Latest news with #CFR
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
FMCSA streamlines regulations on truck routing, civil penalties
WASHINGTON — The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is making changes to two truck safety regulations to eliminate potential red tape and improve consistency and clarity for the industry. In a final rule that takes effect on Friday, FMCSA is repealing for-hire motor carrier routing regulations as they relate to serving municipalities and unincorporated communities, according to a notice posted on Tuesday. 'The purpose of this final rule is to remove an outdated regulation … as it no longer accurately reflects the agency's current statutory authority,' FMCSA stated. The motor carrier routing regulation authorizes freight carriers and freight forwarders to serve points within the commercial zones and territorial limits of municipalities and unincorporated communities. However, federal law does not authorize FMCSA to include routing limitations when granting operating authority to U.S.-domiciled motor carriers, the agency stated, which makes the motor carrier routing regulation obsolete. 'This final rule will remove the obsolete regulation thereby streamlining the CFR [Code of Federal Regulations] and eliminating a source of possible confusion for stakeholders.' Final rules issued by FMCSA are routinely preceded by a notice-and-comment period. That will not happen in this case, because 'retaining regulations that are unlawful is plainly contrary to the public interest,' the notice states. 'Agencies thus have ample cause and the legal authority to immediately repeal unlawful regulations. Furthermore, notice-and-comment proceedings are unnecessary where repeal is based purely on legal analysis. For these reasons, FMCSA finds good cause that notice and public comment on this final rule are unnecessary.' In another final rule posted on Tuesday, a civil penalties schedule update, FMCSA is amending its regulations to remove the reference to rules under the Transportation Department's 'Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Program' from the agency's civil penalty schedule. 'Instead, the civil penalty schedule will refer solely to the part of the Code of Federal Regulations where this program is incorporated' into the regulations, FMCSA stated. 'Because the rule does not impose any new material requirements or increase compliance obligations, it is issued without prior notice and opportunity for comment.' The agency explained that removing the reference to DOT's drug and alcohol testing procedures will not affect FMCSA's enforcement programs because any recordkeeping violations relating to testing for controlled substances and alcohol would be cited under a different part of the CFR. 'The amendment made in this final rule serves to remove an erroneous reference and to improve clarity for stakeholders,' FMCSA stated. 'It is technical in nature and does not impose any new material requirements or increase compliance obligations.' FMCSA unveils 18 proposed rule changes DOT takes heat for drug testing certification delays Lawmakers look at expanding FMCSA's power to rein in cargo theft Click for more FreightWaves articles by John Gallagher. The post FMCSA streamlines regulations on truck routing, civil penalties appeared first on FreightWaves.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Why did Russia invade Ukraine? Debunking Putin's ‘root causes' claims
As Russia continues to bombard cities and towns across Ukraine, Russian officials have hardened their position against a ceasefire, continuing to repeat the obscure demand that the war's "root causes" be addressed before agreeing to any truce. For months, the phrase "root causes" has become a go-to talking point repeated by Russian President Vladimir Putin and his deputies, including Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, to justify their continued aggression. "In (Russia's) telling, they ascribe these root causes to an aggressive West," said Robert Person, an expert on Russian foreign policy and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). "The most concrete thing that you'll hear, when they're talking about the root causes that they refer to, is the enlargement of NATO." Russia has named the alleged threat from NATO in its attempts to justify its invasion of Ukraine, among other reasons, and has demanded that a peace agreement include a ban on Ukraine ever joining the alliance. But Russia's framing is a red herring, Person and other experts argue. "What Putin is after in Ukraine and beyond is not just a rollback of the prospect of NATO membership. It's not about securing Ukraine's neutrality," he said. "It's really about turning Ukraine into a subservient vassal state with a puppet government that does his bidding." The false narratives serve a useful purpose for Russia's government, however, said Mercedes Sapuppo, assistant director in the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center. "When Putin discusses the 'root causes' of his war, he is calling up a framework that he claims justifies Russia's aggression in Ukraine by falsely placing blame on Ukraine," said Sapuppo. "Putin and the Kremlin are using these narratives to frame Ukraine as the instigator of the Kremlin's war." Even U.S. President Donald Trump has bought into the idea, saying as recently as last month, "I think what caused the war to start was when (Ukraine) started talking about joining NATO." Alongside NATO expansion, Russia has at times named additional reasons for its invasion — including propaganda claims of Nazi extremism, and protecting the status of Russian language speakers or the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church — but it has placed outsized emphasis on NATO. In 2018, Ukraine enshrined its goal of NATO membership in its constitution and has since argued that membership in the security alliance is needed in the future to deter further Russian aggression. Yet the idea that NATO is the root cause of this conflict is "nonsensical," said Stephen Hall, assistant professor in Russian and post-Soviet politics at the University of Bath. "It's a narrative that's pushed by the Kremlin to try and get so-called 'useful idiots' to play it up in the media and elsewhere." One sign that Putin's concerns go beyond NATO, notes Hall, is the limited resistance that Russia put up when Poland joined NATO in 1999 and when Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia followed in 2004 — four countries that share a border with Russia. "Then fast forward to when the state with the longest border (in NATO) with Russia, Finland, joins in 2023. There's barely a peep from Moscow," he added. While NATO is relevant, it is only in highlighting to Putin that Ukraine is slipping away from Russian influence, Hall said. Additionally, if Ukraine were to make independent decisions based on the will of its people, it could send a signal to Russian citizens that democracy is a viable option for them, as well. "That, obviously, is a problem for Putin's autocracy, or any autocracy for that matter," Hall said. "It's very clear that the root cause for him, really, is just Ukraine's existence." Before Russia's 2014 invasion, the idea of NATO membership was deeply unpopular with Ukrainian citizens, with only around 15 to 20% of Ukrainians supporting it at the time. Since Russia's invasion, however, support has skyrocketed. According to a poll last year by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, 84% of Ukrainians would like to see their country join NATO. Evidence that NATO is a smokescreen for Putin's motivations is seen not just in how Putin treats other NATO members, but also how it has treated Ukraine for decades, Person of CFR said. "For over twenty years, Putin has very aggressively been targeting Ukrainian sovereignty and Ukrainian democracy," Person said, citing Putin's interference in Ukraine during the 2004 Orange Revolution as an example. In the lead-up to the Orange Revolution, Putin heavily promoted pro-Russian candidate Viktor Yanukovych ahead of the 2004 presidential election, including visiting Ukraine to push his preferred candidate. His attempts to interfere with Ukraine's politics prompted a backlash, helping to spark protests over a rigged election that resulted in Yanukovych's defeat. "Then in 2014, when Russia invaded Crimea, when they invaded the Donbas, membership in NATO was nowhere on the immediate agenda — for NATO or Ukraine. There was a constitutional provision at the time that prohibited it, and required neutrality," Person noted. "How does that somehow spark or cause the Russian invasion of 2014?" Sapuppo, of the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center, says understanding Putin's motivation for the war is necessary for informing the West's strategies for negotiations with the Russian leader. "It's very clear that the root cause for (Putin), really, is just Ukraine's existence. This should make it clear to Western leaders that any agreements to end the war need to be very forward-looking when it comes to security guarantees," she said. If Western leaders were to fall into the trap of focusing on NATO limitations, this would not only fail to address the true reasons for the invasion, but would also allow Russia to establish a revisionist history, she said. But recognizing the underlying motives for Russia's invasion also means recognizing that they are far more difficult to solve than a question of neutrality, Person added. "You could draw lines on a map all day long. No line, unless it incorporates, at least all of Ukraine up to and including Kyiv and its government, is going to satisfy Putin's demands," he said. "At the end of the day, what Putin cannot tolerate is a sovereign Ukraine that chooses its own foreign policies and partnerships, its own economic relationships." Hi, this is Andrea. Thank you for reading this article. The Kyiv Independent doesn't have a wealthy owner or a paywall. Instead, we rely on readers like you to keep our journalism funded. We're now aiming to grow our community to 20,000 members — if you liked this article, consider joining our community today. Read also: What happens to all the guns in Ukraine post-war? We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
DW
2 days ago
- Business
- DW
Amid calls for arms embargo, who supplies Israel's weapons? – DW – 05/26/2025
Spain calls for arms embargo on Israel as Gaza violence escalates — but real pressure would require action from three major weapons exporters. Spain has asked European countries to suspend arms shipments to Israel as international condemnation grows over its conduct in Gaza. At a meeting of the "Madrid Group" hosted by the Spanish government, the host country's Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares called for an immediate suspension of Europe's cooperation deal with Israel. He also called for an embargo on arms shipments. "We must all agree on a joint arms embargo," said Albares prior to the conference. "The last thing the Middle East needs right now is weapons." Among those at the meeting were representatives from Germany, France, the UK, Italy, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Morocco and Brazil and several intergovernmental organizations. However, only a fraction of the nations represented at the Madrid Group meeting actually supply Israel with armaments. Israel is also one of the world's top exporters of armaments, so it has a powerful internal supply of weaponry as well. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) in March reported that Israel is the 15th biggest importer of arms globally, despite it being actively involved in conflict, accounting for less than two percent of global imports. Its imports have also dropped by around 2.3% in the last five years, compared to the preceding period. Crucially, three nations account for almost all of Israel's weapons supply: the United States, Germany and Italy. United States is Israel's biggest arms supplier By far, the US is the biggest arms supplier to Israel, both since the October 7 attacks and also historically. Though its proportional supply has reduced over the last decade, it still accounted for about two-thirds of Israel's imports from 2020-2024, according to SIPRI. This includes aircraft, armored vehicles and guided bombs. Israel is also the top recipient of US aid historically, according to the US-based, nonpartisan Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). As well as a substantial economic contribution between 1946 and 2024, Israel has received $228 billion in military support from the US. Today, most US foreign aid to Israel is military spending. This includes an existing agreement to provide $3.8 billion in support until 2028. Most aid provided by the US must be spent on the purchase of American military equipment and services, according to the CFR. It's unlikely that the US will change its support for Israel. Attempts led by independent senator Bernie Sanders to withhold billions in military sales to Israel were rejected by the US Senate in both April 2025 and November 2024. Germany will continue to provide Israel weapons Germany is a long-time diplomatic and military supporter of Israel. From 2020-2024, Germany accounted for about a third of Israel's incoming arms supply, mostly naval frigates and torpedoes. SIPRI researcher Zain Hussain told DW via email that "Israel has relied on Germany for […] naval capabilities" and that Israel has an incoming submarine order from Germany. Germany's arms supply to Israel has also included armored vehicles, trucks, anti-tank weapons and ammunition. And that is unlikely to change, despite Spain's calls for an embargo. "As a country that understands Israel's security and existence as a core principle, Germany is always obliged to assist Israel," said German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul. Those comments came as German chancellor Frederich Merz told public broadcaster WDR he "no longer understands' Israel's objective in Gaza and that its actions could "no longer be justified by a fight against Hamas." Despite his remark, any future restriction on Germay's arms supply would be a significant development. Germany provided more than €131 million ($137 million) in arms exports in 2024, according to government statistics. The figure in 2023 was €326 million. Italy accounts for 1% of Israel's arms Italy contributes around one percent of Israel's arms. But by Italian law, it is prohibited from doing so given the conflict. The Italian government has been critical of Israel's actions, however reports last year found it continued to supply Israel following the commencement of hostilities in October 2023. That reportedly included €2.1 million ($2.4 million US) in the last quarter of 2023, during which Israel's offensive was under way. That was despite assurances from the Italian government that shipments had ceased. Analysis performed on government accounts by Italian news outlet Altreconomia found Italy supplied €5.2 million in arms to Israel last year. Israeli protesters demand end to Gaza war To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Some EU nations have reduced their exports Israel has no shortage of armaments either produced domestically or through its major backers. Despite pressure from European nations to adopt an arms embargo, Hussain said the most effective block would requires Israel's primary armorers to join. "The USA and Germany are the most important suppliers of major arms to Israel. For there to be maximum pressure on Israel's major arms capabilities, these states would have to be involved in an arms embargo," Hussain said. Some European nations have either stopped the supply of weaponry, or have suspended export licenses. These include France, Spain and the UK, though their contributions are less than 0.1% of Israel's total intake. However, a study of UK trade data, cited by The Guardian in May, found that the country sent Israel thousands of military items despite export ban. However for Germany to heed Spain's call, a major change in US foreign policy would be required, said Catherine Gegout, an international relations researcher at the University of Nottingham, UK. "I think there would be much more pressure on Germany if the US changed as well," Gegout told DW. "But I'm not sure the rest of the EU states [opposing arms] will be enough to change that special relationship with Israel." Despite Germany's long-standing commitment to Israel, Gegout said its ongoing weapons supply is becoming a problem for the European Union. "I think it's a gigantic problem for the EU that Germany is sending so many weapons," Gegout said. She said Spain's attempt to implement an arms embargo serves both a direct and symbolic purpose for countries that may oppose Israel's activities in Gaza. Edited by: Jess Smee
Daily Maverick
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
It's time for accountability and action on South Africa's gun violence crisis
In a country where 33 people are shot dead every single day, gun violence in South Africa has reached levels last seen in the late 1990s. The statistics tell a devastating story: murders have surged by 62% and attempted murders by almost 50% over the past decade, with firearms now the weapon of choice in nearly half of all murders and almost 60% of all attempted murders, while organised crime, empowered by easy access to deadly weapons, flourishes. Almost all the firearms used in South Africa's gun violence crisis are domestically sourced, originating from the state and civilians. Latest data show that civilians reported the loss/theft of 8,452 firearms in the 2023-24 financial year – this number includes 1,648 firearms that were lost/stolen from private security companies, while SAPS reported the loss/theft of 741 service firearms in this time. A crisis of accountability South Africa's gun violence crisis is playing out against a range of violations of our international commitments. As a signatory to the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime (Untoc), the Southern African Development Community Firearms Protocol, the UN Programme of Action on Small Arms and the Arms Trade Treaty, our government is legally committed to maintaining accurate, comprehensive records of firearms within our borders. Yet South African authorities cannot answer a basic question: how many guns are in our country? The Central Firearms Registry (CFR) produces contradictory reports, even for the same year. Our government has further demonstrated its lack of commitment by downgrading its participation in international mechanisms meant to combat these problems. The Untoc review process – a crucial international accountability mechanism – has been outsourced to a junior official, while South Africa hasn't submitted required reports under the UN Small Arms Programme of Action since 2014. The deadly consequences The connection between this record-keeping failure and gun-related violence is clear. Firearms are both enablers and multipliers of violent crime. They were used in 42% of murders and 58% of attempted murders in periods where data were available. With guns increasingly becoming the weapon of choice for criminals, our government's inability to track and control firearms represents a profound national security failure. The infamous case of police Colonel Christiaan Prinsloo illustrates the deadly serious consequences. As custodian of a police armoury, Prinsloo stole 2,000+ firearms marked for destruction and sold them to organised crime groups, feeding violence across communities. In Prinsloo's initial statement to his lawyer, he described how firearms were 'removed from the police computer' before being sold to criminals. Gun Free South Africa's Prinsloo Guns Class Action, instituted on behalf of affected families, is an attempt to get justice by holding the state accountable for failing to safeguard its weapons. A path forward South Africa doesn't lack solutions—it lacks implementation. Here's what must happen: First, we must tighten controls over licensed firearms held by the state and civilians to prevent leakage and criminal use. This includes urgently repairing our broken Central Firearms Registry, because without accurate information on who owns what firearms for which purpose, all other interventions will fail. This requires both technical upgrades and a cultural shift within the institution, which may require a frank discussion about outsourcing (not privatising) functions. Second, we need to focus on enforcing current firearm-related laws and addressing legislative loopholes that are being exploited. The recently published draft regulations to strengthen controls over private security company firearms is a step forward, but we need an urgent amendment to the Firearms Control Act to align it with legal and constitutional developments in South Africa, as well as our global commitments under conventions like the Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime's Firearms Protocol. In addition to tightening controls over licensed guns to stop leakage into the illegal pool and criminal use, government must prioritise recovering illegal guns already in circulation. The failure of government's flagship crime-prevention operation Shanela – which uses a broad stop-and-search approach – is evident from firearm recovery numbers, which show marginal increases. Thus, a third urgent action is for government to embrace an intelligence-led approach to gun recovery that includes tracking the origin of reclaimed firearms to close leakage loopholes. Fourth, a national firearms amnesty is essential. Unlike previous amnesties in South Africa, this must implement a 'no questions asked' approach, where the focus is on bringing unlicensed guns back under legal control by encouraging owners to either surrender guns for destruction or, in the case of expired licences, apply for a new licence (as an expired licence cannot be renewed). Finally, civil society must be embraced as an ally by the state because it is here that trust is built around sensitive issues, which include gun ownership. Understanding of and respect for the responsibility of owning a gun, including complying with the law around registration, licensing and use, is shaped by culture and community. These relate to issues of power, safety, security, respect and responsibility, which demand a community-based approach. In this respect, civil society must be treated by government as a critical friend (as described by a panellist at the Constructive Dialogue on Firearms in Vienna on 30 April 2025) that plays a key role in promoting and supporting responsible gun ownership, while also providing independent and useful insight and analysis on gun ownership, use and trafficking. A matter of political will South Africa's gun violence crisis is ultimately a test of political will: Does our government have the courage to confront a small but vocal minority who are vehemently opposed to any gun control interventions? South Africa's own experience is a guide to what needs to be done: Between 2000 and 2010, South Africa's gun death rate halved from 34 to 18 people shot dead a day through a range of gun control interventions, including a focus on recordkeeping, passing and implementing stricter gun legislation, holding a national firearms amnesty, using intelligence to recover firearms and involving civil society as a critical friend. In addition, international frameworks and knowledge exist and can be drawn upon. What's missing is determined implementation and accountability.
Time of India
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Jenu Kuruba families claim land rights in tiger reserve
Mysuru: Members of 52 Jenu Kuruba tribal families from Karadikallu Atturu Kolli Haadi inside the (NTR) in of Kodagu district on Tuesday put up a board in their haadi (hamlet) claiming land rights under the (FRA). Tired of too many ads? go ad free now This board is right next to another board put up by the forest department, warning that trespassing inside the tiger-protected area is a crime. With the board, reading 'Nanga Kaadu, Nanga Jamma, Nangave Alako' (our forest, our land, we rule), Jenu Kuruba families are claiming rights to their ancestors' properties. A decision to put up the board was approved at the Gram Sabha held from 11am to 2pm under the FRA on Tuesday. According to Shivu JA, a tribal leader who chaired the meeting, it was decided to file a case against the local gram panchayat officer under SC/ST atrocities act for allegedly meddling with the forest rights of Jenu Kuruba tribal families, as the local body has no power under the FRA. "Now, we are informed that applications of only 39 tribal families will be reconsidered, and the rest of the 13 applications remain rejected. We will protest this decision," he said. The sabha also decided to urge the state and central govts to implement the FRA scientifically across the country. The families also set May 26 as the deadline to grant them the Community Forest Resource Rights (CFR) and other rights of the FRA.
