Retired General Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda, who was Mexico’s Minister of Defense from 2012-2018, was arrested last month in Los Angeles International Airport, accused of drug trafficking and money laundering for an offshoot of the Beltran Levya drug cartel, which also involved him allegedly protecting them from law and order. He denies all the charges.
Zepeda was due to appear in a US Court today to answer those charges. However, in an extraordinary turn of events prosecutors from the eastern district of New York have announced: “The United States has determined that sensitive and important foreign policy considerations outweigh the Government`s interest in pursuing the prosecution of the defendant.” Under escort, the General will be returned to Mexico to face the accusations.
The arrangement was jointly agreed by US Attorney General William Barr and his opposite number in Mexico, Alejandro Gertz Manero. The Mexican Government was outraged that the United States’ Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), hadn’t shared any of the evidence leading up to the General’s arrest on US soil. Mexico lodged a formal complaint, and the incident threatened to have serious and long-lasting effects and consequences on bi-lateral cooperation.
On Thursday, the authors of two studies will present their work and discuss with MEPs in a joint Constitutional Affairs and Legal Affairs committee meeting.
Dr Christoph Demmke, Professor of Public Management, University of Vaasa, Finland, will present “Conflict of interest policies: effectiveness and best practice in Europe“. The study analyses the effectiveness of relevant rules, policies and practices within member states regarding conflict of interest for top political appointments.
Dr Markus Frischuut, Professor, Jean Monnet Chair “EU Values & DIGitalization for our CommuNITY (DIGNITY)”, at MCI / The Entrepreneurial School, Innsbruck, Austria will follow with “Strengthening transparency and integrity in the EU institutions by setting up an independent EU ethics body“. Based on a comparison covering France, Ireland and Canada, this study proposes an ‘Independent Ethics Body’ (IEB) via a new interinstitutional agreement.
Antimicrobial medicines, including antibiotics, have long been overused and misused, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), which added that antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is “spreading further and faster every day”.
Antibiotics are medicines used to prevent and treat bacterial infections, explained the World Health Organization (WHO), and are included in the more encompassing term of antimicrobials.
While bacteria, not humans or animals, become antimicrobial-resistant, they may infect humans and animals, and the infections they cause are harder to treat than those caused by non-resistant bacteria.
FAO maintains that if left unaddressed, AMR may force tens of millions more people into extreme poverty, hunger and malnutrition.
“Just like the COVID-19 pandemic, AMR is no longer a future threat”, said FAO Deputy Director-General Maria Helena Semedo. “It is happening here and now, and it is affecting us all”.
Ripple impacts
The World Health Organization (WHO) stressed that antimicrobial resistance makes common infections harder to treat and accelerating the risk of disease spread, severe illness and death.
AMR occurs when bacteria, viruses, fungi or parasites change over time and no longer respond to medicines, posing a global health and development threat.
The overuse of medicines in humans, livestock and agriculture, as well as poor access to clean water, sanitation and hygiene are some of the factors that have accelerated the AMR threat worldwide, according to WHO.
FAO added that a lack of AMR regulation and oversight, the use of antibiotics as growth promoters in animals, and over-the-counter or internet sales that have sparked a boom in counterfeit or poor-quality antimicrobials are also reasons.
“Around the world people, animals and plants are already dying of infections that cannot be treated – even with our strongest antimicrobial treatments”, stated Ms. Semedo.
Threatening modern medicine
WHO has declared AMR as one of the top 10 global public health threats facing humanity.
DAMASCUS – The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) welcomes a donation of €2 million from the European Union (EU) for monthly food assistance for Syrian families facing unprecedented levels of hunger.
The donation will help Syrians across the country, but particularly those in the northwest hardest hit by conflict, displacement, soaring food prices and COVID-19. Families will get a monthly nutritious food basket at a time when parents are struggling to afford basic food items.
“After almost 10 years of relentless war and shelling, many Syrians have exhausted all their resources and need our support more than ever. The European Union is committed to continue providing humanitarian aid and food assistance for as long as the man-made crisis in Syria causes intolerable human suffering,” said European Commissioner for Crisis Management Janez Lenarčič.
A record 9.3 million Syrians are food insecure and an additional 2.2 million are at risk across the country. Families are facing multiple shocks compounded by COVID-19, including food prices that are now the highest ever recorded. Basic food items are 2.5 times more expensive than they were last year and highly vulnerable families are increasingly dependent on food from WFP to survive.
“Syrian families have nothing left and the needs have never been greater,” said WFP Representative and Country Director in Syria Corinne Fleischer. “WFP is grateful for the EU’s support, and this funding will help us reach some of the country’s most vulnerable people who risk slipping further into hunger and poverty after more than nine years of conflict.”
The EU is a close partner and a significant donor to WFP’s operations in Syria. Since 2012, it has contributed over €190 million to WFP’s lifesaving work in the country. Thanks to continuous funding from donors like the EU, WFP provides 4.8 million Syrians each month with food, nutrition support, school meals and snacks as well as assistance designed to help them rebuild their livelihoods.
Contact
For more information please contact (email address: [email protected]):
EU guarantees will enable Silk Road Bank AD Skopje to offer micro finance products under more favourable terms to micro companies
This agreement will support recovery of private sector, development of startups and employment in North Macedonia
After a successful and thorough due diligence by The European Investment Fund (EIF) and the European Investment bank (EIB), the twin Luxembourg based Multilateral Institutes have given a serious show of confidence to Silk Road Bank, its Management, its Business Model, Its Corporate Governance as well as the Bank’s Swiss Shareholder and their professionalism. The Bank is humbled by this show of support by these two institutions and shall endeavor to be the “best in breed”.
Thanks to the EaSI Guarantee, funded by the European Union and implemented on its behalf by the European Investment Fund (EIF), Silk Road Bank AD Skopje will be able to issue up to €5 million in microcredits to micro-companies in North Macedonia. Loans under this agreement will be available to companies with a maximum of 9 employees. The annual turnover of the company should not exceed €2 million.
The funds are allocated from the budget of the European Union Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (“EaSI”), which aims to support the EU’s objective of high levels of employment and adequate social protection, while fighting against social exclusion and poverty and improving working conditions. The microfinance and social entrepreneurship axis of the EaSI programme provides support to financial intermediaries that offer microloans to entrepreneurs or finance to social enterprises. The objective is to increase access to microfinance, which includes microcredit i.e. loans of up to €25,000, in particular for vulnerable persons and micro-enterprises.
To this end, Silk Road Bank has created the Bizz UP package of products intended for financing of vulnerable categories of clients as well as start ups and companies in their development phase with an operating history of up to 36 months. Following the signing of the cooperation agreement with the European Investment Fund (EIF), Silk Road Bank as а financial intermediary will support financing of these categories of clients on the domestic market, through the funds from the Employment and Social Innovation Program (EaSI) financed directly by the European Union. The Bizz UP package consist several micro finance products, such as overdraft, loans for working capital needs and investment loans.
Alain Godard, EIF Chief Executive, stated: “We are happy to be able to provide this kind of support for the private sector in the Western Balkans, especially to micro-enterprises and startups that often face significant difficulty in accessing finance and have been hardest hit by the pandemic. The EU-supported guarantees will enable Silk Road Bank to offer loans on more favourable terms and conditions for their working capital and investment needs. In this way, we help companies maintain liquidity, support existing jobs and create inclusive employment opportunities in the longer-term.
“Silk Road Bank, in the middle of the COVID pandemic crises introduces the Bizz UP Package of products especially designed to support vulnerable categories of clients, as well as Micro-Enterprises, either in startup or development phase with financial support in amount of up to €25.000, with privileged interest rates in comparison to the regular interest rates and favorable payment terms. These products are supported by the European Investment Fund through the Employment and Social Innovation Program through taking over a part of the credit risk of these exposures” said Mr. Igor Dimitrov, President of the Bank’s Management Board.
Background information:
European Union Programme for Employment and Social Innovation
Under this programme, the European Commission supports microfinance and social entrepreneurship finance with an overall envelope of €193 million for the 2014-2020 period. The aim is to increase access to microfinance i.e. loans of up to €25.000, in particular for vulnerable people and microenterprises. In Addition, for the first time, the European Commission is also supporting social enterprises with investment of up to €500.000. The microfinance and social entrepreneurship support is first implemented through the EaSI Guarantee, which will enable microcredit providers and social enterprise investors to reach out to entrepreneurs they would not have been able to finance otherwise for risk consideration. The European Commission has selected the EIF to implement the EaSI Guarantee. https://www.eif.org/what_we_do/microfinance/easi/easi-funded-instrument/index.htm.
About the European Investment Fund (EIF)
The European Investment Fund (EIF) is part of the European Investment Bank Group. Its central mission is to support Europe‘s micro, small and medium-sized businesses by helping them to access finance. EIF designs and develops both venture and growth capital, guarantees and microfinance instruments which specifically target this market segment. In this role, EIF fosters EU objectives in support of innovation, research and development, entrepreneurship, growth and employment. https://www.eif.org
About Silk Road Bank AD Skopje
Silk Road Bank is the former Greek owned Alpha Bank AD Skopje which was taken over by Swiss Holding Company, Silk Road Capital, in May 2016. The bank was founded in 1993 under the name of Kreditna Banka AD Skopje and was one of the first privately funded banks in Macedonia. The turn around at Silk Road Bank that started in May 2016 has been very challenging. Since then Silk Road Bank AD Skopje is focused on growth and shall continue its proven business strategy by embedding bank’s products and services to the needs of the clients and oriented towards the current aspects of the banking business, improved products and innovations, thus confirming the image of a dynamic and state-of-the-art European Bank which follows market trends and demands and meets the needs of its clients.
Archbishop José Gomez said Tuesday evening that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is setting up a team to deal with policies the future president may put in place which diverge from Church teaching.
He announced the move at the conclusion of the public portion of the USCCB Fall plenary assembly, which was held online on 16-17 November.
Archbishop Allen Vigneron of Detroit, USCCB vice president, will lead the special working group.
The team will be composed of the chairmen of various committees, including those covering doctrine and communications.
Joe Biden is set to become the second president who professes the Catholic faith in America’s history. The first was John F. Kennedy.
Speaking to US Bishops, Archbishop Gomez said the Church in the country is facing a “unique moment”, which “presents certain opportunities but also certain challenges.”
He added that President-elect Biden “has given us reason to believe his faith commitments will move him to support some good policies.” Archbishop Gomez counted immigration reform, aid to refugees and the poor, racial justice, capital punishment, and climate change among the list.
President-elect Biden has “also given us reason to believe that he will support policies that are against some fundamental values we hold dear as Catholics.”
Archbishop Gomez said these include the repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which bans the use of federal funds to pay for most abortions, and the preservation of Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision which legalized abortion. “Both of these policies undermine our preeminent priority for the elimination of abortion,” said Archbishop Gomez.
Other potential issues include “unequal treatment of Catholic schools” and the Equality Act.
‘Confusion among the faithful’
“These policies pose a serious threat to the common good whenever any politician supports them,” said Archbishop Gomez. “We have long opposed these polices strongly and we will continue to do so.”
“When politicians who profess the Catholic faith support them there are additional problems,” he added. “And one of the things it creates confusion among the faithful about what the Church actually teaches on these questions.”
He called it a “difficult and complex situation.”
Enhance collaboration
Concluding his remarks, Archbishop Gomez said the USCCB responded similarly four years ago when President Donald Trump was elected, establishing a committee to address “critical issues”.
“Then as now,” he said, “committees already existed to address those issues and the goal was to emphasize our priorities and enhance collaboration.”
“This great achievement shows that together we can overcome any health challenge”, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO Director General, wrote in a tweet.
The outbreak in DRC’s northwestern Equateur Province emerged in early June and caused 130 Ebola cases and 55 deaths.
A key part of the response – with potential lessons for the global fight against COVID-19 – was the vaccination of more than 40,000 people at high risk of falling sick from the frequently fatal haemorrhagic disease, the WHO said in a statement. Like one of the COVID-19 candidate vaccines, the Ebola vaccine needs to be kept at super-cold temperatures to keep it from spoiling.
#Ebola outbreak in Equateur Province, ?? is over. This followed the end of the most complex Ebola outbreak in North Kivu in June. I invite you to read these powerful stories of those working to end the latest outbreak, including #healthworkers & survivors. https://t.co/WnvLG5ysFq
“Overcoming one of the world’s most dangerous pathogens in remote and hard to access communities demonstrates what is possible when science and solidarity come together,” said Dr. Matshidiso Moeti, WHO Regional Director for Africa.
‘Transferrable’ to COVID
“The technology used to keep the Ebola vaccine at super-cold temperatures will be helpful when bringing a COVID-19 vaccine to Africa. Tackling Ebola in parallel with COVID-19 hasn’t been easy, but much of the expertise we’ve built in one disease is transferrable to another and underlines the importance of investing in emergency preparedness and building local capacity.”
The response to both diseases involves finding, isolating, testing, and caring for every case and relentless contact tracing. The innovative Ebola response includes special ARKTEK freezers that can store vaccines in the field for up to a week, enabling responders to vaccinate people in areas without electricity.
The Ebola outbreak was the 11th on record in DRC and its spread raised fears that it could reach the capital Kinshasa before being brought under control. The challenge of containing the disease was complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic and exacerbated by the spread of Ebola cases in remote areas in dense rain forests.
Many affected areas were accessible only by boat or helicopter and had limited telecommunications capacity, and the response was also slowed by a strike among health service providers over pay.
Funding shortage
There was also a shortage of international funding for Ebola, forcing the WHO to turn to emergency funds to support epidemiological and public health interventions.
The outbreak began just as the country was winning a nearly two-year battle with Ebola in the restive eastern part of the country, the world’s second-deadliest outbreak in which 2,280 people died.
David McLachlan-Karr, the UN Humanitarian Coordinator in DRC, congratulated the government and health partners on ending the outbreak and said the engagement of communities had made it possible to stop the outbreak quickly. He also hailed the close cooperation between DRC and neighbouring Republic of Congo, which he said had prevented the disease crossing the river.
Learn the lessons
Mr. McLachlan-Karr said DRC’s Government should try to foresee the kind of pitfalls that had hampered the response effort and prevent them from recurring in future response efforts. He said that there was still much to do to, including taking care of orphans and supporting survivors, and there needed to be an efficient and effective system for surveillance and issuing alerts.
The virus was first discovered in 1976 and the worst outbreak on record hit west Africa in 2014-2016. Although that outbreak killed more than 10,000 people, it also gave rise to the development of a highly effective vaccine and several treatments for Ebola virus disease.
A plastic sheet separates a mother from her son at an Ebola treatment centre in Beni, North Kivu province, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Children will need special attention – UNICEF
“Though the outbreak is over, children affected by the Ebola epidemic will still require special attention and care, as communities affected begin to return to normal life,” said Edouard Beigbeder, the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Representative in the DRC.
The agency has provided care and psychosocial support to hundreds of children whose parents or caregivers have fallen ill or died due to Ebola. Such support is critical for children who are especially vulnerable to isolation, stigma, malnutrition or poverty.
“Throughout the latest epidemic to hit DRC, we have worked with our partners to meet children’s unique physical, psychological and social needs. This includes caring for the wellbeing of surviving parents and family members so that they can better look after their children,” he added.
The agency said that it would continue to reinforce the national health care system to make it more effective in responding to future epidemics. It is also working on programs for Ebola survivors in the DRC.
In addition, UNICEF plans to work with the local health authorities in Equateur to ensure that mothers and children in the areas previously affected by Ebola continue to receive quality essential health care. This includes improving water and sanitation in health centres, promoting hygiene practices in affected communities, provide psychosocial support to Ebola survivors, as well as children affected by the epidemic.
Last week, Saudi Arabia’s Council of Senior Scholars issued a defamatory statement against the Muslim Brotherhood, claiming that the movement is one of the worst organisations and a threat to Islamic orthodoxy. The Brotherhood, claimed the Saudi scholars, “…is a terrorist group that does not represent the approach of Islam… It is a perverted organisation that disobeys legitimate rulers, stirs up discord, conceals foul doings under the cover of religion and practices violence and terrorism. The brotherhood did not show keenness to follow the teachings of Islam or the Sunnah and hadith, but aimed rather to reach power.”
At the same time, the statement accused what is quite possibly the most moderate Muslim organisation in the world of being the incubator for many “terrorist” organisations. Even after Muslim scholars around the world expressed their shock at the statement, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdul Aziz Al-Sheikh, insisted that what was mentioned in the statement is accurate, and claimed that the Muslim Brotherhood “is a stray group”.
Unsurprisingly, the movement denied these outrageous allegations. “The Brotherhood… is far from acts of violence and terrorism, and the dissemination of division within the [Muslim Ummah],” said spokesman Talaat Fahmy. “It is a reformist advocacy group that calls for obedience to Allah through sharing wise and pious advice without excess or negligence.”
In response to the statement of the Saudi Arabian scholars and Al-Sheikh’s remarks, activists circulated a fatwa (religious opinion) of the late scholar Sheikh Abdul Aziz Bin Baz (1910-1999), who was the respected Chairman of the Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Iftaa in Saudi Arabia: “The most righteous Islamic groups and the closest to the teachings of the Prophet are Ahl Al-Sunnah, including Ahl Al-Hadith, Jamaat Ansar Al-Sunna and then comes the Muslim Brotherhood.”
Bin Baz’s opinion represented the view of the official religious bodies in Saudi Arabia and thus the official view of the Kingdom itself about the Muslim Brotherhood. So too, does the statement of the Council of Senior Scholars, so why is it so negative today when it was extremely positive in the past?
In 1936, the founder of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, King Abdulaziz Al-Saud, agreed with Imam Hassan Al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, that the organisation should take responsibility for reforming the religious principles of the new Kingdom and lay down the curricula for schools and universities. At that time, the tribal religious principles proved to be insufficient for the foundations of a modern nation state.
King Abdulaziz also needed the Muslim Brotherhood’s scholars to gentrify the tribal mentality of the Saudi citizens in order to be able to deal with the modern life of the Kingdom after the discovery of oil. The King mobilised his followers against the Ottoman Empire in the early 20th century using the religious legacy of the companions of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and wanted to show his people that he was still committed to such principles while parts of the Arab world were plagued with different ideologies which blamed Islam for the difficulties in the region.
Taking up such an important responsibility in the new Kingdom was not free of obligations. King Abdulaziz set his conditions which led, during the reign of one of his many sons, for example, to the Muslim Brotherhood being asked to provide its expertise to help in the recruitment, fundraising and organisation of the Mujahideen who were encouraged by the United States and Saudi Arabia to fight the Soviet Union’s occupation of Afghanistan. According to Amin Mohammad Habla, the movement responded to this request “enthusiastically” on the basis of honouring their principle of Islamic “brotherhood”.
According to Habla, this made the Brotherhood very well respected in the Kingdom, which received its leaders and members warmly, many of whom had been released from Egyptian prisons during the rule of Gamal Abdel Nasser and Anwar Al-Sadat.
In a paper for the Washington Institute for the Near East Policy, Mohamed Qandil wrote: “Saud Bin Abdulaziz followed the same path as his father, while the Brotherhood’s second Supreme Guide Mohammed Al-Hudaybi followed in Al-Banna’s footsteps, and the close relations between the two institutions continued. Those relations were clearly manifested in Faisal Bin Abdulaziz’s position in the organisation, as the king and his ‘Islamic unity’ project were in direct confrontation with ‘Pan-Arab nationalism’ and Nasserist ideology.”
The honeymoon did not last. After the assassination of King Faisal Bin Abdulaziz, the relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood was shaken as rulers of the Kingdom saw that the outcomes of the school and university curricula did not keep up with their ambitions. They wanted absolute obedience to the ruler, but the Brotherhood brought up generations on the principles of freedom of religious beliefs and expression, including being able to express opposition to those in government.
Researchers and observers more or less agree that the opposition of the Muslim Brotherhood to the Kingdom’s request for American help to liberate Kuwait from Saddam Hussein in 1990, and the letter to King Fahd Bin Abdulaziz on this issue by the prominent late Saudi Scholar Sheikh Safar Al-Hawali, were the main reasons for the start of the demonisation of the movement. By then the Brotherhood had become the umbrella group for most of the moderate Muslim scholars around the world.
At the beginning of the 21st century, these doubts were translated into action. Under a lot of pressure, Saudi Arabia was obliged to change its policy with the Muslim Brotherhood after the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington. The pressure came from other Arab leaders who already suppressed the group, as they claimed that the Brotherhood was responsible for the existence of Al-Qaeda, which was accused of carrying out the terrorist attacks.
The Saudi government cracked down on the Brotherhood’s funding sources and closed its charitable organisations. The then Saudi Interior Minister, Prince Nayef Bin Abdulaziz, had the responsibility of fighting Al-Qaeda in the Kingdom as part of the US “war on terror”, and claimed in an interview with Kuwait’s Al-Siyasa newspaper that the Muslim Brotherhood “is the source of the crisis.”
Saudi Arabia continued to distance itself from the movement when the Brotherhood came to global prominence after the rise of the Islamists in Turkey and Palestine, who won majorities in free and fair elections.
“After the spread of the 2011 Arab revolutions, the kingdom [under King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz] began to adopt a new approach towards the Brotherhood,” wrote Qandil, adding: “During this period, some demands for reform were adopted by Brotherhood affiliates, which pushed the Saudi regime to turn against them. This was especially the case regarding neighbouring Egypt, where the kingdom applauded the removal of the Brotherhood president Mohamed Morsi and supported the current regime’s firm stance against them.” Following the 2013 coup against Morsi, Egypt blacklisted the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group. Saudi Arabia took the same baseless decision.
After the death of King Abdullah in 2015, his aging brother Salman took the throne. He continued the same hostile approach towards the Muslim Brotherhood even though the late Saud Al-Faisal, the then Minister of Foreign Affairs, said soon after Salman’s accession: “We do not have any problem with the Muslim Brotherhood. Our problem is only with a small group affiliated with this organisation. They are the ones who bow their heads in homage to the Supreme Guide.”
Saudi Arabia’s King Salmanin Abdulaziz Al-Saud in Saudi Arabia on 1 June 2019 [Bandar Algaloud/Anadolu Agency]
That was the core of the issue. The Saudis used the Muslim Brotherhood to exploit religion when it suited them, and then wanted the movement’s affiliates to obey the government in Riyadh.
The movement’s affiliates in Yemen, who were strong on the ground during the revolution against the regime, were basically ordered to kneel down before the Saudi-led coalition which was interfering in the country. The Kingdom invited a number of Muslim Brotherhood officials, including the then leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, and asked them to mediate with the Muslim Brotherhood’s Al-Islah Party in Yemen on behalf of the Saudi-led coalition.
Following this, the now de facto ruler of the Kingdom, Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman, declared that the time for religious restrictions on Saudi life has ended so “the harmonious period between the Brotherhood and the Kingdom has [also] ended.”
When the Muslim Brotherhood was needed, it was praised and when it was not needed, it was demonised. This is the reason why the top religious institution in the Kingdom is defaming the moderate group in order to justify the open war against it. This approach has been hailed by Israel, which said, “We are in need for such approach.”
According to the Secretary General of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, it is “impossible” that the aforementioned statement was issued by a religious commission. “It must have been issued by the interior ministry and signed by the religious commission,” insisted Dr Ali Al Qaradaghi.
There, in a nutshell, is the malaise affecting the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia under Bin Salman. Religion has become a tool to stay in power, and if that means denigrating organisations like the Muslim Brotherhood, so be it. Nothing must get in the way of the Crown Prince being able to befriend the Zionist enemies of Islam in the West and, increasingly, across the Arab world.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
