. Labour lost 15 points, and the seat – target number 116 for the Conservatives – fell to the Tories on a swing of 10.2% [compared to the 2017 election], one of the largest seen on the night.” -- “Yet the Tories’


The U.K. will leave the European Union. Does that mean Scotland will leave the U.K.?

to hold a referendum — unlike separatists in Catalonia, for instance, who held an independence referendum in 2017 without permission from Spain’s national government. In interviews during the campaign, she refused to be drawn on what might happen should Johnson refuse to allow an independence vote. The governments in London and Edinburgh now seem set on a collision course, with the possibility of protracted conflict and potential legal action. This standoff has implications beyond independence. The U.K. looks set to enter the second stage of negotiations with the European Union, covering a future trade deal after Brexit, with far-reaching implications for Scotland. The Scottish government, joined by the Labour-led Welsh government, wants more formal input throughout the process. But it is difficult to see how intergovernmental relations will improve if the Scottish and U.K. governments are also involved in a protracted battle over a referendum. And for the Labour Party, which had a dismal night all around, Jeremy Corbyn will step down as leader soon. Under his tenure, the party attempted to have things both ways on Brexit and Scottish independence. Corbyn pledged renegotiation with Europe but personally remained neutral on whether to have a second Brexit vote. Labour’s position on Scottish independence vacillated, causing conflict with leadership in Edinburgh. This was exacerbated by internal turmoil — allegations of anti-Semitism and general poor performance. The party likely will be embroiled in internal conflict for quite some time. And in Scotland, with just one Scottish Labour MP left standing (down from 41 in 2010), the party’s future appears uncertain. Questions can also be raised about the future of the union beyond Scotland. The issue of the Northern Irish backstop to Brexit remains tricky, although it may not get in the way of Johnson’s overall plans anymore now that the Conservative government will no longer rely on Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party for support. Calls for extensions and reforms to the agreement allowing Wales to govern itself are likely, too, although notable Conservative victories in key Welsh seats may undercut these demands. The overall result may suggest a return to “normal” politics after the uncertainty of the past five years. But it’s likely further instability lies ahead. Read more: Why whisky distillers are uneasy about an independent Scotland Brexit will make things worse. Is that why people voted for it? Boris Johnson is finding that Brexit only works when it’s a fantasy


Labour has a choice: The center or the abyss

like Bernie Sanders, offered the electorate a brand of reheated socialism. He proclaimed himself hero of the oppressed workers as he challenged capitalism, embraced identity politics and presented a platform of unprecedented fiscal incontinence. Yet he was firmly rebuffed by voters, who backed instead an upper-crust conservative widely seen as an untrustworthy buffoon. One consequence of Corbyn’s incompetence is that Britain will now leave the European Union early next year. This could have dire consequences for many struggling communities in the Midlands and north of England that have turned to the Tories. But Johnson’s “Get Brexit Done” mantra struck a chord with voters fed up with a debate that has dragged on since 2016, dividing the nation and paralyzing politics. The Conservatives united the Leave vote, but Corbyn’s tortured attempt to straddle both sides badly backfired. Nationalism has reshaped British politics. Johnson, the leading Brexiteer, who became prime minister five months ago, has booted out high-profile moderates opposing his Brexit plan. Scottish Nationalists swept seats north of the border under their sure-footed leader, Nicola Sturgeon. In Northern Ireland, Unionists are in the minority for the first time. Yet for Labour, this result goes beyond its muddled message on Brexit, the central issue confronting the country. The future of the party itself is in crisis. Blair is the only Labour leader to have won general elections for almost half a century. Under three successors, the party has lost its grip on its historic coalition of liberal metropolitan middle-class voters with working-class supporters — and now that coalition has been shattered. Brexit was the Tory tool, but Corbyn was the cause. Johnson took his party from minority government to a 80-seat majority despite rising only 1 percent in vote share. Labour, stained by the anti-Semitism of hard-left bigots and helmed by a leader viewed as toxic by many voters, lost 2½ million supporters. Many canvassers said they heard the same thing on doorsteps: Corbyn was not trusted to lead his nation. “Every door I knocked on — and my team and I spoke to 11,000 people — mentioned Corbyn,” said Ian Murray, the sole remaining Labour MP in Scotland. “Not Brexit.” Incredibly, it seems the biggest indicator of Tory-backing constituencies was not their stance on Brexit but if they had high proportion of working-class voters. The first shock result of the night came from Blyth Valley in Northumberland, where about 1 in


After Britain’s elections, people are talking about a united Ireland. Don’t hold your breath.

of the United Kingdom. In the end, Boris Johnson effectively abandoned the DUP and struck a provisional deal with the E.U. under which there would be no customs controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, but there would be controls between Northern Ireland and the rest of Britain. Now, the DUP is in a bad situation with little bargaining leverage. The final problem for Unionists is very simple. Johnson’s Conservatives don’t seem to particularly care about unionists, and perhaps don’t even care very much about Northern Ireland’s territorial status. They were happy to weaken Northern Ireland’s relationship with Britain to reach a deal on Brexit. They are redefining their understanding of conservatism so that it is based around English nationalism rather than U.K. nationalism. That poses an existential threat to Northern Ireland unionists, who view the United Kingdom as the core of their political identity. This does not mean a united Ireland Northern Ireland is entering into a world of nationalist strength, unionist weakness, U.K. government near-indifference, and a Brexit deal that emphasizes connections between Northern Ireland and the Republic at the expense of connections between Northern Ireland and Britain. That might seem to add up to a united Ireland in a hurry, perhaps after a cross-border referendum. However, there are strong countervailing forces. The first and most obvious of these is that the government of the Republic of Ireland does not want a united Ireland in the short term. It can see very well how Britain’s politics have been shattered by a divisive referendum over the country’s constitutional status. It does not want to import instability into its own political system by encouraging a referendum in Northern Ireland that would be similarly divisive. It is notable that Ireland’s first response to the election result was to warn against moving to a united Ireland and to express the hope that Northern Ireland’s Assembly (which has been suspended due to disagreements between nationalists and unionists) might now be revived. The Republic’s government wants a return to stability in Northern Ireland rather than dangerous and unpredictable short-term change. The second is that the party that really wants a united Ireland and political upheavals in the Republic suffered some setbacks in the elections. Sinn Fein, which was organically linked to Irish Republican Army paramilitaries, did well in capturing seats, but its overall vote fell. It is being challenged again by the


25 essential documents from The Afghanistan Papers

director of Joint Staff, Indiana National Guard. Served in Khost province in 2009. Interviewed on Feb. 25, 2016. Key quote: Read the document. Former director of Security Sector Governance Center at U.S. Institute of Peace. Interviewed on Oct. 20, 2016. Key quote: Read the document. Retired Navy SEAL. Former National Security Council staffer during the Bush and Obama administrations. Former senior director for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Interviewed on Aug. 25, 2015. Key quote: Read the document. Retired U.S. Army general. Commander, U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, 2010-2011. Former CIA director. Interviewed on Aug. 16, 2017. Key quote: Read the document. Retired U.S. diplomat. Assistant secretary of state for south and central Asian affairs, 2006-2009. Interviewed on Oct. 15, 2015. Key quote: Read the document. Retired British Army general and former chief of defense staff. Commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, 2006-2007. Interviewed on Sept. 27, 2017. Key quote: Read the document. Retired U.S. Army general. Commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, 2002-2003, and NATO forces, 2007-2008. Interview date unknown. Key quote: Read the document. Retired U.S. Army colonel. Strategic adviser to three commanders in Afghanistan. Interviewed on April 5, 2016. Key quote: Read the document. Former senior fellow at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Former adviser to chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff. Former NPR reporter. Interviewed on May 26, 2015. Key quote: Read the document. Former DEA agent and director of counternarcotics task force at U.S. embassy in Kabul. Interviewed on April 19, 2016. Key quote: Read the document. Retired Marine general. Commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, 2011-2013. Interviewed on Nov. 2, 2016. Key quote: Read the document. Financial consultant and business executive. Former forensic operations program manager for anti-corruption task force in Afghanistan. Interviewed on Oct. 6, 2015. Key quote: Read the document. Former governor of Kandahar province, 2008-2014. Interviewed on Jan. 7, 2017. Key quote: Read the document. U.S. combat adviser assigned to an Afghan army battalion as part of Task Force Phoenix, 2007-2008. Interviewed on April 11, 2017. Key quote: Read the document. Former National Security Council director for Afghanistan, 2007-2009. Retired U.S. Army colonel. Interviewed on June 17, 2015. Key quote: Read the document. Part 1: At war with the truth | Part 2: Stranded without a strategy | Part 3: Built to fail | Part 4: Consumed by corruption | Part 5: Unguarded nation | Part 6: Overwhelmed by opium


‘Why now?’ Answers to 16 reader questions about The Afghanistan Papers.

The Washington Post recently published a six-part series and a separate database documenting how U.S. officials misled the public about the war in Afghanistan. The investigation is based on more than 2,000 pages of government interviews with key officials who offered unrestrained criticism of the 18-year conflict. The interviews were part of a project conducted by the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), a little-known government agency tasked with investigating fraud in the war. The office published seven “Lessons Learned” reports based partly on the interviews, but it left out the harshest assessments from people who shaped or carried out U.S. policy in Afghanistan. The Post had to sue SIGAR twice to compel it to release the documents. To augment the interviews, The Post also obtained hundreds of previously undisclosed memos from Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld during his time at the Pentagon. The Post’s Craig Whitlock, who wrote the series, David Fallis, the deputy editor of The Post’s Investigative Unit, and Danielle Rindler, graphics editor, recently answered questions from readers as part of a live online discussion. Below is a condensed and edited version of the chat. What prompted this investigation by The Washington Post? It began when Craig got a tip that retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn had been interviewed by SIGAR. When Craig filed a FOIA [a request for records under the Freedom of Information Act] for the interview, SIGAR denied the request. That piqued our interest further. Craig learned there were hundreds of other interviews, and we began pushing to get them all. The more interviews we were able to obtain, the more significant we felt it was to gather them and make them public. — David Fallis Why are these revelations being viewed as a massive shock? SIGAR has been providing quarterly reports to members of Congress ever since its inception. It’s true that SIGAR has published many audits and reports pointing out fraud and waste. I think what makes The Afghanistan Papers different is that you have people who were directly involved in the war talking honestly, bluntly and unsparingly about the war’s failures — in direct contrast to what our leaders were saying in public. — Craig Whitlock Why was this dropped on the public at this moment? The bottom line is that we publish when the material is ready, which is what happened in this project. I’ve been


The British election result will be good for the U.S. and great for the U.K.

a Hindu temple as he is on a rugby pitch. His chancellor of the exchequer, Sajid Javid, is of Pakistani descent, while his home secretary, Priti Patel, is of Indian descent. His successful tenure as London’s mayor also makes him uniquely appreciative of modern Britain’s international status and population. Johnson’s goal will be to spread Britain’s influence further into the world, not to raise the drawbridge and turn inward. His biggest challenge will be to maintain the union with Scotland and Northern Ireland. Scotland’s voters gave the independence-minded Scottish National Party 48 of the region’s 59 seats on Thursday. While polls still show Scottish voters are opposed to independence, SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon intends to press for a second independence referendum during Johnson’s tenure. He will need to include Scotland in his investment plans as much as the northern towns who voted for his party if he wants to keep the Union. Northern Ireland will be trickier task. Unionists already oppose Johnson’s withdrawal agreement because they believe it envisions a future customs barrier in the Irish Sea between it and the remainder of Britain. Catholics overwhelmingly vote for parties that seek unification with the rest of Ireland, and current demographic trends show they will be a majority of the Northern Irish population within a decade. Northern Ireland’s republicans won’t push to leave the U.K. and join Ireland anytime soon. But Johnson will need to work hard to build continued support for the Union if he wants to forestall a referendum in the near future. These developments should be good news for American foreign policy. A strong, confident Britain will help build support for democracy and capitalism in ways that the United States, as the global superpower, cannot. It will also cleave even closer to the United States in security matters as a tighter Anglo-American alliance helps both nations combat their largely common threats. Johnson’s personal connection to the United States — he was born in Manhattan — will also help cement ties. Johnson’s campaign slogan said he would get Brexit done, unify the country and unleash Britain’s potential. My bet is he does exactly that. Read more: Ian Birrell: Sebastian Mallaby: Megan McArdle: It’s time for Remainers to admit it: They lost Max Boot: Populist nationalism is on the march. No one seems to know how to stop it. Henry Olsen: Boris Johnson is poised to break Labour’s ‘Red Wall’


I helped write the official lies to sell the Afghanistan war

This past week, Washington Post reporting showed that the conflict in Afghanistan has been an operation of deception, as the war’s architects knowingly misled the public about its objectives and progress. But The Afghanistan Papers were not a revelation to me. I was one of the deceivers. From July 2009 to March 2010, I served as one of the U.S. Air Force’s designees for a nation-building mission, and I witnessed the disconnect between what happened on the ground and the messages the public heard about it. As my team’s information operations officer, I played a direct role in crafting those messages. I employed “strategic communication” during events like the 2009 Afghan presidential election and directed embedded reporters to only the sunniest stories, keeping them away from disgruntled troops who might not stick to tidy talking points. But my job wasn’t only to mislead the American public: Our information campaign extended to the Afghan people and to higher-ups within the American military itself. I arrived in Paktia province in July 2009, as part of a provincial reconstruction team (PRT). At 25, I embodied the kind of idealistic fervor that the military depends on. I wanted to make a difference by building support for the government, eroding support for the insurgency, increasing access to basic services and enhancing the rule of law. These initiatives seemed worthy, noble even, and each required local buy-in. If we were to win the war, we would do so with hearts and minds. And we would win hearts and minds with information. With low literacy rates and minimal access to electricity, information in Afghanistan flows largely over the airwaves. We relied on hand-crank radios disseminated to Afghans by coalition forces, tuned to stations owned and operated by coalition forces. I wrote broadcast news copy for the team’s interpreters to translate and thought of it as a persuasive tool, rather than strictly fact-sharing. Local listeners were, in military lingo, the subjects of “non-lethal targeting.” As one of my military supervisors constantly repeated, “We control the message!” It was a power we wielded strategically. As accusations of fraud, ballot tampering and voter intimidation circulated around the presidential election, I followed my supervisors’ directives to “aggressively pursue” interviews with members of security forces and government officials “highlighting the transparency and legitimacy of the election process.” For a “good news story” radio broadcast to the Afghan people, I interviewed a detainee


How Boris Johnson — and Jeremy Corbyn — turned British politics upside down

time around didn’t highlight its renewed proposal to abolish tuition fees, while its ambivalence over Brexit failed to inspire a demographic that was overwhelmingly pro-remain. And yet young people will bear the brunt of what comes next. In a sense, this was not the worst night in modern Britain’s history but the worst in its future. Brexit, in all scenarios, will erect social, economic and political barriers with the rest of Europe. Britain will become smaller and lonelier. In an attempt to compensate for Brexit’s losses, Johnson will supplicate for trade deals around the world, and Britons fear President Trump’s price. This election could also signal the end of the United Kingdom as a political entity. Scottish nationalists gained 13 constituencies last night and now occupy 48 of Scotland’s 59 Westminster seats. The Scottish National Party’s leader, Nicola Sturgeon, will redouble her efforts to hold a new referendum on independence. Northern Irish nationalists, too, earned significant victories, while unionists continue to denounce Johnson’s Brexit deal, which erects a customs wall with Great Britain. The largest victory of all was for English nationalism. Brexit was never a project of the whole country, and only England and Wales endorsed it. Its dependence on nostalgia, anti-immigrant sentiment and the language of global buccaneering and domestic control profoundly alienates other parts of the U.K. The Conservative Party is no longer the spiritual home of unionism, but Brexit. Ultimately, Johnson’s success may also have laid the foundations for his eventual downfall. His duplicitousness is legendary. His campaign was littered with disinformation. When he was questioned in television debates about his honesty and trustworthiness, audiences laughed. The truth is that Brexit is not “getting done” but only getting begun. After further years of grueling negotiations, the people who voted for it may not welcome its trade-offs or consequences. Flushed with victory, on Friday, Johnson exhorted the nation to “find closure and let the healing begin.” But the truth is that Britain’s open wounds will last a generation — and it was Johnson who opened them. This week’s revolution heralds the watershed not of national renewal but decline. Britain spent much of its history forcing misery on the rest of the world. Today, it forces it on itself. Read more: Brexit will make things worse. Is that why people voted for it? Five myths about Brexit Boris Johnson plays a clown. He’s really just a power-hungry nihilist.


A bad week for the Nobel Prize

Want smart analysis of the most important news in your inbox every weekday, along with other global reads, interesting ideas and opinions? In 2012, the world’s most famous imprisoned Nobel laureate gave an acceptance speech more than two decades after winning the prize If that moment represented a kind of apogee for Suu Kyi as a global icon, this week marked a nadir. On Wednesday, Suu Kyi took the stand as Myanmar’s top civilian leader before a hearing on war crimes at the International Court of Justice in The Hague. She is the first national leader to appear directly before the court while genocide in Myanmar is still allegedly unfolding. Close to a million Rohingya Muslims fled a bloody military crackdown in western Myanmar to squalid camps in Bangladesh, where their plight seems to be receding from global view. Rights groups warn of further persecution and pogroms to come. “The former democracy icon and Nobel laureate had maintained an expressionless demeanor in court the previous day, as the tiny West African nation of Gambia spent hours detailing stories of systematic rape, murder and other brutality targeting the Rohingya Muslim minority in Myanmar,” my colleagues reported. Then she spoke. Suu Kyi said her country was simply “dealing with an internal armed conflict, started by coordinated and comprehensive attacks” by Islamist militants. She did not utter the word “Rohingya” — a deliberate omission, because authorities in Myanmar refuse to accept even the existence of this minority group, rendered them effectively stateless and cast its communities as interlopers from Bangladesh. It’s a far cry from the commitment to freedom and democracy that won her the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991. Last year, the Norwegian Nobel Committee even had to rebuff calls to strip Suu Kyi of her award for her at least tacit support for ethnic cleansing. Another cloud of controversy hangs over the Nobel Foundation and the Swedish Academy, which administers the prizes for literature. As a result, an unprecedented number of governments formally boycotted his ceremony. Two members of an external committee set up to oversee the Swedish Academy quit last week in the aftermath of the furor surrounding Handke’s selection. “The choice of 2019 laureate was not just a choice about a body of work, it has also been interpreted, both inside the academy and outside, as a defense of the stance that literature is above ‘politics’,” one of them,


U.S. military’s Afghanistan food supplier stays in picture despite $45 million fraud settlement

The U.S. military is allowing its primary supplier of food and water for troops in Afghanistan to continue doing business with the military even though fraud charges against three former executives resulted in a $45 million settlement. Dubai-based logistics company Anham is at least the third supplier for the Defense Logistics Agency’s primary Afghan troop supply contract to be involved in massive fraud allegations. Anham’s former Virginia-based subsidiary, Unitrans International, agreed to pay the settlement last week to resolve federal criminal and civil complaints of obstruction and making false claims. The settlement highlights how the U.S. military effort in Afghanistan, which has stretched for nearly two decades and cost taxpayers at least $1 trillion, has consistently created opportunities for fraud. Three executives associated with Anham, including longtime chief executive Abul Huda Farouki, were indicted by the Justice Department last year. They were accused of setting up a fake construction scene ― referred to by whistleblowers as a “Potemkin Village” ― to overstate progress on a warehouse, jacking up prices for basic items sold to deployed military units and illegally shipping products through Iran. In January, Anham was suspended in relation to the fraud charges and barred from applying for any future opportunities with the U.S. government. However, the suspension was soon lifted because the Defense Logistics Agency entered into an “administrative agreement” that allowed the company to continue its work, providing food and water to 13,000 troops stationed in Afghanistan. In a lengthy statement on its website, Anham said it has agreed to “review and continue to strengthen” its internal compliance programs and cooperate with future investigations. “ANHAM has a long and successful history working with the U.S. government and military to provide high quality services reliably and cost-effectively in active war zones around the world,” the company wrote. Anham sought to separate itself from the litigation, referring to “former employees” and “a former subcontractor” in its statement. However, the company’s administrative agreement, a public document reviewed by The Washington Post, points to the close involvement of the former executives. Farouki, a Virginia-based business executive who was Anham’s CEO for years, independently or with his wife recently owned 25 percent of Anham and a third of its U.S.-based subsidiary, according to the company’s agreement with the Defense Logistics Agency. The two have since placed their ownership interests in a trust managed by Steven Shaw, a former Air Force official who


For Canada, USMCA ends uncertainty, but concern lingers for the dairy and aluminum industries

TORONTO — Ray Laing followed the on-again, off-again negotiations to revamp NAFTA closely — and concluded he was on the losing end of the new deal. He worries the agreement, which opens up more of Canada’s long-protected dairy market to the United States, will eat into demand for the roughly 660,000 gallons of milk produced each year at his Laingspring Farm in Steinbach, Manitoba. But as representatives of Canada, Mexico and the United States signed the pact in Mexico City on Tuesday, Laing was willing to cut Canada’s negotiators some slack. “This was the best of a bad situation,” he said from the farm that has employed five generations of his family. The U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, was greeted largely with a communal exhale here, not because it dramatically benefited Canada or modernized trade, but because the country averted worse outcomes, and many worried about its prospects in the midst of an impeachment inquiry. The deal remains to be ratified by the members. The United States is Canada’s largest trading partner — roughly 75 percent of its exports flow to its southern neighbor — and uncertainty over the pact’s future rankled many. The Bank of Canada this month identified trade conflicts as the main risk to Canada’s economy. “This negotiation has been an existential challenge for our country, and at times, an existential drama,” Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland said at the signing ceremony. Canada had already scored small gains in the initial version of the USMCA last year. It won in its efforts to preserve the dispute settlement process in NAFTA’s Chapter 19, which allows the members to challenge one another’s countervailing and anti-dumping duties before a binational panel. Under the most recent deal, which was revised to satisfy the demands of Democrats in Congress, Canada ticked off a few more items on its wish list. Officials cheered the removal of a provision in last year’s agreement that would have extended patent protections for the special class of drugs called biologics to 10 years, increasing costs for Canadian patients. The United States agreed to end panel-blocking, which gave countries the ability to obstruct dispute settlement by refusing to appoint arbitrators. “All of the new measures line up with Canada’s interests,” said Dan Ciuriak, a former deputy chief economist in Canada’s foreign affairs and trade department. But not everyone is pleased. Canada’s main concession in last year’s agreement was to


Ask Amy: Reader weighs in on anti-male bias

Dear Amy: We men work harder, die sooner and register with Selective Service to be sent overseas to be killed at a higher rate than women do. An epidemic of suicide is going on, and women are worried about petty issues regarding men! Don't you women ever get tired of complaining? You are killing us! Fed Up Fed Up: This is from the official website of the Selective Service (sss.gov): “Virtually all male U.S. citizens, regardless of where they live, and male immigrants, whether documented or undocumented, residing in the United States, who are 18 through 25, are required to register with Selective Service.” This requirement for all men residing in this country to register for the potential to be drafted for military service quite obviously places an undue burden on men. My ignorance of the legal obligation to register is perhaps a function of my own female privilege. I cop to that. Yes, the suicide rate for men and boys is higher than that for women and girls, but that gender gap is rapidly closing, which is heartbreaking on every level. Women fight and work and struggle and suffer, too. We make less money than our male counterparts for the same jobs. We are vulnerable to partner violence, sexual assault, degradation, street harassment, workplace harassment, humiliation, everyday petty sexism and ... mansplaining. Sometimes just getting through the day -- working and taking care of children and elderly parents, while also trying to throw off the mantle of generations of oppression -- is tiring and ... well, a person gets a little cranky. And, yes, complaining IS exhausting, as you no doubt know from your own statement, but sometimes the pettier complaints are placeholders for the big ones. Next time you hear a woman complain about something you consider small, understand that there is more to her -- and her complaining -- than meets your estimation. Dear Amy: We are both retired and so have more opportunity to see things during the day than some of our neighbors. Within the past year we have witnessed some unexplainable activity at a rental property near us. Basically, as far as we can tell, no one actually lives there full time, and yet cars periodically come and go at odd intervals. Sometimes, weeks will pass with no "visits," and then there will be a flurry of activity, with several vehicles all appearing at


Man severely injured in July robbery in Northwest D.C. has died, police say

A man who was severely injured during a robbery in Northwest Washington’s Brightwood Park neighborhood in July has died of his injuries, according to D.C. police, who said his death has been ruled a homicide. Authorities arrested two 17-year-old male youths in the robbery. Police said they have not yet filed charges in the killing, and the case remains under investigation. The youths were not identified because they are juveniles. Authorities said that the attack occurred July 22 and that the victim died Dec. 4. The medical examiner’s office ruled the case a homicide on Tuesday. The victim was identified as 40-year-old Jose Martinez-Coto, of Northeast. Police said Martinez-Coto was robbed about 11:25 p.m. in the 5200 block of Georgia Avenue NW. Authorities said one person assaulted him and two others took his property. peter.hermann@washpost.com