Daybreak, Politics, Entertainment, Sport

Tag: U.S

U.S. falsely accusing China undermines international rule of law
For a long time, some American politicians and organizations, out of ulterior motives,
have stirred up trouble based on hearsay, knitting the conspiracy theory about the
origin of COVID-19 and trying to hold China accountable for the pandemic and claim
compensation from the country.
On May 12, Lindsey Graham, Chair of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary,
even introduced the so-called COVID-19 Accountability Act to instigate chaos again,
showing a total disregard for the law.
A major infectious disease outbreak is classified as a public health emergency as well
as a force majeure in terms of legal theories.
From the aspect of substantive law, the existing international legal system hasn’t
specified in any way that the country where a virus has been first discovered should
assume responsibility.
It is widely known that the virus came into being purely by accident and it is
obviously unfair to falsely accuse pandemic-hit regions and people and cause
secondary damage.
According to procedural law, the principles of sovereign equality and immunity
indicate that the courts in one country have no right of jurisdiction over the sovereign
act of a foreign government to prevent and control the epidemic.
The Charter of the United Nations (UN) stipulates the principle of sovereign equality.
“Equals have no sovereignty over each other,” said the Roman law. The doctrine from
ancient Rome has formed the basis of state immunity in the course of history and been
supported by the judicial practice of the sovereign states nowadays.
A sovereign state is thus exempt from the jurisdiction of foreign national courts, a
right protected by the international law rather than a “gift” given by foreign
government.
It should also be noted that the estoppel principle of the international law requires
countries to be consistent in applying the rules. As some U.S. politicians found no
legal grounds for butting in China’s anti-pandemic attempts, they didn’t simply give
up.
To justify their accusations against China, they intend to amend the Foreign Sovereign
Immunities Act of the U.S., a commitment of the country to sovereign immunity.
Such a move will not only impair the logic and operation of the international law, but
trigger global sovereign litigation, causing chaos in the international legal system and
putting a strain on international relations.
Many legal experts in the world have made remarks to expose the true faces of some
U.S. officials behind such clumsy tricks.
Some American politicians have claimed that the novel coronavirus originates from a
lab in Wuhan, China, yet they fail to provide any evidence, said Lawrence Gostin,
Professor of Global Health Law at the Georgetown University of the U.S.
Facts should matter, instead of unfounded allegations made by some media and
individuals, noted Armin von Bogdandy, Director at the Max Planck Institute for
Comparative Public Law and International Law, adding that he disagrees that China
has to pay the damages.
Peter Hilpold, Austrian legal expert as well as Professor of International Law at the
University of Innsbruck in Austria, pointed out that the unconfirmed claims from the
U.S. has damaged China’s reputation and for this, China could also claim
compensation from America.
The law has to be based on evidence and facts. To find out the origin of the virus is a
serious scientific problem as well as a professional issue that needs to be tackled with
reason, which makes it necessary to listen to and respect the opinions of scientists and
professionals.
There is a general consensus in the international scientific community that the novel
coronavirus is neither man-made nor genetically engineered.
With the further investigation and research into the virus, the pandemic turns out to
happen much earlier than people thought in many countries. Experts from the World
Health Organization (WHO) made it clear that the source of the virus couldn’t be
determined yet.
The joint statement of 27 well-known medical experts from 8 countries recently
published on The Lancet and Nature, both authoritative journals in the world, and the
reports released by professionals from America, Australia and Britain have also
confirmed that the virus wasn’t man-made.
Faced with such facts, some Americans have already become a laughingstock for their
embarrassing and untenable accusations.
Despite feeble arguments, some U.S. officials still refuse to halt the farce of trying to
hold China responsible and claim damages. It is evident that they are plotting to
politically blackmail China through the presumption of guilt.
Tom Ginsburg, Professor of International Law at the University of Chicago, pointed
out that many right-wing politicians in the U.S. are focusing on China’s problem to
whitewash their own mistakes.
Before filing a lawsuit against China, the U.S. might as well prosecute the
government, which is to blame for the epidemic in the country, according to Michele
Geraci, former Undersecretary of State at the Italian Ministry of Economic
Development.
Justice naturally inhabits a man’s heart. By falsely accusing China, the U.S. is openly
undermining international rule of law, which is meant to protect fairness and justice,
not to be used as a tool by some U.S. officials to politically blackmail other countries.
To quote an ancient Chinese saying, “Turn inward and examine yourself when you
encounter difficulties in life.” Amid the global epidemic, the U.S. government needs
to reflect on itself, give priority to safeguarding the life security and physical health of
its people, and stop harming both itself and others.
(Zhong Sheng is a pen name often used by People’s Daily to express its views on
foreign policy.)
May 15, 2020
U.S. politicians reveal their cold-bloodedness in pandemic response
Viruses are common enemies of human beings and the COVID-19 pandemic poses common
challenges for all countries. It is a humane and just act for countries to do their best to help others
in the pandemic while maintaining strict prevention and control policies at home.
However, some U.S. politicians and their followers are being cold-blooded even though they
always speak of Bible verses. They described China’s donation to other countries as “politics of
generosity,” medical teams as “geopolitical expansion,” and material supports as “mask
diplomacy.” Their narrow mind and vicious manipulation are really astonishing.
Saving lives comes before everything as life is invaluable, and goodwill shall be repaid with
greater kindness – those are China’s traditional virtues. China received strong support from the
international society when it had a hard time battling the novel coronavirus, and it is grateful to
and will never forget the assistance offered by each country.
After China achieved initial progress in containing the virus, it immediately started offering
assistance for other countries, launching the most intensive and wide-ranging emergency
humanitarian operation since the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, from Tokyo
to Paris, from Teheran to Madrid, and from the shore of the Black Sea to the cape of Africa.
China is taking concrete actions to build a community with a shared future for mankind.
This spring, batches of medical supplies arrived at major airports around the world from China;
huge amounts of cash were donated to international organizations such as the World Health
Organization (WHO); teams of Chinese medical experts traveled across countries to help relieve
the pandemic; and cross-continental teleconferences were held between Chinese and foreign
experts to exchange anti-pandemic experiences.
Facts shall not be distorted, and any act tarnishing truth shall not be tolerated. Never estimate the
generosity of others with narrow-mindedness, as every effort made by global countries to save
lives deserves respect and recognition.
American dignitaries said publicly that the status of the United States as a global leader over the
past seven decades has been built not just on wealth and power but also, and just as important, on
the legitimacy that flows from the United States’ domestic governance, provision of global public
goods, and ability and willingness to muster and coordinate a global response to crises.
However, what on earth did the U.S. do for itself and the world in the pandemic?
At the initial phase of the pandemic, the White House ignored the warning from the WHO and
failed to take effective measures, which later led to a drastic surge in infections. Besides, it also
passed the buck to China, the WHO and immigrants. Turning a blind eye to the urgency of
pandemic relief, the U.S. enhanced its sanctions on Iran, Syria and Venezuela, and told countries
not to accept the help from Cuban medical teams with various ridiculous excuses. It even
threatened to stop funding the WHO, an important international organization that helps the world
fight the pandemic, and arbitrarily requested to replace the WHO chief.
There’s no refuge in the world as the virus is still rampant around the globe, and only mutual
assistance and cooperation can help the world get through the difficulty. It is a fundamental point,
as well as an international consensus.
On the contrary, the U.S. refused to join a UN initiative to research, manufacture and distribute a
possible vaccine and treatments for COVID-19. “In the past two months, our lives have changed
beyond all recognition. The only thing that has remained the same is President Trump’s failed
foreign policy,” said Washington Post in a recent article.
Washington even ditched its allies when anti-pandemic materials are in short supply, intercepting
medical materials ordered by other countries. Vaccines are considered hope and a sharp weapon in
the pandemic, but the U.S. offered large sums of money to get exclusive access to a coronavirus
vaccine being developed by a German company, in a move condemned as “modern piracy” by
Western media. German Federal Minister of Health Jens Spahn commented that his country would
only develop a vaccine “for the whole world, not for individual countries.”
The power of morality and warmth of humanity are valuable especially in crisis. Some U.S.
politicians compared COVID-19 to traffic accidents, in an attempt to play down the deaths of tens
of thousands of people, which only revealed their cold-bloodedness. Some publically called to
allow the transmission of the virus, so as to “fix what is a significant burden on our society and
resources that can be used” at the sacrifice of the lives of the vulnerable groups and the homeless.
Their cold-bloodedness is way beyond people’s recognition.
They bragged about the “strong leadership” of the U.S. in pandemic response, and U.S. Secretary
of State Mike Pompeo shamelessly declared that generosity is a core American value. However,
those are just empty talks. U.S. Ambassador to Israel once promised to give $5 million to
Palestinian households and hospitals in coronavirus aid. However, Palestinian Ambassador to
France later said the donation was different from what the U.S. had promised, and Washington
lied on its assistance to Palestine. It was even reported by media that the donation was indeed lip
service.
Ironically, U.S. magazine The National Interest noted that the assistance received by the U.S. from
China was indeed more than what the U.S. government has offered its own people. This makes it
easier to understand the Americans who criticized U.S. politicians on the internet, saying
humanity and morality are rare.
There is only one Earth where all countries co-exist. In the global war against the pandemic,
nothing comes before saving lives through international cooperation.
May 7, 2020
U.S. accusations against China on COVID-19 totally immoral
Hypes are recently being made by certain politicians and organizations in the U.S. to claim compensation from China for the COVID-19 outbreak.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is one of them that has repeatedly accused China of covering up how dangerous the disease is and failing to share all of the information it had.
He also stigmatized China and claimed to hold the country responsible when the time is right. What he did not only is harmful, but also goes against conscience.
Such a theory is groundless and the accountability forced on China by U.S. politicians barely hold water.
Some questioned China’s epidemic data and information transparency, because they either had not a thorough check or simply ignored the facts. Some complained that China didn’t take timely measures at the beginning of the outbreak, because they either failed to see the huge difficulties posed by the sudden outbreak of the unknown virus or were reluctant to admit the ignorance and incompetence of the U.S. in dealing with the Pandemic after the country acquired certain information.
China has notified the World Health Organization (WHO) about the epidemic and shared relevant information in a timely manner, fulfilling its obligations according to the provisions of the International Health Regulations. It has also set a good example
for other countries in fulfilling international duties, as pointed out by the WHO.
With concerted efforts of the Chinese people, the country has done a great job in “early detection, early reporting, early isolation, and early treatment,” acted promptly to track the source of infection and close contacts, and released timely information to
the society in all honesty.
The theory about the so-called compensation is also unjustifiable. The anti-pandemic practices of China or any other country are the practices of a sovereign state, which, based on the principle of sovereign equality under the international law, shouldn't be
bound by the courts of other countries.
Even the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of the U.S. has specified that the American courts have no jurisdiction over foreign governments and affiliates unless foreign affiliates have been prosecuted by the U.S. for engaging in illegal commercial
transactions. China’s offering of supplies for other countries was either humanitarian aid free of charge or normal and reasonable market practice. The country has also fulfilled its obligations according to the International Health Regulations.
If the U.S. government winks at or even backs the accusations and compensation calls against China, it will have to rewrite the international law first and promise that such principles also apply to itself in the future.
After all, to claim damages from a country for a public health emergency is without precedent in history. The U.S., for example, has never compensated for the 1918 flu pandemic, AIDS or the influenza A (H1N1) virus that first emerged on its homeland,
or the subprime mortgage crisis that led to an international financial crisis. Besides, the theory is morally unacceptable. It is immoral and shameless for U.S. officials to ask China to take responsibilities for the novel coronavirus pneumonia
outbreak and apologize and pay for the damages, as such a request breaks the bottom line of human conscience.
Despite various backgrounds and motives, Pompeo and his fellow politicians, in essence, are using the virus as a political tool to stir up troubles and suppress China.
When China released timely information about the virus and launched an all-out and people’s war against the epidemic, Pompeo and the like were busy downplaying the risks of the outbreak, stigmatizing China and shifting blames.
When China called for unity in the anti-pandemic fight and assisted other countries out of morality and responsibilities, Pompeo and his colleagues were still discrediting China and sowing discord between China and other countries.
Virus is the enemy of all mankind and countries shall work together to defeat it.
The U.S. can’t become more immune to the virus or contain the pandemic by defaming and slandering China, just like the injection of disinfectant can’t cure COVID-19 patients.
Pompeos are just being big mouths instead of making concrete efforts to contain the pandemic.
May 4, 2020
Why the U.S. has become the country worst hit by COVID-19
A negative approach, delayed actions, and incorrect policies resulted in making the U.S. the country that has been worst hit by the COVID-19 outbreak in the world. The U.S. has over 960,000 confirmed cases and 54,000 dead as of April 26, according to Johns Hopkins University data.
These figures are not very precise, as the number of tests that have been conducted is limited. It is beyond the capacity of even the developed world to test every single individual, let alone the developing world and underdeveloped countries. The pandemic has already become a terrible threat to humankind. Some countries in Europe have already passed the peak, and the trend of new infections is already on the decline. But the U.S. has not reached this point yet. In Asia and Africa, the pandemic is still in its initial stages. Some experts are predicting a frightening future.
Although the Trump administration has recently taken good initiatives, the delay has already caused enormous damage. Timely decisions and the correct policies might have prevented a lot of the suffering. A 2 trillion-dollar package is a very positive step, and other measures have been encouraging. The U.S. is one of the largest economies, the wealthiest nation, and most developed and advanced in science and technology. The U.S. can overcome the epidemic, but it must bear a high cost to do so.
The Chinese government and Chinese people have been brave as they took on this formidable task. From the very beginning of the fight against the outbreak, they have put people’s lives and health first. They acted according to the overall principle of shoring up confidence, strengthening unity, ensuring science-based control and treatment, and imposed targeted measures. China mobilized the entire nation, set up collective control and treatment mechanisms, and acted with openness and transparency. China has put up a strenuous struggle and made tremendous sacrifices. Now, the situation in China is under control, and life and economic activity are gradually being resumed.
Over the last few months, China has been struggling to overcome the epidemic and focused on its goal of saving human beings and containing the virus. China has concentrated all its energies into fighting against COVID-19. The country mobilized all its national resources, and with the support of the public, finally controlled the coronavirus outbreak.
The Trump administration failed to help out its allies in their most challenging moments, when Italy, France, UK, Spain, and Germany were facing a severe threat. If the U.S. had helped its allies from the beginning, it might not have spread so widely or even reached the U.S.
In fact, when China was suffering from the outbreak, the U.S. was overly engaged in scoring political points by bashing China, criticizing its draconian and authoritative laws, accusing it of not respecting human rights and personal freedom, and generally trying to defame the country. But China ignored pressure from the outside world and focused only on eliminating the epidemic.
The U.S. government wasted time, ignored the suffering of the Chinese people and assumed that it would never happen to them. They were relaxed and, to some extent, some U.S. politicians were happy with the loss of human lives and the economic damage China was suffering. Instead, China recovered, and a stable normal situation has almost returned.
The U.S. is now facing enormous challenges, especially as it has now become the worst-hit country. During the recent pandemic, “China-Fever” was very evident in the U.S. Had it spent less time on anti-China sentiments and more on controlling the pandemic, the situation might be different.
May 4, 2020
U.S. practice to claim compensation for COVID-19 outbreak a shame for human civilization
Some U.S. politicians are making the COVID-19 pandemic a political show, from repeatedly politicizing the disease and stigmatizing other countries, to the lousy cliché of claiming compensation.
The political farce staged again and again by the U.S., a major country that touts itself as an “international leader”, is astonishing people around the world.
Even American media outlets outlined the need for joint anti-pandemic efforts from the international society, the mission to save lives, and the trend to conduct anti-pandemic cooperation. However, trying to divert people’s attention, the U.S. politicians showed no conscience, and they shall never be tolerated for undermining international cooperation.
The U.S. side once said openly that it greatly appreciates China’s efforts and transparency, and the data China shared are helpful for the U.S. efforts against the epidemic. However, Washington just had a U-turn, and some U.S. politicians thought they could escape their due responsibilities by doing so.
According to the best practices for naming new human infectious diseases jointly made by the World Health Organization (WHO) and other international organizations, disease names shall not include countries or regions. However, the U.S. politicians blatantly violated the rules and called the novel coronavirus “Chinese virus” and “Wuhan virus.” While the international society is generally lauding China’s contribution made at huge sacrifice, they are forming cliques for blackmailing.
What they have done is an affront to international law and justice. The terms about sovereign
immunity in the international law stipulate that the practices and treasure of a country are not
bound to the legislation, jurisdiction or administration of other countries. More importantly, the
sudden outbreak of an epidemic is a global public health incidence, which is considered force
majeure in legal context. China is the first to report COVID-19 infection, but the origin of the
virus needs further science-based studies.
Facts indicate that China’s containment efforts do not have any causality with the outbreak in the
U.S. Even former Counselor on International Law Chimène Keitner in the U.S. Department of State couldn’t tolerate the practices of some U.S. politicians. She said any professionals with actual working experience about sovereign immunity would find that the U.S. courts have no jurisdiction as long as they take a look at the titles of the lawsuits.
However, some U.S. politicians did not drop the idea at all to claim compensation, and they resorted to exceptions of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Lea Brilmayer, professor of international law at Yale Law School called such practice “a last-ditch effort to do something to respond to the political situation,” and Keitner considered it a “total nightmare.”
China firstly reported the disease doesn’t suggest the virus originated in the country. The source of the virus is a serious scientific issue that can only be studied by scientists and medical experts, not the crazy imagination by certain American politicians. In order to reach political goals, the U.S. politicians illogically fantasized about the virus’ existence in China, and such groundless assumption driven by politics is not even agreed by authoritative infection control specialists in the U.S. who said such blame goes against facts.
It is globally recognized that China has always responded to the epidemic and shared relevant information in an open, transparent, timely and responsible manner, and the country was hailed by the WHO for its moves’ high speed and massive scale which are rarely seen in the world. China’s all-out efforts have established a strong line of defense. The political manipulation by certain Americans who ignore facts and fabricate data has no moral baseline and deviates from humanity.
According to U.S. media, the White House National Security Council instigated U.S. officials to shift the blames to China for the coronavirus, and the Senate Republican campaign arm distributed a 57-page messaging strategy that urged Republican candidates to blame China for the COVID-19 pandemic.
Professor Tom Ginsburg of political science at the University of Chicago saw through the plot, saying the lawsuits against China aim to “cover up for the U.S. government’s own errors” and offer political support for the Republicans in the November election.
Blatantly trampling upon the sovereignty of other countries and damaging the international rule of law with supremacy, the U.S. is standing on the totally opposite side of international justice. It deeply worried Georgetown University professor David Stewart who remarked that“All those folks looking at China ought to be looking over their shoulder saying, 'Wait a minute, can we be sued?' ”
The 1918 flu pandemic originated in the U.S. and caused a huge humanitarian disaster, and who is
to blame for that? The first AIDS infection emerged in the U.S. and later the virus spread to over
75 million people around the world and led to 35 million deaths, and who should compensate for
the loss? The Wall Street Journal is the origin of the 2008 financial crisis, so when will the U.S.
compensate the world for the losses over trillions of dollars?
There are also questions that need to be raised to the U.S. Why are the CT images of the patients
of electronic cigarette pneumonia that broke out last August in the U.S. resemble those of the
COVID-19 patients? What on earth happened in the bioweapons lab in Fort Detrick, Maryland?
When did the earliest COVID-19 infection happen in the U.S., since a COVID-19 patient without
travel history to China died on Feb. 6? Why are American scientists silenced for publishing
COVID-19 studies in the U.S. which always brags about its freedom of speech? Chinese and
European scientists have published multiple genetic sequencing results of the novel coronavirus,
and why doesn’t the U.S. release its studies as the top power in biogenetic studies? The U.S.
politicians must give answers.
WHO head Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus warned that countries seeking to politicize the Covid-
19 pandemic are “playing with fire.” “If you don’t want many more body bags, then you refrain
from politicizing it,” he said.
U.S. politicians should listen to the sincere advice from the civilized world, as the continuing farce
would only lead to fewer supports and self-humiliation.
(Zhong Sheng is a pen name often used by People’s Daily to express its views on foreign policy.)
May 4, 2020
Japan, U.S. evacuate citizens from China as virus spreads
The United States and Japan flew citizens out of the Chinese city at the epicenter of a new virus outbreak on Wednesday, as the death toll rose sharply to 132 and the first case appeared in the Middle East. The World Health Organization (WHO) has said it is confident in China’s ability to contain the coronavirus, but concern is mounting as health authorities reported the number of confirmed cases had jumped by 1,459 to 5,974.
Streets were deserted in many major cities as the number of deaths from the flu-like virus rose by 26 to 132, almost all in the province of Hubei, the capital of which is Wuhan, where the virus emerged last month in a wild animal market. The central province of about 60 million people is under virtual lockdown. “I was extremely worried that I was stuck there while the situation was changing very rapidly,” said Takeo Aoyama, who arrived in Tokyo on a chartered plane carrying 206 Japanese nationals out of Wuhan, with more flights planned. “I feel really relieved,” Aoyama, an employee of Nippon Steel who was wearing a mask, told reporters at the airport in the Japanese capital. Two of those evacuated had symptoms of pneumonia but a coronavirus diagnosis has not been confirmed, hospital representatives said later.
Concern is also growing over the impact of the virus on the world’s second-biggest economy, with airlines cutting flights to China – British Airways is the latest to announce a suspension – and global companies curbing employees’ travel there. The gambling hub of Macau was virtually a ghost town, while malls and shopping centers in Asian capitals such as Bangkok were bare, with many who ventured outdoors wearing green or white masks. Sectors from mining to luxury goods have been shaken by concerns about the possibility of a worst-case pandemic. Hong Kong stocks took a beating on the first day of trading after the Lunar New Year break. Casino and financial stocks led the Hang Seng index 2.5% lower to a seven-month trough. Regional markets, however, arrested their slide, with stocks in Japan, Australia, Korea and India steady or firmer and currencies mostly stable. Chinese markets resume trade on Feb. 3. “In our view, the worst is yet to come,” Japanese securities firm Nomura said in a note, warning of a severe near-term blow to China’s economy.
January 29, 2020
U.S. moves to curtail “birth tourism”
On Thursday, the Department of State announced amendments to some visa regulations aimed at curtailing what is known as “birth tourism’’ in the United States.
Birth tourism is a practice whereby pregnant foreign nationals travel to the U.S. to give birth for the purpose of obtaining American citizenship for the child.
The updated rules, which came into force on Friday, apply to pregnant applicants for B-1 visa meant for business visits, and B-2 visa for pleasure, tourism and medical visits.
Under the new policy, pregnant women applying for either of the two visa types have to convince consular officers that they are travelling to the U.S. to give birth for reasons other than obtaining American citizenship for the child.
Before now, traveling to the U.S. to give birth for the purpose of obtaining citizenship for a child, otherwise known as “birth tourism” was a permissible basis for the issuance of a B non-immigrant visa.
“The Department does not believe that ‘birth tourism’ is a legitimate activity for pleasure or of a recreational nature,” the policy document stated.
The President Donald Trump administration says the new rules are aimed at checking “endemic abuses’’ of the visas and protecting the U.S. from attendant national security risks.
Under the U.S. Constitution, anyone born in the country automatically becomes a citizen, a policy that Trump condemns for producing what he calls “anchor babies’’ and birthright citizenship.
The new regulations also apply to B-2 visa applicants seeking medical treatment in the U.S. Henceforth, they must also show proof of their arrangements for such treatment and prove their ability to pay all associated costs.
On Thursday afternoon, a senior state department official gave further insight into the new changes during a background media briefing on the via teleconference.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) participated in the conference and now presents excerpts of the question and answer session:
Question: How exactly are consular officers going to determine whether a person’s primary purpose of traveling is to give birth? Will you be asking all women who appear to be of childbearing age whether that is their intention?
Answer: This will not be a question that officers are asking all female applicants. They were expressly told that they should not be including this as a question to ask all female applicants. Officers would only raise this topic of primary purpose if they have a specific reason to believe that an applicant is pregnant and planning to give birth in the United States. At that point, the officer would have to determine what the primary purpose of travel is. In other words, is it to give birth in the United States to obtain U.S. citizenship for a child? Or is it some other rebuttable presumption, rebuttable reason that they would provide for giving birth in the United States?
All of our visa interviews for non-immigrant visas, for B-1/B-2 visitor visas, are conversations between the adjudicating consular officer and the applicant to determine eligibility for a visa, and our officers are highly trained professionals who already deal with a number of sensitive topics during visa interviews. And all applicants must currently demonstrate a credible, permissible purpose of travel.
Question: Could you get into more specifics of what that specific reasons might be, given that they are not allowed to ask explicit questions if a woman is pregnant or not? The White House has pointed to a national security concern behind this rule change. What specific concerns were those?
Answer: The most basic way would be that the applicant themselves notes on their visa application form that their purpose of travel is for medical treatment. That would then obviously lead to a conversation over what type of medical treatment the applicant is seeking. Those are conversations that happen every day already as we determine that applicants overcome the presumption of immigrant intent and that they have the financial ability to pay for whatever treatment it is they’re seeking.
With regard to the national security concerns, first off, we would say that obviously, travel for this purpose is incompatible, we feel, with temporary travel for pleasure on a visitor visa. Permitting short-term visitors with no demonstrable ties to the United States to obtain visas to travel to the U.S. primarily to obtain U.S. citizenship for a child creates a potential long-term vulnerability for the United States. As noted in the rule, foreign governments or entities, including entities of concern to the United States, may seek to benefit from birth tourism for purposes that would threaten the security of the United States.
This is a stark difference between aliens using a temporary visitor visa for the purpose of obtaining U.S. citizenship for their children and the extensive requirements applicants must meet to immigrate and naturalise to become U.S. citizens. The previous regulation failed to address the national security vulnerability and this is why we have made the change.
Question: Is a consular officer allowed to ask a visa applicant if she is pregnant? You said they won’t bring it up in all cases, but is the consular officer allowed to make that determination just by looking at an applicant?
Answer: As to the questioning, I would just note every visa case is unique. The interview questions are tailored to the circumstances of each applicant. As I noted, consular officers have been directed not to ask all female applicants if they are pregnant or intend to become pregnant. What we are driving at here is what the actual primary purpose of travel is. Officers would only raise this topic if they have a specific, articulable reason to believe that a visa applicant may be pregnant and planning to give birth in the United States.
All visa applicants have to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the consular officer, that they are qualified for the visa for which they are applying. We are committed to treating all applicants fairly and with respect. Our officers are highly trained professionals who already deal with a number of sensitive topics.
Question: How are consular officers going to determine the costs of certain medical treatments to evaluate if they think an applicant could afford those costs?
Answer: The process for how we assess an applicant’s ability to pay for medical treatment is not impacted by this rule. We are already determining, as part of our visa interview, as part of an applicant’s sort of overall eligibility for a B1/B2 visa, that medical treatment costs would be covered by the applicant, that they have the ability – financial ability, in some way to do that.
Question: Would consular officers be allowed to require pregnancy tests, or ask for pregnancy tests?
Answer: Officers are not allowed to require any sort of pregnancy test. Again, the thrust of this is that the primary purpose of travel – it is not the pregnancy; it is the primary purpose of why the applicant wants to give birth in the United States.
Question: To reiterate what a previous colleague said, visual cues can be used as part of a consular officer’s assessment. Is that correct? You said the totality, so that seems to include visual cues.
Answer: There is no change in the rule that would regulate the questions consular officers could ask from one day to the other. So, this would be tied up in the natural, normal conversations that occur in visa interviews. I would simply highlight that the change from our current regulations to this regulation and how we operationalise these interviews is adding a prong for the actual purpose of travel. In other words, because an applicant is pregnant, because an applicant wants to give birth in the United States, does not mean the applicant will be refused the visa. It is the third prong that this rule changes, which is what is the reason you want to go to the United States to give birth? We have always, in cases where applicants are pregnant and have a desire to give birth, done a calculus to determine their eligibility for the visa based on (1) are they an intending immigrant to the United States and (2) will they be paying for their own – for their medical treatment or will the cost be covered in some other way?
We are now simply adding to it that this particular purpose of travel – going to the United States for the purpose of giving birth to a child to obtain U.S. citizenship – is not going to be allowed as pleasure travel. However, an applicant, who is pregnant, who is planning to give birth in the United States but is going for some other primary purpose of travel – visiting a sick relative, going for business meetings – they could still be issued their visa. An applicant who is pregnant, who has no desire or no plan to give birth in the United States, would certainly still be issued a visa for whatever their other primary purpose of travel is. It’s only impacting the segment of traveler who’s going for this specific purpose…
The U.S. government has no records of the number of women who travel to the U.S. specifically to give birth or the number of babies born to visitors each year.
But the Centre for Immigration Studies, a group that advocates stringent immigration laws, estimated that 36,000 female foreigners gave birth in the U.S. and then left the country.(NAN)
January 24, 2020
U.S., China sign ‘Phase One’ trade deal as tensions ease
The U.S. and China signed a so-called ‘Phase One’ deal on Wednesday thus putting on hold a trade war between the two economic giants but leaves in place massive tariffs on Beijing’s goods while also sidestepping some of the thorniest issues.
The trade war has roiled world markets and slowed global growth over the past two years.
The approximately 90-page deal includes Chinese promises to buy some 200 billion dollars’ worth of U.S. products over two years and implement stronger rules on intellectual property.
It also established a dispute resolution mechanism, which is meant to ensure the deal is enforceable, and provides further access to the Chinese market for U.S. financial service providers.
The U.S. said that if the sides could reach a more expansive Phase Two deal, Washington would roll back tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese imports.
The first phase leaves in place Washington’s tariffs on 370 billion dollars’ worth of Chinese imports, while reducing the tariff rate on some of those goods from 15 to 7.5 per cent.
Analysts also cautioned that some of the most difficult issues in the U.S.-China trade relationship remain unsolved, including Beijing’s subsidies programmes and use of government-run businesses.
Still, President Donald Trump hailed the “historic” agreement at a lengthy White House signing ceremony.
“Keeping these two giant and powerful nations together in harmony is so important for the world.
“The world is watching today.
“Together, we are righting the wrongs of the past,” Trump said, while stressing that he viewed the remaining tariffs as a negotiating tool.
China will buy 40 billion dollars in U.S. agriculture products “in line with market terms,” Chinese Vice Premier Liu He said at the ceremony, while noting that demand would also be a factor.
Trump has made closing the large trade deficit between the U.S. and China one of the goals of his administration.
He also has sought an end to abuses of U.S. intellectual property rights by Chinese companies along with forced technology transfers.
“We are not likely to see in this agreement any provisions addressing the key structural problems with China,” Jennifer Hillman, a trade expert at the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations, warned ahead of the ceremony.
Hillman cited Beijing’s use of subsidies to “prop up” companies that flood markets with goods and drive down prices among the practices.
Chinese President Xi Jinping, who did not attend the event in Washington, praised the deal, in a letter read out by Liu.
“In the next step the two sides need to implement the agreement in real earnest and optimize its positive impact,” Xi said.
“In that spirit, I hope the U.S. side will treat fairly Chinese companies and their regular trade and investment activities,” the letter added.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said on Wednesday, “(The deal) is an extreme disappointment to me and to millions and millions of Americans who want to see us make China play fair.”
Chinese observers also feel like the deal, while halting a trade conflict that was spiralling out of control, may fail to serve China’s national interests.
Beijing might also find it hard to purchase the set amounts of U.S. agricultural, energy, and manufactured goods outlined in the agreement without alienating other countries, said Shi Yinhong, a professor of international relations at Renmin University.
“I think China has made a lot of concessions, and the implementation of the first phase of the agreement poses a considerable challenge,” he said.
Other countries have raised objections to the deal, saying it would force China to adopt a system of “managed trade” to the detriment of other nations, according to Joerg Wuttke, president of the European Chamber of Commerce in China.
The U.S. “wanted to have a real, comprehensive agreement also covering structural changes,” Wuttke said, “and they came up basically with a shopping list that China has to fulfil.”
China insisted the deal is compliant with World Trade Organisation rules. (dpa/NAN)
January 16, 2020
U.S. Senate approves 1.4-trillion budget likely avoiding shutdown
The U.S. Senate has passed a 1.4-trillion-dollar spending package that is expected to be signed into law by President Donald Trump.
The spendings bills – approved in two votes of 73-21 and 81-11 – come ahead of a Friday deadline to fund the government or face a shutdown.
Last year Republican lawmakers and Trump used the budget deadline as political leverage in a bid to get funding for Trump’s border wall with Mexico.
The stalemate over wall funding lead to the longest government shutdown in U.S. history at 35 days.
This year lawmakers across the partisan divide said they wanted to avoid a government shutdown and the 2020 funding bills include 1.4 billion dollars in funding for the border wall.
The massive spending bill provides government funding through September 2020.
It also raises the age to purchase tobacco products from 18 to 21 and provides 25 million dollars towards gun violence research.
December 20, 2019