It's time to pay serious attention to the power grid - CNN

lonk.indah.link

(CNN) Millions of Americans have gone without power this year. The biggest examples include California (heat), Texas (cold) and now Louisiana (hurricanes).

With New Orleans, a major US city, powerless -- potentially for weeks -- in the aftermath of a hurricane with dangerously high temperatures setting in, it's worth taking a serious look at efforts to improve the nation's power system and make it more "resilient."

RELATED: Ida left more than 1 million without power, possibly for weeks. And now comes the scorching heat

Power outages can happen anywhere. Mark Dyson works at the Rocky Mountain Initiative, which advocates for carbon-free energy, and he told me everyone in the country needs to be concerned about this.

"I can't think of a single area of this country that doesn't have a looming catastrophic risk, like what we've seen on display in the last 18 months," he said. "If you can think of one, I can probably come up with a climate change scenario."

Dyson is based in Colorado, so I asked about his neighborhood. That one was too easy.

"Wildfires," he said, and then described a fire that had started at a shooting range and nearly cut power to the whole area.

"That fire spread quickly and took out three of the four transmission lines leading up a valley into Aspen, Colorado, from our office, basically, right behind our office and except for um, the really well-timed intervention by utility workers and a helicopter with a bunch of fire-retardant gel, that fourth line would have burned down and the city of Aspen and surrounding communities would have been without power for a week," he said.

RELATED: Climate change is sparking wildfires that are amplifying Covid

Work your way around a map of the US and there have been disasters and outages just about everywhere in recent years.

The Northeast? Ice and snow, obviously. But also summer storms. Hurricane Sandy was a particularly debilitating event. I'm also old enough to remember the Great Blackout of 2003, which seems like it's from an earlier time, when a computer glitch in Ohio shut down an entire region of the country. You might think computer systems are more advanced now, but let's not forget people in the mid-Atlantic stood in line for gas after a ransomware attack earlier this year. Glitches happen, and cybersecurity is an issue alongside climate change.

Just throw out a region. The Dakotas? Dyson immediately suggested that the so-called "derecho" storms that affected Minnesota could easily touch the Dakotas. They're also in the midst of a drought, which taxes the electrical system and could potentially threaten power there.

Best-laid plans. Power companies, utilities and governments can know exactly what the threat to their electrical system is, plan for it and still see a major outage. Here's a massive government report, updated in 2017 -- the Quadrennial Energy Review -- that predicted essentially what we're seeing now.

In fact, Louisiana had worked hard to protect New Orleans from long-term power outages caused by hurricanes, with multiple transmission lines into the city, including towers that withstood Hurricane Katrina, and a natural gas plant inside the city.

"These are the kinds of Achilles' heels that show up and can create enormous risks even for systems that are designed to be redundant," Dyson said.

RELATED: Climate change is making hurricanes stronger, slower and wetter. Ida checked all the boxes

There are also surprises. Dyson pointed out that in Texas, the system was completely prepared for summer surges of energy consumption but not for a giant ice storm knocking out the gas supply during the winter.

"That's an example of the kind of threat that is just outside of the planning. ... It's outside of the range of imagination for many grids that were designed around 1950s architecture and technology but show themselves to be vulnerable to these large-scale events that can disable big chunks of them at a time."

People used to talk about the coming threat of changing climate. Not anymore.

Karen Wayland contributed to the energy resilience portion of the energy review when she worked at the Department of Energy and now she's CEO of Gridwise, an alliance of utilities, energy companies and other groups that is pushing for a modernized electrical grid.

"We're seeing it already," Wayland said. "It's here."

And she argued the energy infrastructure has to be ready for what's coming.

"When you think about recovering from storms, you have to assume that what we're going to get in five, 10 years will be more severe than what we're getting even now as a result of climate change," she said, adding that cybersecurity must also be addressed.

After the Texas outage, she told Congress in testimony that the country is more and more reliant on electricity and that interruptions cascade through the economy, and she asked for more investment in resilience.

Infrastructure money. Congress is considering a bipartisan infrastructure proposal that would put $73 billion toward upgrading the nation's electricity system.

RELATED: Five things you didn't know were in the infrastructure bill

But that's just a down payment on the hundreds of billions it will take to remake the power system. How and when a full-scale update will occur and who will pay for it will become an increasingly pressing question as more catastrophic weather events develop.

There is no one single fix. Burying power lines might be an attractive option in some places, but buried lines can be vulnerable in flooding, are prohibitively expensive, take longer to repair and would divert money from other resilience ideas, like a more diverse set of energy sources, including solar, or even just making building codes stricter, so that homes are more energy efficient and last longer when the power does go out. These decisions will vary from state to state and city to city.

Use these opportunities to innovate. Dyson, who wants to see more solar energy and microgrids that can help during disaster response, is worried that utilities and governments react to these disasters in the wrong way.

In many cases, he said, "the industry is doubling down on some of the technologies that are actually failing us."

Wayland said that losing power, to some degree, is a fact of life, but Americans "should expect that we as a society are hoping to accelerate the resilience that will minimize disruptions."

What else was in the news?

• Get the latest on Ida and its aftermath here.
• In addition to power, there's a shortage of gasoline.
• President Joe Biden defended the messy exit from Afghanistan. "I was not going to extend this forever war, and I was not extending a forever exit," he said.
• A Syrian oil spill is spreading across the Mediterranean.
• Five states are dangerously low on ICU beds. More kids are being hospitalized with Covid.
• The Texas legislature approved its bill to put new restrictions on voting.

Adblock test (Why?)

"time" - Google News
September 01, 2021 at 06:34AM
https://ift.tt/3t2CPrW

It's time to pay serious attention to the power grid - CNN
"time" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3f5iuuC

Biden's Speech on Withdrawal From Afghanistan: Full Transcript - The New York Times

lonk.indah.link

A day after U.S. troops left, the president called the mission to evacuate Americans and Afghan allies an “extraordinary success” and forcefully defended ending the United States’ involvement.

The following is a transcript of President Biden’s remarks about Afghanistan on Tuesday, a day after the United States concluded its two-decade war there with the end of evacuation flights and the departure of the last American troops.

Last night in Kabul, the United States ended 20 years of war in Afghanistan. The longest war in American history. We completed one of the biggest airlifts in history with more than 120,000 people evacuated to safety. That number is more than double what most experts thought were possible. No nation, no nation has ever done anything like it in all of history. Only the United States had the capacity and the will and ability to do it, and we did it today.

The extraordinary success of this mission was due to the incredible skill, bravery and selfless courage of the United States military and our diplomats and intelligence professionals. For weeks, they risked their lives to get American citizens, Afghans who helped us, citizens of our allies and partners and others on board planes and out of the country.

They did it facing a crush of enormous crowds seeking to leave the country. They did it knowing ISIS-K terrorists, sworn enemies of the Taliban, were lurking in the midst of those crowds. And still, the women and men of the United States military, our diplomatic corps and intelligence professionals did their job and did it well. Risking their lives, not for professional gains but to serve others. Not in a mission of war but in a mission of mercy.

Twenty service members were wounded in the service of this mission. Thirteen heroes gave their lives. I was just at Dover Air Force Base for the dignified transfer. We owe them and their families a debt of gratitude we can never repay, but we should never, ever forget.

In April, I made a decision to end this war. As part of that decision, we set the date of Aug. 31 for American troops to withdraw. The assumption was that more than 300,000 Afghan national security forces that we had trained over the past two decades and equipped would be a strong adversary in their civil wars with the Taliban.

That assumption, that the Afghan government would be able to hold on for a period of time beyond military drawdown, turned out not to be accurate. But I still instructed our national security team to prepare for every eventuality, even that one. And that’s what we did. So we were ready when the Afghan security forces, after two decades of fighting for their country and losing thousands of their own, did not hold on as long as anyone expected.

We were ready when they and the people of Afghanistan watched their own government collapse and the president flee amid the corruption and malfeasance, handing over the country to their enemy the Taliban and significantly increasing the risk to U.S. personnel and our allies.

As a result, to safely extract Americans citizens before Aug. 31, as well as embassy personnel, allies and partners and those Afghans who had worked with us and fought alongside of us for 20 years, I had authorized 6,000 American troops to Kabul to help secure the airport.

As Gen. [Kenneth F.] McKenzie said, this is the way the mission was designed. It was designed to operate under severe stress and attack, and that’s what it did. Since March, we reached out 19 times to Americans in Afghanistan, with multiple warnings and offers to help them leave Afghanistan, all the way back as far as March. After we started the evacuation 17 days ago, we did initial outreach and analysis and identified around 5,000 Americans who had decided earlier to stay in Afghanistan but now wanted to leave.

Our Operation Allied Rescue ended up getting more than 5,500 Americans out. We got out thousands of citizens and diplomats from those countries that went into Afghanistan with us to get Bin Laden. We got out locally employed staff at the United States Embassy and their families, totaling roughly 2,500 people. We got thousands of Afghan translators and interpreters and others who supported the United States out as well.

Now we believe that about 100 to 200 Americans remain in Afghanistan with some intention to leave. Most of those that remain are dual citizens, longtime residents who had earlier decided to stay because of their family roots in Afghanistan.

The bottom line: Ninety percent of Americans in Afghanistan who wanted to leave were able to leave. And for those remaining Americans, there is no deadline. We remain committed to get them out if they want to come out.

Secretary of State [Antony J.] Blinken is leading the continued diplomatic efforts to ensure safe passage for any American, Afghan partner or foreign national who wants to leave Afghanistan. In fact, just yesterday, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution that sent a clear message about what the international community expects the Taliban to deliver on moving forward. Notably, freedom of travel. Freedom to leave. And together we’re joined by over 100 countries that are determined to make sure the Taliban upholds those commitments. It will include ongoing efforts in Afghanistan to reopen the airport, as well as overland routes, allowing for continued departure to those who want to leave and deliver humanitarian assistance to the people of Afghanistan.

The Taliban has made public commitments, broadcast on television and radio across Afghanistan, on safe passage for anyone wanting to leave, including those who worked alongside Americans. We don’t take them by their word alone but by their actions. And we have leverage to make sure those commitments are met.

Let me be clear: Leaving Aug. 31 is not due to an arbitrary deadline. It was designed to save American lives. My predecessor, the former president, signed an agreement with the Taliban to remove U.S. troops by May 1, just months after I was inaugurated. It included no requirement that Taliban work out a cooperative governing arrangement with the Afghan government. But it did authorize the release of 5,000 prisoners last year, including some of the Taliban’s top war commanders, among those who just took control of Afghanistan.

By the time I came to office, the Taliban was in its strongest military position since 2001, controlling or contesting nearly half of the country. The previous administration’s agreement said that if we stuck to the May 1 deadline that they had signed on to leave by, the Taliban wouldn’t attack any American forces. But if we stayed, all bets were off.

So we were left with a simple decision: Either follow through on the commitment made by the last administration and leave Afghanistan, or say we weren’t leaving and commit another tens of thousands more troops. Going back to war. That was the choice, the real choice. Between leaving or escalating. I was not going to extend this forever war. And I was not extending a forever exit.

The decision to end the military airlift operations at Kabul airport was based on the unanimous recommendation of my civilian and military advisers. The secretary of state, the secretary of defense, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and all the service chiefs and the commanders in the field. Their recommendation was that the safest way to secure the passage of the remaining Americans and others out of the country was not to continue as 6,000 troops on the ground in harm’s way in Kabul, but rather to get them out through nonmilitary means.

In the 17 days that we operated in Kabul, after the Taliban seized power, we engaged in an around-the-clock effort to provide every American the opportunity to leave. Our State Department was working 24/7 contacting and talking and, in some cases, walking Americans into the airport. Again, more than 5,500 Americans were airlifted out. And for those who remain, we will make arrangements to get them out if they so choose.

As for the Afghans, we and our partners have airlifted 100,000 of them. No country in history has done more to airlift out the residents of another country than we have done. We will continue to work to help more people leave the country who are at risk. We’re far from done.

For now, I urge all Americans to join me in grateful prayer for our troops and diplomats and intelligence officers who carried out this mission of mercy in Kabul, and at tremendous risk with such unparalleled results. An airlift that evacuated tens of thousands to a network of volunteers and veterans who helped identify those needing evacuation, guide them to the airport and provided them for their support along the way. We’re going to continue to need their help. We need your help, and I’m looking forward to meeting with you. And to everyone who is now offering, or who will offer, to welcome Afghan allies to their homes around the world, including in America, we thank you.

I take responsibility for the decision. Now, some say we should have started mass evacuations sooner and “Couldn’t this have been done in a more orderly manner?” I respectfully disagree. Imagine if we had begun evacuations in June or July, bringing in thousands of American troops and evacuating more than 120,000 people in the middle of a civil war. There still would have been a rush to the airport. A breakdown in confidence and control of the government. And it still would have been very difficult and dangerous mission.

The bottom line is, there is no evacuation from the end of a war that you can run without the kinds of complexities, challenges, threats we faced. None. To those who would say we should have stayed indefinitely, for years on end, they ask: “Why don’t we just keep doing what we were doing? Why do we have to change anything?”

The fact is everything had changed. My predecessor had made a deal with the Taliban. When I came into office, we faced a deadline, May 1. The Taliban onslaught was coming. We faced one of two choices: follow the agreement of the previous administration and extend it to have more time for people to get out, or send in thousands more troops and escalate the war.

To those asking for a third decade of war in Afghanistan, I ask: What is the vital national interest? In my view, we only have one: to make sure Afghanistan can never be used again to launch an attack on our homeland.

Remember why we went to Afghanistan in the first place? Because we were attacked by Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda on Sept. 11, 2001, and they were based in Afghanistan. We delivered justice to Bin laden on May 2, 2011. Over a decade ago. Al Qaeda was decimated.

I respectfully suggest you ask yourself this question: If we had been attacked on Sept. 11, 2001, from Yemen instead of Afghanistan, would we have ever gone to war in Afghanistan? Even though the Taliban controlled Afghanistan in the year 2001? I believe the honest answer is no. That’s because we had no vital interest in Afghanistan other than to prevent an attack on America’s homeland and our friends. And that’s true today.

We succeeded in what we set out to do in Afghanistan over a decade ago. Then we stayed for another decade. It was time to end this war.

This is a new world. The terror threat has metastasized across the world, well beyond Afghanistan. We face threats from Al Shabab in Somalia, Al Qaeda affiliates in Syria and the Arabian Peninsula, and ISIS attempting to create a caliphate in Syria and Iraq and establishing affiliates across Africa and Asia.

The fundamental obligation of a president, in my opinion, is to defend and protect America. Not against threats of 2001, but against the threats of 2021 and tomorrow. That is the guiding principle behind my decisions about Afghanistan.

Understand the Taliban Takeover in Afghanistan

---

Card 1 of 6

Who are the Taliban? The Taliban arose in 1994 amid the turmoil that came after the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan in 1989. They used brutal public punishments, including floggings, amputations and mass executions, to enforce their rules. Here’s more on their origin story and their record as rulers.

Who are the Taliban leaders? These are the top leaders of the Taliban, men who have spent years on the run, in hiding, in jail and dodging American drones. Little is known about them or how they plan to govern, including whether they will be as tolerant as they claim to be. One spokesman told The Times that the group wanted to forget its past, but that there would be some restrictions.

How did the Taliban gain control? See how the Taliban retook power in Afghanistan in a few months, and read about how their strategy enabled them to do so.

What happens to the women of Afghanistan? The last time the Taliban were in power, they barred women and girls from taking most jobs or going to school. Afghan women have made many gains since the Taliban were toppled, but now they fear that ground may be lost. Taliban officials are trying to reassure women that things will be different, but there are signs that, at least in some areas, they have begun to reimpose the old order.

What does their victory mean for terrorist groups? The United States invaded Afghanistan 20 years ago in response to terrorism, and many worry that Al Qaeda and other radical groups will again find safe haven there. On Aug. 26, deadly explosions outside Afghanistan’s main airport claimed by the Islamic State demonstrated that terrorists remain a threat.

How will this affect future U.S. policy in the region? Washington and the Taliban may spend years pulled between cooperation and conflict, Some of the key issues at hand include: how to cooperate against a mutual enemy, the Islamic State branch in the region, known as ISIS-K, and whether the U.S. should release $9.4 billion in Afghan government currency reserves that are frozen in the country.

I simply do not believe that the safety and security of America is enhanced by continuing to deploy thousands of American troops and spending billions of dollars a year in Afghanistan. But I also know that the threat from terrorism continues in its pernicious and evil nature. But it’s changed. Expanded to other countries. Our strategy has to change, too.

We will maintain the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan and other countries. We just don’t need to fight a ground war to do it. We have what’s called over-the-horizon capabilities, which means we can strike terrorists and targets without American boots on the ground, very few if needed.

We have shown that capacity in just the last week. We struck ISIS-K remotely, days after they murdered 13 of our service members and dozen of innocent Afghans. And to ISIS-K, we are not done with you yet.

As commander in chief, I firmly believe the best path to guard our safety and our security lies in a tough, unforgiving, targeted, precise strategy that goes after terror where it is today. Not where it was two decades ago. That’s what is in our national interest.

And here is the critical thing to understand: The world is changing. We’re engaged in a serious competition with China. We’re dealing with the challenges on multiple fronts with Russia. We’re confronted with cyberattacks and nuclear proliferation. We have to shore up American competitiveness to meet these new challenges and the competition for the 21st century. And we can do both: fight terrorism, and take on new threats that are here now and will continue to be here in the future. And there’s nothing China or Russia would rather have, would want more in this competition, than the United States to be bogged down another decade in Afghanistan.

As we turn the page on the foreign policy that’s guided our nation the last two decades, we’ve got to learn from our mistakes. To me there are two that are paramount: First, we must set missions with clear, achievable goals, not ones we’ll never reach. And second, we must stay clearly focused on the fundamental national security interest of the United States of America.

This decision about Afghanistan is not just about Afghanistan. It’s about ending an era of major military operations to remake other countries. We saw a mission of counterterrorism in Afghanistan, getting the terrorists to stop the attacks, morph into a counterinsurgency, nation building, trying to create a democratic, cohesive and united Afghanistan. Something that has never been done over many centuries of Afghan’s history. Moving on from that mind-set and those kind of large-scale troop deployments will make us stronger and more effective and safer at home.

And for anyone who gets the wrong idea, let me say clearly: To those who wish America harm, to those engaged in terrorism against us or our allies, know this. The United States will never rest. We will not forgive. We will not forget. We will hunt you down to the ends of the Earth, and you will pay the ultimate price.

Let me be clear. We’ll continue to support the Afghan people through diplomacy, international influence and humanitarian aid. We will continue to push for regional diplomacy engagement to prevent violence and instability. We’ll continue to speak out for the basic rights of the Afghan people, especially women and girls, as we speak out for women and girls all around the globe.

And I’ve been clear that human rights will be the center of our foreign policy. But the way to do that is not through endless military deployments, but through diplomacy, economic tools and rallying the rest of the world for support.

My fellow Americans, the war in Afghanistan is now over. I’m the fourth president that must face the issue of whether and when to end this war. When I was running for president, I made a commitment to the American people that I would end this war. Today I’ve honored that commitment. It was time to be honest with the American people again. We no longer had a clear purpose in an open-ended mission in Afghanistan. After 20 years of war in Afghanistan, I refuse to send another generation of America’s sons and daughters to fight a war that should have ended long ago.

After more than $2 trillion spent in Afghanistan — costs that researchers at Brown University estimated would be over $300 million a day for 20 years in Afghanistan. For two decades. Yes. The American people should hear this: $300 million a day for two decades. You take the number of one trillion, as many say, that’s still $150 million a day for two decades. And what have we lost as a consequence in terms of opportunities?

I refuse to continue a war that was no longer in the service of the vital national interests of our people. And most of all, after 800,000 Americans serving in Afghanistan — I’ve traveled that whole country. Brave and honorable service. After 20,744 American servicemen and -women injured, and the loss of 2,461 American personnel, including 13 lives lost just this week, I refuse to open another decade of warfare in Afghanistan.

We’ve been a nation too long at war. If you’re 20 years old today, you’ve never known an America at peace. So when I hear that we could have, should have, continued this so-called low-grade effort in Afghanistan, at low risk to our service members, at low cost, I don’t think enough people understand how much we have asked of the 1 percent of this country who put that uniform on, willing to put their lives on the line in defense of our nation.

Maybe it’s because my deceased son Beau served in Iraq for a full year. Before that, well — maybe it’s because of what I’ve seen over the years as senator, vice president and president traveling these countries. A lot of our veterans and their families have gone through hell. Deployment after deployment, months and years away from their families, missed birthdays, anniversaries, empty chairs at holidays, financial struggles, divorces, loss of limbs, traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress.

We see it in the struggles many have when they come home. We see it in the strain on their families and caregivers. We see it in the strain of their families when they’re not there. We see it in the grief borne by their survivors. The cost of war, they will carry with them their whole lives.

Most tragically, we see it in the shocking and stunning statistic that should give pause to anyone who thinks war can ever be low grade, low risk or low cost: Eighteen veterans, on average, who die by suicide every single day in America. Not in a far-off place, but right here in America.

There’s nothing low grade or low risk or low cost about any war. It’s time to end the war in Afghanistan. As we close 20 years of war and strife and pain and sacrifice, it’s time to look for the future, not the past. To a future that’s safer, to a future that’s more secure. To a future that honors those who’ve served and all those who gave what President Lincoln called their “last full measure of devotion.” I give you my word with all of my heart. I believe this is the right decision, a wise decision and the best decision for America.

Thank you. Thank you and may God bless you all. And may God protect our troops.

Adblock test (Why?)

"time" - Google News
September 01, 2021 at 05:34AM
https://ift.tt/3gORt0W

Biden's Speech on Withdrawal From Afghanistan: Full Transcript - The New York Times
"time" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3f5iuuC

Time to Switch Tracks Again in Canadian Rail Battle - The Wall Street Journal

lonk.indah.link

A shareholder vote on a Kansas City Southern suitor is scheduled for Friday.

Photo: Whitney Curtis/Bloomberg News

It’s time for this railroad’s board to punch its ticket.

Kansas City Southern, the smallest major freight railroad in the U.S., has been the subject of a bidding war between two Canadian rivals. Its shares fell Tuesday because of an unwelcome regulatory decision, but things turned out nearly as well as they could have for its shareholders.

Having agreed in March to be bought by Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd. , it switched to a higher bid containing more cash by that company’s larger domestic rival, Canadian National Railway Co. It then stuck with Canadian National after receiving a counteroffer from its original suitor earlier this month while shrewdly delaying its shareholder vote until this Friday.

A decision Tuesday by the U.S. Surface Transportation Board not to approve the voting trust that Canadian National was to use to purchase the shares makes its next decision obvious: KCS should snap up the $1 billion break fee it is now owed by Canadian National and go back to its original suitor with its improved bid. Canadian Pacific applied under a more lenient set of rules and already has had its voting trust approved by the STB. While that doesn’t guarantee that the agency will ultimately give the green light to an eventual merger, KCS’s shareholders can still get paid while the bureaucrats dither.

In theory Canadian National can appeal the STB’s decision or even proceed without a voting trust and further sweeten its offer, but KCS’s shareholders would be foolish to take that risk, which would be the equivalent of exchanging a bird in the hand for 1.1 in the bush. Without a trust, the only financial surety it can get is yet another break fee. And the STB’s unanimous decision not to approve the trust, along with tougher talk in general from the Biden administration on competition matters, makes a deal a long shot without serious concessions.

Canadian Pacific’s decision to raise its original bid, meanwhile, might have been unnecessarily aggressive since it wasn’t financially superior to the existing offer. The new offer may have convinced KCS to delay the shareholder vote on Canadian National’s bid but, given the STB’s decision, Canadian Pacific could have eventually walked away with its prize anyway, and for billions less. Its shares fell 4.5% on Tuesday. Its rival’s stock, meanwhile, jumped 7.3% despite being on the hook for $1 billion. If the STB had approved the trust but later rejected the merger itself, Canadian National would have been a forced seller of KCS shares for a potential loss of billions more.

It has been quite a ride, but KCS’s shareholders have come far enough. Why risk waiting to see what lies around the next bend?

Write to Spencer Jakab at spencer.jakab@wsj.com

Adblock test (Why?)

"time" - Google News
September 01, 2021 at 04:40AM
https://ift.tt/3taFW15

Time to Switch Tracks Again in Canadian Rail Battle - The Wall Street Journal
"time" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3f5iuuC

The Importance Of Real-Time Ocean Visibility - Forbes

lonk.indah.link

When it comes to real-time visibility, the market is becoming more important and more robust and saturated than ever before. Billions of venture capital dollars of investment are being poured into companies that can integrate real-time visibility data with transportation to provide a more informed ETA for shippers and carriers.

The need to know where products are, whether they are on the way to the warehouse, store, or customer, when there are delays, and alerts for these delays, is critical to ensure a positive experience. The rise of visibility solutions at the container level is helping to drive the transportation execution market to new heights. However, the biggest problem when it comes to providing accurate and updated ETAs is the difference in modes.

Real-Time Visibility

Visibility solutions are playing a larger role in the market, as real-time tracking of assets becomes more important. Suppliers of visibility solutions continue to bring in additional data streams for better estimated time of arrival (ETA).

Real-time visibility tools are often thought of as an over-the-road technology. In this case, the visibility is based on integration to truck carriers’ systems. The carriers in turn are tracking the ELD devices on their trucks or by a downloadable app that the driver puts on his smart phone. There are a variety of external data streams that also play a role in providing better visibility and improved ETAs. Companies are partnering with data aggregators to get a better idea of when shipments will arrive. This includes port data, social media, news, event and weather (SNEW) data, traffic data, and other available sources to provide an accurate ETA to warehouses, stores, and end consumers.

The Internet of Things (IoT) is driving interest in the market. For a truer ETA, companies are using IoT data from trucks to get a better understanding of driver behavior, such as typical driving speeds and times, as well as how they operate in heavily congested areas. Companies can take sensor data from trucks and incorporate hours of service rules to know when, where, and for how long a driver needs to stop. These applications also understand that where and when the driver stops will have an impact on the ETA. This is especially true if drivers stop before a major city and will have to endure rush hour traffic once they start driving again.

Transportation visibility is clearly not only for trucks. However, the nuances and granularity of the data will vary depending on the mode. Ocean ETAs, for example, are much different because the factors are different than over the road. These include currents and wind speeds, which play a major role in the overall transit times. The majority of ocean shipments go through trans-shipments, or stopovers, meaning that the journey is more than just port to port. The route can easily change based on a variety of factors. These changes can add significant time to the ETA.

The Importance of Ocean Visibility

For over-the-road shipments, getting bumped to the next truck can add a day or two to the overall transit time. For ocean cargo, however, if a shipment gets bumped to the next ship, it can add up to 15 days to the transit time. For ocean cargo, there are multiple sources feeding into ETAs, including the initial Captains ETA as well as ASI data from ship transponders. Ocean visibility algorithms take into account a variety of factors including berthing times, when the container will offload, when it will clear customs, and when it will get to the next part of transport and to a DC into the overall ETA. These factors make ocean ETAs more complex and less accurate, when compared to over-the-road.

FourKites, the global leader in real-time supply chain visibility, recently launched its Dynamic OceanSM platform for visibility, rate and documentation management. The solution recognizes a few important pieces of the ocean visibility puzzle. First and foremost, ocean visibility goes well beyond the question of “what time will my container get there?” The platform also takes into consideration questions      such as, “If I use a freight forwarder, is it still my shipment or is it under a different contract?” and,    ”How can I best manage my documents so that my containers don't get stuck at the port of discharge?”

What really sets FourKites’ Dynamic Ocean solution apart from others is that the visibility it offers for ocean shipments does not stop at the port. While other solutions focus just on tracking containers, FourKites is the only platform that offers door-to-door precision tracking — spanning port, yard, rail and multimodal coverage — together with highly accurate predictive ETAs and collaborative workflow and document management features. To that end, FourKites also has an extremely robust yard management solution — Dynamic Yard — that provides real-time insights across your yard, including trailer inventory, SKU-level visibility, and flexible and configurable     custom yard zones, in addition to unprecedented levels of collaboration.    .    

Unlike other visibility platforms, Dynamic Ocean offers comprehensive multimodal visibility for each leg of the journey, alongside rate and booking management, and document management/visibility. End-to-end visibility with Dynamic Ocean hits upon seven different stages throughout a shipment’s journey:

Shipment at origin. This stage includes emptying the truck upon arrival, and then loading it with the next shipment. The load is tracked through departure with an ETA to the final delivery. This initial ETA is important for understanding when the shipment will arrive at and move through a port.

In-Transit to Port. During transit on the ocean, this stage uses technology to track the real-time position of the container and give a more appropriate ETA.

Port of Loading. This leg takes into consideration any event involving the vessel, its schedule, and events. Additionally, it looks at the ETA of the different legs of the journey, and any exception and alerts that arise during transit.

Ocean In-Transit. This stage uses technology to track the latest position of the vessel in real-time, and adjust its ETA accordingly, depending on a variety of scenarios.

Port of Discharge. Port of discharge looks at other vessel, container, and port events, and how they can impact the overall timing of the shipment. 

In-Transit to Destination. This stage integrates over-the-road with ocean or rail tracking     to give real-time updates on the container’s location and update the ETA to the most accurate time frame possible.

Final Destination. The final stage monitors ETAs and delays on the network, tracks actual arrival times and records the proof-of-deliveries.

Final Thoughts

There are a number of technologies that are enhancing transportation visibility systems. The Internet of Things (IoT) is driving interest in the market. For a truer ETA, companies are using IoT to use sensor data from containers to know when and where a shipment will arrive. Machine learning is also important in transportation visibility systems. Real-time visibility solutions leverage machine learning to learn more about constraints (such as capacity, regulations, and hours of service) and then use that information to give a much more accurate ETA for shipments to warehouses, stores, and end customers. In the end, understanding the ocean leg of the journey is perhaps the most important aspect for trans-continental shipments.

FourKites’ recently released Dynamic Ocean solution can help to make the ocean less of an unknown when it comes to global shipping.

My colleague Chris Cunnane was the author of this article.

Adblock test (Why?)

"time" - Google News
August 31, 2021 at 11:42PM
https://ift.tt/3zBdXKg

The Importance Of Real-Time Ocean Visibility - Forbes
"time" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3f5iuuC

There are mounting risks that make September a potentially hazardous time for stocks - CNBC

lonk.indah.link

In this article

• .SPX

Traders on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in New York, on Wednesday, Aug. 11, 2021.

Michael Nagle | Bloomberg | Getty Images

After seven months of gains, stocks face plenty of potential risks that could make September live up to its reputation as the worst month of the year for the market.

According to CFRA, the S&P 500 has been positive just 45% of the time in September going back to World War II. The average 0.56% decline in the month is the worst of all months, with February the only other month with an average negative performance.

Strategists say it's not clear a correction or pullback is coming, but the risks have been rising. They include Federal Reserve policy changes, the spread of the Covid-19 delta variant and political risks.

Charles Schwab chief investment strategist Liz Ann Sonders said it's too simplistic to assume the market will follow history. "Are there a myriad of risks out there that at some point in time could be a risk factor that could lead to more than a 3% or 4% pullback? Absolutely," she said. "Could it be in September? Sure."

The decline is even worse in September when it falls in the first year of a presidential term. On average, the S&P 500 has declined 0.73% in those years. CFRA also found that in years where the S&P 500 set new highs in both July and August — like this year — the benchmark fell an average of 0.74% and rose only 43% of the time.

The S&P 500 rose nearly 3% in August and was closed out the final day of the month with a flattish performance. For the year, the S&P 500 is up 20.4%.

Risks growing

September has built-in calendar risks, including the upcoming August employment report Friday, which could determine how much the Fed will tip its hand at its Sept. 22 meeting on plans to cut back its bond buying program this year.

According to Dow Jones, economists expect 750,000 jobs were added in August. If the number is dramatically higher, market pros say they could see the Fed ramping up its plans to wind down the $120 billion a month bond buying program and possibly announce it in September. If the payrolls data is as expected or weaker, the Fed could delay its tapering for a few months.

Sonders said weaker data may not be negative for the market, since it could indicate the Fed would move more slowly to pare back the bond purchases. The gradual decrease of the bond purchases is seen as a precursor to an ultimate interest rate increase by the Fed, though Chairman Jerome Powell last week stressed the two were not linked.

Sonders said the Fed will rely on the incoming data in making its decision. That makes the course of Covid and its impact on the economy an important factor.

"The bottom line is sadly, the market is still at the mercy of this ... virus," Sonders said. 

Back to normal?

September has also been lauded as a month where Americans were supposed to feel a sense of normalcy, as children return to school in classrooms. Labor shortages have been expected to subside in September, as parents of school age children rejoin the work force and extended unemployment benefits expire.

The spread of the delta variant of Covid, however, has now created more uncertainty around the economy, as some companies push back reopening dates. Businesses from retailers to restaurants are seeing consumer traffic drop off in reaction to the spreading virus.

"Consumer confidence has already rolled over. It's less about what's the virus doing now. We all assumed things were going to be closer to normal in September," BITG head of equity and derivatives strategy Julian Emanuel.

Charles Schwab's Sonders said the focus on the Fed will be an overriding theme in September, but Covid is also a potential factor.

"I think the back-to-school component of this is more than just a potential needle mover," Sonders said. "It's whether we can stay in a general schools stay open without a much worse situation developing in some of the states where vaccination rates are lower. That's clearly a calendar specific Covid risk."

Emanuel said the market will be looking for the Fed to continue to push forward its plan to taper the bond purchases.

"This could be one of those ones by the time we get to the 22nd, the market may want the Fed to announce the tapering schedule because the implications of no announcement is this concern that they might know about the virus' impact on the broad economy and the labor market," he said.

Other risks in September could include inflation data. The consumer price index is slated for release Sept. 14. If data continues to run hot, Emanuel said that could push up Treasury yields, a negative for the market.

Emanuel said the market is also keeping an eye out on any discussion of when the U.S. will reach the debt ceiling, and it's also awaiting the fate of the multitrillion-dollar infrastructure bill, expected to be considered by Congress in September.

The U.S. exit from Afghanistan also hangs over the market as a risk factor. Final evacuation flights left Kabul on Monday. "The event has come and gone and the political fallout could be longer lasting, particularly if there are signs for greater instability in the region," Emanuel said.

September is worst month

Emanuel has been expecting a sizeable sell-off, and September and October are often choppy times.

"It doesn't mean the market is going to go down, but from our point of view there's a lot of complacency and belief that as long as the Fed isn't raising rates, the market cannot go down," he said.

He said investors should protect against a decline, and suggests using options.

"We're not saying you should be fearful," he said. "What we're saying is be prudent. You have fantastic gains in your portfolio."

Sonders said there have been major corrections in the market under the surface, even though some investors see the market as resilient because the major indexes have advanced to records. She said her biggest concern has been speculative froth.

"You've had rotational corrections and bear markets in areas like the meme stocks, SPACs and cryptos," she said.

Sonders said she maintains one outperform, and that is health care. She is looking more at factor-based investing than sector-based. She's looking for factors in individual stocks that reflect quality and is screening for things like stocks with strong free cash flow or earnings revisions.

Adblock test (Why?)

"time" - Google News
September 01, 2021 at 02:04AM
https://ift.tt/2Y4RVlg

There are mounting risks that make September a potentially hazardous time for stocks - CNBC
"time" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3f5iuuC

Live Afghanistan updates: Biden defends U.S. departure: 'It was time to end this war' - The Washington Post

lonk.indah.link

President Biden on Tuesday defended the U.S. evacuation effort in Afghanistan, which was capped with the Taliban taking control of the Kabul airport after the last American military flight left the country.

“The United States ended 20 years of war in Afghanistan, the longest war in American history,” Biden said during an address at the White House, praising the efforts to get more than 120,000 Americans and allies evacuated to safety. “And still, the women and men of the United States military, our diplomatic corps and intelligence professionals did their job and did it well, risking their lives not for professional gains but to serve others — not in a mission of war, but a mission of mercy.”

The president added, “I was not going to extend this forever war, and I was not extending a forever exit.”

“It was time to end this war,” Biden said.

Biden’s comments came after celebratory gunfire from the Taliban echoed across Kabul, capping the militant group’s victory in a 20-year war with the United States. One of the Taliban’s top officials, however, cautioned its fighters to be careful in how they treated the local population and called for international investment and national unity in the country.

“I invite you all to come and invest in Afghanistan,” said Zabihullah Mujahid at a speech at the airport. “Your investments will be in good hands. The country will be stable and safe.” He added that after years of war and invasion, “the people do not have more tolerance” for further violence.

The Taliban’s senior leadership has held multiday talks as the group works to forms a government.

Here’s what to know

• The White House said that officials are still in touch with Americans who have remained in Afghanistan and would be available to assist them if they wanted to leave.
• Celebrating the completion of the U.S. departure from Afghanistan, Taliban supporters gathered to hold a mock funeral procession alongside makeshift coffins draped in American flags, Reuters reported.
• A recent survey showed divided views on U.S. troop withdrawal. Fifty-four percent of U.S. adults said the decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan was the right one, while 42 percent say it was the wrong decision, a recent Pew Research Center report showed.
• The United States said it would maintain “robust counterterrorism capabilities” in the region, said Secretary of State Antony Blinken. There is broad skepticism that the Taliban will keep its promise to stop the country from serving as a breeding ground for groups such as al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, whose local affiliate killed 13 U.S. service members and at least 170 civilians outside Kabul airport last week.

After Cruz slams Biden for departure, Castro accuses Republican of not doing enough to help evacuations

Link copied

After Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) criticized President Biden’s handling of the U.S. departure from Afghanistan, Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Tex.) on Tuesday accused the Republican of not offering enough assistance to Texans who had reached out to his office seeking help to evacuate families from Afghanistan.

“Several callers indicated that they had reached out to Sen. Cruz’s office without a response or — what they felt to be — an earnest effort to help,” Alex Sarabia, a Castro spokesperson, said in a Tuesday statement to The Washington Post. Sarabia added that the congressman’s office had received calls and emails from individuals desperate for help in evacuating families, including American citizens, from Afghanistan in the past two weeks.

A spokesperson with Cruz’s office declined to comment.

Cruz on Monday slammed the president’s decision to depart from Afghanistan and end America’s longest war, while there are still between 100 and 200 Americans in the Taliban-controlled country. CNN correspondent Clarissa Ward reported she had encountered a Texas family of four, who she said had gone to the Kabul airport for two weeks and failed to leave.

“America doesn’t leave Americans behind,” Cruz tweeted, saying it was “horrifying.”

The White House said that officials are still in touch with Americans who have remained in Afghanistan and would be available to assist them if they wanted to leave.

In response, Castro called Cruz’s remarks “interesting.”

“I got several calls to my office from Texas families saying your office wouldn’t help them get families out of Afghanistan so they were calling a Texas congressman instead,” the congressman tweeted.

Biden administration in touch with Americans choosing to remain in Afghanistan for now

Link copied

The White House said Tuesday that officials are still in touch with Americans who have remained in Afghanistan and would be available to assist them if they wanted to leave.

“We are in touch with a number of these Americans, not everyone, perhaps, but we are in touch,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said at the daily news briefing. “We are in touch with as many of them who we can make contact with through a range of means.”

White House aides are getting daily updates on the range of options available to help those remaining in the country depart if they choose to do so.

“Some of that may be over land, over borders, some of that may be through airplanes,” Psaki said. “And so we’re working again with the Qataris and the Turks on that. We’re working to get the civilian side of the airport operational.”

The reasons why some Americans have chosen to remain in the country vary from possessing dual citizenship to wanting to remain with family members who might not be eligible to leave.

Earlier Tuesday, Biden placed the number at 100 to 200 Americans after more than 5,000 were evacuated.

“Most of those who remain are dual citizens, longtime residents, but earlier decided to stay because of their family roots in Afghanistan. The bottom line, 90 percent of Americans in Afghanistan who wanted to leave were able to leave. And for those remaining Americans, there is no deadline. We remain committed to get them out if they want to come out,” the president said in remarks at the White House.

Psaki said there was growing concern among Taliban leaders of a potential brain drain. “If they allow some of these people out, the doctors, the lawyers, the people who have been trained by the Americans over the last 20 years, not to mention people in Afghanistan who could cause trouble for the Taliban if they were able to essentially go into exile and oppose the Taliban government,” she said.

Taliban supporters stage a mock funeral to mark U.S. departure

Link copied

Celebrating the completion of the U.S. departure from Afghanistan, Taliban supporters gathered Tuesday to hold a mock funeral procession alongside makeshift coffins draped in American flags, Reuters reported.

Tightly packed crowds looked on as some people held up fake caskets wrapped in different flags, including those of the United States, France, Britain and NATO, photos published by Reuters show. Music blasted over loudspeakers, and some held up phones to record the procession in the eastern city of Khost. Others held up firearms, videos of the gathering show.

“August 31 is our formal Freedom Day. On this day, American occupying forces and NATO forces fled the country,” Taliban official Qari Saeed Khosti told local television station Zhman TV, according to Reuters.

The fake funeral was part of celebrations held across the nation to mark the last U.S. troops leaving Afghanistan and the end to the 20-year war in the country. As soon as thelast U.S. service member departed Kabul — sometime before 11:59 p.m. Monday — gunfire rang out in celebration.

“The last American soldier left Kabul airport … and our country gained full independence,” Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid tweeted. “The sounds of gunfire in Kabul are shots of joy.”

In defense of decision to end war, Biden focuses on global rise of terrorism

Link copied

President Biden said Tuesday that it was necessary to end the war in Afghanistan to focus on the biggest terrorism threats of today and tomorrow. But he warned the Islamic State that the United States would not end its fight against the terrorism organization’s influence.

The president made the decision to fully pull American troops out of the country after 20 years of fighting, arguing that it was difficult to justify the benefits of continuing to occupy Afghanistan.

“It was time to end this war,” he said. “This is a new world. The terror threat has metastasized across the world, well beyond Afghanistan.”

Biden called the move “the best decision for America” and praised those involved with evacuating more than 120,000 Americans and allies to safety over a relatively brief time.

But the president said the U.S. commitment to tackling terrorism abroad was not over. He spoke about the rapid spread of terrorism in East Africa, the Middle East and other countries requiring more attention than the United States had previously provided.

“The fundamental obligation of a president, in my opinion, is to defend and protect America, not against threats of 2001 but against the threats of 2021 and tomorrow,” he said.

The way the United States combats terrorism in the next decade will require an approach that differs from those employed in years past, the president said, because of how terrorism now manifests itself.

“The threat from terrorism continues in its pernicious and evil nature,” he said. “But it’s changed, expanded to other countries.”

“Our strategy has to change, too,” Biden added. “We will maintain the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan and other countries. We just don’t need to fight a ground war to do it.”

The U.S. soldier whose boots were the last on the ground in Afghanistan

Link copied

After nearly 20 years of continuous U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, an Army general ascended the ramp of a transport plane sometime before 11:59 p.m. Monday, closing the chapter on U.S. involvement in the country’s longest war.

Army Maj. Gen. Christopher T. Donahue, commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, was the last service member with his feet planted on Afghan soil, officials said, before boarding a C-17 transport plane with Ross Wilson, the top diplomat in Kabul until shortly after his departure.

Donahue was photographed in night-vision green — evoking the way Americans fought in Afghan darkness — as he carried an M4. Other aircraft, including drones and fighter jets, flew overhead to protect the last departing flights, Pentagon officials said.

‘I was not extending a forever exit’: Biden defends U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan and airlift mission

Link copied

In remarks at the White House on Tuesday afternoon, President Biden defended his decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan and his handling of the evacuation effort, calling the mission to extract more than 120,000 Americans and Afghan allies an “extraordinary success.”

“I was not going to extend this forever war, and I was not extending a forever exit,” Biden said.

The president also defended his decision to set Aug. 31 as the withdrawal date, arguing that it was not an “arbitrary deadline.”

“It was designed to save American lives,” he said.

The president added that about 100 to 200 Americans remain in Afghanistan and that the United States will continue to try to get them out of the country.

Biden has faced criticism, with some Republicans arguing that the United States should have kept a military presence in Afghanistan. In strong terms, Biden rejected that notion, insisting that war takes a toll no matter the level of conflict: He pointed out that 18 veterans die by suicide every day in the United States.

“There’s nothing low-grade or low-risk or low-cost about any war,” Biden said.

The president underscored that his predecessor, Donald Trump, negotiated a deal with the Taliban that included a deadline for U.S. withdrawal. Biden said that he took responsibility for his decision as commander in chief and that his military leaders were in agreement.

“I refuse to continue a war that was no longer in the service of the vital national interest of our people,” Biden said.

Most Americans favor troop withdrawal but criticize Biden’s performance, survey shows

Link copied

A recent survey showed divided views on U.S. troop withdrawal. A majority (54 percent) of U.S. adults said the decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan was the right one, while 42 percent say it was the wrong decision, a recent Pew Research Center report showed. The survey was conducted between Aug. 23 and 29. The U.S. military pullout was completed Aug. 30.

Sixty-nine percent of respondents said that the United States mostly failed in achieving its goals in Afghanistan. Twenty-seven percent said the nation succeeded.

Respondents also viewed the Biden administration’s handling of the Afghanistan situation critically. Forty-two percent of people rated the job the Biden administration has done handling the Afghanistan situation as “poor.” Twenty-nine percent responded that the administration handled it as “only fair,” 21 percent as “good,” and 6 percent said “excellent.”

The survey noted that partisanship was evident in most attitudes on the U.S.'s handling of Afghanistan. While 7 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents rated the Biden’s administration’s performance on Afghanistan positively, closer to half (43 percent) of Democrats and those who are Democratic-leaning say the administration has done an excellent or good job.

Partisan differences were most stark on withdrawal: Most Democrats (70 percent) say they support the decision to withdraw U.S. forces, while most Republicans (64 percent) say it was the wrong decision.

Pew noted that most of the survey was conducted before the Aug. 26 bombing that killed 13 U.S. service members and around 169 Afghans — though it noted little overall change in attitudes after the attack.

For Biden, ‘forever war’ isn’t over — just entering a new, perilous phase

Link copied

But for President Biden, the end of the “forever war” is more of an inflection point than an actual conclusion. The departure of forces kicks off a new phase of the United States’ entanglement in Afghanistan that could also prove perilous — and no less challenging.

Biden and his team now have to grapple with deep skepticism over whether the Taliban will keep its promises for a peaceful transition. It pledged not to seek revenge on the Afghans who worked with and aided Americans during the conflict, and to respect the rights of women — at least within the framework of the group’s interpretation of Islamic law. But many foreign policy experts and even Biden allies remain mistrustful of what, exactly, that means.

National security threats remain, such as whether a Taliban-controlled Afghanistan will again become a haven for terrorists eager to attack the United States.

Key update

Roughly 1,250 Canadian citizens and their family members left behind in Afghanistan

Link copied

TORONTO — Canadian officials said Tuesday that roughly 1,250 Canadian citizens and their family members were left behind in Afghanistan — the first such estimate provided to the public — while adding that they would resettle 5,000 Afghans evacuated by the United States.

“We’re pulling out all the stops to help as many Afghans as possible who want to make their home in Canada,” Immigration Minister Marco Mendicino told reporters at a news conference.

Amid pressure from veterans and advocacy groups, Canada last month announced that it would resettle Afghans who aided Canada’s war effort or its diplomats and their families. It estimated that 6,000 people might be eligible for resettlement under the program.

Canadian officials said last week that the country had evacuated about 3,700 people from Kabul before its evacuation mission ended, including about 2,000 Afghans — far short of the number eligible — in an effort that drew criticism from advocates for being haphazard.

Canada insists that its rescue mission is not over and that it is working with allies on other ways to facilitate the evacuation of vulnerable Afghans, though they might need to make their way to third countries first.

Foreign Minister Marc Garneau said he would be speaking to officials from countries neighboring Afghanistan to facilitate the entry of those left behind. He also said that he is pushing the Taliban to allow those with valid travel documents to leave Afghanistan.”

Afghans with travel documents to other countries must be allowed to move safely and freely out of the country without interference,” Garneau said. “Canada and its allies are firm on this point.”

Analysis: No, the Taliban did not seize $83 billion worth of U.S. weapons

Link copied

“ALL EQUIPMENT should be demanded to be immediately returned to the United States, and that includes every penny of the $85 billion dollars in cost.”

— Former president Donald Trump, in a statement, Aug. 30

We don’t normally pay much attention to claims made by the former president, as he mostly just riffs golden oldies. But this is a new claim. A version of this claim also circulates widely on right-leaning social media — that somehow the Taliban has ended up with $83 billion in U.S. weaponry. (Trump, as usual, rounds the number up.)

The $83 billion number is not invented out of whole cloth. But it reflects all the money spent to train, equip and house the Afghan military and police — so weapons are just a part of that. At this point, no one really knows the value of the equipment that was seized by the Taliban.

What we lost in Afghanistan: Readers share their sacrifices from 20 years of war

Link copied

Twenty years after the United States launched its longest war, militants are back in control in Afghanistan. The Taliban’s rapid return to power — beamed across television, computer and smartphone screens around the globe — was deeply personal for many who fought in the war, who helped the country rebuild or were forced to flee amid the violence.

Their stories, shared in interviews, illustrate the ongoing, everyday impact of the war in Afghanistan on people spanning continents and communities. The war has left a mark on people who, despite being worlds apart, are bound by the same feeling — an overwhelming sense of personal sacrifice. Here’s what they lost.

Taliban’s shadowy supreme leader presided over three-day leadership meeting in Kandahar

Link copied

The Taliban’s senior leadership held a three-day meeting this week in Kandahar, Afghanistan’s second-largest city and birthplace of the extremist group.

Earlier in the week, reports circulated that Haibatullah was in Kandahar, stirring speculation. The extremist cleric has not been publicly seen in years.

The meetings concerned the “current political, security and social issues of the country,” Mohammad Naeem, spokesman for the Taliban’s political office in Qatar, said Tuesday on Twitter.

He added, “At the end of the meeting, the esteemed leader of the Islamic Emirate [Haibatullah] gave comprehensive instructions to the members of the council and made them all aware of their responsibilities.”

Since Afghan President Ashraf Ghani fled Kabul on Aug. 16, it has remained unclear exactly what kind of government the Taliban will preside over.

The group has pledged to make unifying the war-torn country a central aim, but its record of brutal repression and gender-based violence has left many Afghans fearful of its return to power. Others have welcomed the Taliban as an alternative to the U.S. military presence and to the corruption that flourished under the Western-backed government.

An Afghan politician spent her life working for women’s rights. She barely made it out of the country.

Link copied

Fawzia Koofi spent years fighting for women’s rights in Afghanistan. She survived at least two assassinations attempts and then last year, sat face-to-face with Taliban leaders to negotiate the country’s future.

But the former Afghan legislator, who once hoped to run for president, finally left Kabul Monday night on one of the last evacuation flight, despite the Taliban militants who had put her under house arrest — and who now control her home.

Hours after landing in the gulf nation of Qatar, Koofi said the Afghanistan now felt unsafe but the outspoken Taliban critic pledged she would one day return.

“It was heartbreaking to see how everything collapsed,” she said in a BBC radio interview on Tuesday.

Senate passes measure to expand temporary assistance to Americans returning from Afghanistan

Link copied

During a minute-long pro forma session Tuesday morning, the Senate unanimously passed a measure that will increase funding available to provide temporary assistance to Americans returning from Afghanistan.

H.R. 5085, the Emergency Repatriation Assistance for Returning Americans Act, was approved by the House last month. It expands the pool of funding for temporary aid to Americans evacuated from Afghanistan, generally for 90 days after their arrival.

The aid may include “money payments, medical care, temporary billeting, transportation and other goods and services necessary for the health or welfare of individuals,” according to the Social Security Act, which the legislation amends.

Vice President Harris was presiding Tuesday morning in her role as president of the Senate when the measure was passed.

Key update

Key update

Key update

Adblock test (Why?)

"time" - Google News
August 31, 2021 at 10:19PM
https://ift.tt/3BpbuTQ

Live Afghanistan updates: Biden defends U.S. departure: 'It was time to end this war' - The Washington Post
"time" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3f5iuuC