As in most things that matter in this world, particularly in maintaining a world order, the US set itself up as the sole and supreme arbiter of what is a democracy. Thus did we see US President Joe Biden holding a “Summit for Democracy” on December 9-10 to which 110 countries were invited. &nbsp;

He had promised to hold such a summit in the course of his election campaign. The summit’s stated purpose was "to renew democracy at home and confront autocracies abroad". Doubtless, democracy is shrinking not only in the number of countries sliding towards authoritarian modes of government but also within countries, and the focus of the summit is as important as it is topical for our times.&nbsp;

For that very reason it was surprising to see countries with dubious democratic credentials being invited while deserving democracies were kept out. Clearly, the selection of countries appears to have been dictated by military, strategic and bloc considerations which determine Washington’s foreign policy and security interests. While the merits of Pakistan being invited have been debated, the exclusion of&nbsp;Bangladesh, Bhutan and Sri Lanka is surprising. More damning is the revelation, by Pakistan, that it stayed away because of being slotted for partial participation. So, there were participants, non-participants and a third category of “partial participants”.

Just as the US created categories of “good terrorists” and “bad terrorists”, which translates as those Washington can do business with and those it cannot, there is now emerging a scenario of “good democracies” and “bad democracies”. Needless to say, countries that stand with the US to subserve its military, strategic, geopolitical, diplomatic, economic and business interests would be deemed “good”.Those not prone to do Washington’s bidding or heed its counsel would be condemned as “bad”. Such a conclusion is inevitable given the State Department’s arbitrary choice of participants with no light cast on the criteria applied for excluding countries that are obviously democracies.

As suspect as the criteria for inclusion and exclusion of countries is the US setting itself up as the sole judge of what constitutes democracy. There cannot be one single authority for defining democracy given the many forms it has assumed in practice across the world. This is a value-based judgment and no one country, not even the US, can claim to be the sole repository of all the values that define a democracy. The violent “insurrection” in the US capital which preceded President Biden’s oath-taking showed the world that the foundations of US democracy are vulnerable to the menacing depredations of the very people elected, including to the highest office, under the admirable provisions of the American constitution.

No less disturbing than the questionable selection of participants is that it is the US that has retreated, as the world saw, from backing the forces of democracy in Afghanistan; and, remained a spectator to the army’s atrocities in Myanmar.

There is no denying that US democracy is by far the best the world has. For all its deformities, democracy within the US is envied worldwide by people who are deprived of rights and freedoms as well as those reeling under deficient or authoritarian forms of democracy. Equally undeniable is that US prestige not only as the world’s biggest military power but also as the world’s greatest democracy has taken a severe hit in the aftermath of the Capitol riots, the pullout from Afghanistan, the general indifference to autocracies and the country’s decline as a force for good.

Amidst this cheerless situation, the credentials of the US and western democracies are further sullied by the endless persecution of Julian Assange. His extradition to the US, now cleared by a UK court, is a setback to the cause of press freedom and makes a mockery of the protection the press enjoys under the First Amendment. Assange’s extradition being allowed happened around the time of the “Summit for Democracy”. For all his emphasis on freedom and the importance of a free press, Biden has no qualms about persisting in the footsteps of his predecessor Donald Trump when it comes to hounding Assange.&nbsp;

Democracy, as is all too evident, has neither a conscience nor a keeper.

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

As in most things that matter in this world, particularly in maintaining a world order, the US set itself up as the sole and supreme arbiter of what is a democracy.

As in most things that matter in this world, particularly in maintaining a world order, the US set itself up as the sole and supreme arbiter of what is a democracy. Thus did we see US President Joe Biden holding a “Summit for Democracy” on December 9-10 to which 110 countries were invited. He had promised to hold such a summit in the course of his election campaign. The summit’s stated purpose was "to renew democracy at home and confront autocracies abroad". Doubtless, democracy is shrinking not only in the number of countries sliding towards authoritarian modes of government but also within countries, and the focus of the summit is as important as it is topical for our times. For that very reason it was surprising to see countries with dubious democratic credentials being invited while deserving democracies were kept out. Clearly, the selection of countries appears to have been dictated by military, strategic and bloc considerations which determine Washington’s foreign policy and security interests. While the merits of Pakistan being invited have been debated, the exclusion of Bangladesh, Bhutan and Sri Lanka is surprising. More damning is the revelation, by Pakistan, that it stayed away because of being slotted for partial participation. So, there were participants, non-participants and a third category of “partial participants”. Just as the US created categories of “good terrorists” and “bad terrorists”, which translates as those Washington can do business with and those it cannot, there is now emerging a scenario of “good democracies” and “bad democracies”. Needless to say, countries that stand with the US to subserve its military, strategic, geopolitical, diplomatic, economic and business interests would be deemed “good”.Those not prone to do Washington’s bidding or heed its counsel would be condemned as “bad”. Such a conclusion is inevitable given the State Department’s arbitrary choice of participants with no light cast on the criteria applied for excluding countries that are obviously democracies. As suspect as the criteria for inclusion and exclusion of countries is the US setting itself up as the sole judge of what constitutes democracy. There cannot be one single authority for defining democracy given the many forms it has assumed in practice across the world. This is a value-based judgment and no one country, not even the US, can claim to be the sole repository of all the values that define a democracy. The violent “insurrection” in the US capital which preceded President Biden’s oath-taking showed the world that the foundations of US democracy are vulnerable to the menacing depredations of the very people elected, including to the highest office, under the admirable provisions of the American constitution. No less disturbing than the questionable selection of participants is that it is the US that has retreated, as the world saw, from backing the forces of democracy in Afghanistan; and, remained a spectator to the army’s atrocities in Myanmar. There is no denying that US democracy is by far the best the world has. For all its deformities, democracy within the US is envied worldwide by people who are deprived of rights and freedoms as well as those reeling under deficient or authoritarian forms of democracy. Equally undeniable is that US prestige not only as the world’s biggest military power but also as the world’s greatest democracy has taken a severe hit in the aftermath of the Capitol riots, the pullout from Afghanistan, the general indifference to autocracies and the country’s decline as a force for good. Amidst this cheerless situation, the credentials of the US and western democracies are further sullied by the endless persecution of Julian Assange. His extradition to the US, now cleared by a UK court, is a setback to the cause of press freedom and makes a mockery of the protection the press enjoys under the First Amendment. Assange’s extradition being allowed happened around the time of the “Summit for Democracy”. For all his emphasis on freedom and the importance of a free press, Biden has no qualms about persisting in the footsteps of his predecessor Donald Trump when it comes to hounding Assange. Democracy, as is all too evident, has neither a conscience nor a keeper. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

On The Margin | High and low of democracy summit

The US blocked USD 63 million in funds of designated terrorist groups, including Pakistan-based outfits, in 2019 as part of its crackdown on foreign terrorist organisations, according to an annual report by the treasury department.

The report released by the US Department of Treasury on Thursday states the US blocked USD 342,000 in funds of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), USD 1,725 of the Jaish-e Mohammed (JeM) and USD 45,798 of the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen-al-Islami.

All the three groups are Pakistan-based terror outfits. Harkat-ul-Mujahideen-al-Islami is a Islamic jihad group operating primarily in Kashmir.

Another Pakistan-based Kashmir centric terrorist outfit Hizbul Mujahideen has USD 4,321 blocked by the US in 2019 as against USD 2,287 the previous year, the report said.

For the Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan, the US blocked USD 5,067 in 2019 as against a paltry USD 318 in 2018.

The Department of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is the leading US Government agency responsible for implementing sanctions against the assets of international terrorist organisations and terrorism-supporting countries.

The federal body implements these sanctions as part of its general mission to administer and enforce economic and trade sanctions based on US foreign policy and national security goals.

According to the report, in 2019 the US blocked USD 63 million in funds of nearly 70 designated terrorist organisations, with the highest being USD 3.9 million of the al-Qaeda group. While the total blocked funds in 2018 was USD 46 million, that of the al-Qaeda was USD 6.4 million that year.

The list includes the Haqqani network (USD 26,546). It is a significant increase from USD 3,626 in 2018.

The US continues to block USD 580,811 in funds of the Sri Lanka-based Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which has remained the same for two years -- 2018 and 2019.

The report indicated a significant drop in Taliban funds being blocked by the US from USD 296,805 in 2018 to USD 59,065 in 2019.

According to the report, the combination of sanctions programmes targeting international terrorists and terrorist organisations with those targeting terrorism-supporting governments constitute a wide-ranging assault on international terrorism and its supporters and financiers.

The US also blocked USD 200.19 million in funds of countries designated as sponsors of terrorism -- Iran, Sudan, Syria and North Korea.

The US blocked USD 63 million in funds of designated terrorist groups, including Pakistan-based outfits, in 2019 as part of its crackdown on foreign terrorist organisations, according to an annual report by the treasury department.

The US blocked USD 63 million in funds of designated terrorist groups, including Pakistan-based outfits, in 2019 as part of its crackdown on foreign terrorist organisations, according to an annual report by the treasury department. The report released by the US Department of Treasury on Thursday states the US blocked USD 342,000 in funds of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), USD 1,725 of the Jaish-e Mohammed (JeM) and USD 45,798 of the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen-al-Islami. All the three groups are Pakistan-based terror outfits. Harkat-ul-Mujahideen-al-Islami is a Islamic jihad group operating primarily in Kashmir. Another Pakistan-based Kashmir centric terrorist outfit Hizbul Mujahideen has USD 4,321 blocked by the US in 2019 as against USD 2,287 the previous year, the report said. For the Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan, the US blocked USD 5,067 in 2019 as against a paltry USD 318 in 2018. The Department of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is the leading US Government agency responsible for implementing sanctions against the assets of international terrorist organisations and terrorism-supporting countries. The federal body implements these sanctions as part of its general mission to administer and enforce economic and trade sanctions based on US foreign policy and national security goals. According to the report, in 2019 the US blocked USD 63 million in funds of nearly 70 designated terrorist organisations, with the highest being USD 3.9 million of the al-Qaeda group. While the total blocked funds in 2018 was USD 46 million, that of the al-Qaeda was USD 6.4 million that year. The list includes the Haqqani network (USD 26,546). It is a significant increase from USD 3,626 in 2018. The US continues to block USD 580,811 in funds of the Sri Lanka-based Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which has remained the same for two years -- 2018 and 2019. The report indicated a significant drop in Taliban funds being blocked by the US from USD 296,805 in 2018 to USD 59,065 in 2019. According to the report, the combination of sanctions programmes targeting international terrorists and terrorist organisations with those targeting terrorism-supporting governments constitute a wide-ranging assault on international terrorism and its supporters and financiers. The US also blocked USD 200.19 million in funds of countries designated as sponsors of terrorism -- Iran, Sudan, Syria and North Korea.

US blocks $63 million in funds of global terrorist groups in 2019: Report

Micro-blogging website Twitter blocked more than 166,000 accounts between July and December 2018, for violations related to the promotion of terrorism. The company also said that there is a steady decrease in terrorist groups trying to use the platform owing to its "zero-tolerance policy enforcement".

The rate of suspension was down by 19 per cent compared to the previous period (January-June 2018), Twitter announced in a blog post highlighting details of its transparency report.

Twitter has suspended over 1.4 million accounts since August 2015 for promoting terrorism.

The company said its methodology to bring down the terror accounts were producing results - nearly 91 per cent of accounts promoting terrorism related content were proactively removed by its internal technology. Twitter said that in the majority of cases, it took action at the account setup stage - before the account even tweets.

The greater threat for social media giants such as <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/google-facebook-twitter-have-to-do-more-to-fight-fake-news-european-union-212915">Facebook, Google and Twitter</a> is the pressure from regulatory and government bodies worldwide to remove extremist content more rapidly or face heavy-handed legislation. Many times, these organisations have failed over the years as several men and women joined terror organisations with the help of their Twitter and Facebook accounts.

Due to sheer convenience, affordability and broad reach of numerous social media platforms, terrorist groups have increasingly used social media to propagate hatred and recruit new members into their organisation.

Though Twitter says that the sharp decrease in the number of accounts suspended is indicative of a larger trend, it is now observing that year-on-year the numbers of terrorist organisations attempting to use their service is reducing.

In the past, Twitter has taken down the official pages of terror groups and disqualified their accounts, but many of them have been able to propagate their messages by asking their followers to publish pictures and videos.

Twitter also said that it received eight per cent fewer global requests to remove content, though the US topped the chart with 30 per cent of global government information requests. Requests from the UK (13 per cent), India (6 per cent), Germany (6 per cent) and France (5 per cent) together account for 30 per cent of all global information requests, and 29 per cent of all global accounts specified, the company said.

Micro-blogging website Twitter blocked more than 166,000 accounts between July and December 2018, for violations related to the promotion of terrorism. The company also said that there is a steady decrease in terrorist groups trying to use the platform owing to its "zero-tolerance policy enforcement".

Micro-blogging website Twitter blocked more than 166,000 accounts between July and December 2018, for violations related to the promotion of terrorism. The company also said that there is a steady decrease in terrorist groups trying to use the platform owing to its "zero-tolerance policy enforcement". The rate of suspension was down by 19 per cent compared to the previous period (January-June 2018), Twitter announced in a blog post highlighting details of its transparency report. Twitter has suspended over 1.4 million accounts since August 2015 for promoting terrorism. The company said its methodology to bring down the terror accounts were producing results - nearly 91 per cent of accounts promoting terrorism related content were proactively removed by its internal technology. Twitter said that in the majority of cases, it took action at the account setup stage - before the account even tweets. The greater threat for social media giants such as Facebook, Google and Twitter is the pressure from regulatory and government bodies worldwide to remove extremist content more rapidly or face heavy-handed legislation. Many times, these organisations have failed over the years as several men and women joined terror organisations with the help of their Twitter and Facebook accounts. Due to sheer convenience, affordability and broad reach of numerous social media platforms, terrorist groups have increasingly used social media to propagate hatred and recruit new members into their organisation. Though Twitter says that the sharp decrease in the number of accounts suspended is indicative of a larger trend, it is now observing that year-on-year the numbers of terrorist organisations attempting to use their service is reducing. In the past, Twitter has taken down the official pages of terror groups and disqualified their accounts, but many of them have been able to propagate their messages by asking their followers to publish pictures and videos. Twitter also said that it received eight per cent fewer global requests to remove content, though the US topped the chart with 30 per cent of global government information requests. Requests from the UK (13 per cent), India (6 per cent), Germany (6 per cent) and France (5 per cent) together account for 30 per cent of all global information requests, and 29 per cent of all global accounts specified, the company said.

Twitter suspends over 166,000 accounts for promoting terrorism

terrorist-98561

Terrorist (98561, News on Terrorist (98561, stories on Terrorist (98561, articles on Terrorist (98561, Terrorist (98561 stories at Wion, Terrorist (98561 news, Terrorist (98561 latest news

terrorist 98561

On The Margin | High and low of democracy summit

US blocks $63 million in funds of global terrorist groups in 2019: Report

Twitter suspends over 166,000 accounts for promoting terrorism