#Key Provisions of the Agreement

[kc22invesmentsblog]

The Bretton Woods Agreement: Shaping the Global Financial Landscape

Written by Delvin In the wake of the devastation caused by World War II, the world sought to rebuild and establish a stable international monetary system. The Bretton Woods Agreement, signed in 1944, stands as a pivotal moment in history when representatives from 44 nations gathered in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, to lay the groundwork for a new financial order. This agreement not only led to…

[retroactivebakeries]

It is almost five centuries ago, and the girl who will one day be a swordswoman is lying in the red-tinged mud. She can't get up—broken bone? severed tendon? She can't tell. She's yet to cultivate her palate for pain. Her enemy towers over her, a cataphract mailed in screaming steel and poisoned light. His warhammer falls, and it is death, forever death, death unconquered and unconquerable.

"No," says a part of her. She is not even seventeen years old. Her body is mangled and broken, wound piled upon wound piled upon wound. A dull kitchen knife is her only weapon, though she lost that in the mud the second her grip faltered. Her enemy is no thing of this earth. And yet—

"No. It is not death, forever death, death unconquered and unconquerable. It is only a hammer, falling. It is only 'an attack.'"

And the girl understood.

~~~

It is the better part of three centuries ago, as best the swordswoman can reckon, and she is beset on all sides by foes. They are not monsters—just mountain bandits, or highland rebels, as one cares to see it. But they outnumber her by dozens, and even an exceptional swordswoman might struggle against but two opponents of lesser skill.

From in front of her, beside her, behind her they advance, striking from every angle with spears and blades and axes. Others fill the air with arrows, sling stones, firepots. It would be effortless, to parry any single blow. It would be impossible, physically impossible, to defend against them all.

"No," says a part of her.

"You are not outnumbered. You do not face 'multiple' foes. It would be impossible to defend against every attack — but there is no 'every' attack. Only one."

"Oh," the swordswoman said. And it was, in fact, effortless.

~~~

It is eighty years ago, or thereabouts. A coiling spire of stony flesh and verdigrised copper throbs like a tumor on the horizon, coaxed from the earth by spell and sacrifice. It is the tower of a sorcerer-prince, and a birthing place of abominations.

Seven locks of rune-etched metal are opened with her single key. Wretched shapeling beasts, grown by sorcery in vitreous nodules, flee wailing from her, absconding before she even draws her blade. Demons sworn to thousand-year pacts of service find the binding provisions of their agreements unexpectedly severed.

These things dissatisfy the sorcerer-prince. He waxes wroth. He makes signs of power and chants incantations. With a flask of godling's blood, he draws the binding sigil inscribed upon the moon's dark face. With cold fire burning in his eyes, he speaks the secret name of Death. It is a king among curses, all-corrupting, all-consuming, and it falls from his lips upon the swordswoman.

"No," she says, and she turns it aside with her blade.

The sorcerer-prince's brow furrows. How did she even do that?

"Parried it."

But—

"With my sword."

No—

"See, like this."

Stop—

"Well," the swordswoman finally says, "I figured that if I just...looked at it right, and thought about it, and construed your curse as a kind of attack...then I could block it."

That's not how it works at all!

"If you insist," says the swordswoman, shrugging, and decapitates him.

~~~

It is now. It is the end. Death couldn't take the swordswoman, not when she'd spent all her life cutting it up. At times, Death might sidle up to one of her friends, or peer down into a grandchild's crib, and she'd just give it a look. That's all it took, by then.

Heartache couldn't take her, either. Bad things happened to her, and they hurt, and she lived in that hurt, but if it was ever more than she could take...she'd just, move her sword in a way that's difficult to describe. And she'd keep going.

Kingdoms fell, and she kept going. Continents crumbled and sank into the sea. Her planet's star faded and froze. She started carrying a lantern. Universes were torn apart and scattered, until all that had been matter was redistributed in thermodynamic equilibrium. With one exception.

But now it is the end. There is no time left; time is already dead. The swordswoman has outlived reality, but there is simply no further she can go. This is not a thing that can be blocked. This is the absence of anything further to block.

"No," says the girl who will one day be a swordswoman. "This isn't the ending. And even if it was, it's not the ending that matters."

The swordswoman looks back at who she was, at the countless selves she's been between them. She looks forward, at the rapidly contracting point that remains of the future. She grasps the all of linear time in her mind, and sees that it is shaped like a spear.

[necro-om-nom-nomicon]

If anyone's curious, this is the text of the Shelliac Treaty seen in "The Ensigns of Command".

ALL REQUESTS FOR CHANGES IN THE TEXT OF PROVISION (B) MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING OR BY A TERRIBLY COMPLEX SUBSPACE [AS] LONG AS IT IS ENCRYPTED AND UNREADABLE, AS WELL AS GARBLED AND CONFUSED, SO AS TO CONFORM TO THE PROVISION (A.294 A-C) OF THE INCOMPREHENSIBLE ACTS OF WIDDERSHINS. FEDERATION DOCUMENT LOCATOR NUMBER 7847308340 (SECTION 876234). ALL OF THIS SIMPLY TO GET THE TEXT ALONG TO SUBPARAGRAPH 832. WHICH IS QUITE A WAYS DOWN THE PAGE. YOU MIGHT THINK THAT THIS IS INCREDIBLY CLEVER STUFF. BOY ARE YOU WRONG.

SECTION 87654 RICK IS FINALLY GETTING A KEI AND YURI REFERENCE INTO THE TEXT. YOU KNOW, THE TWO CUTE GIRLS WITH THE BIG GUNS. WE MIGHT ALSO MENTION AKIRA, RANMA NIBUNNOICHI, URUSEI YATSURA, RHEA GALL FORCE, AND A FEW OTHER ANIMATED FILMS. THE FEDERATION AT THIS POINT IN TIME SEEMS MORE TANGLED UP IN PAPERWORK THAN THE IRAN-CONTRA SCANDAL BUSINESS.

SECTION 74543 IN THE TEXT OF THE TREATY, OR DIDN'T ANYONE THINK ABOUT THAT EVENTUALITY WHEN THE BLOODY DOCUMENT WAS FIRST DRAWN UP? NEVER MIND. IT'S A RHETORICAL QUESTION ANYWAY. BUT WE JUST THOUGHT WE'D TRY TO DEMONSTRATE OUR LEGALISTIC CLEVERNESS. JUST ONE MORE UNTIL THE CRITICAL ONE, WHERE WE TALK ABOUT CONSULTATIONS AND THAT SORT OF THING.

SECTION 33406 WE CAN DO SEARCH-AND-REPLACE. COME TO THINK ABOUT IT, THAT'S WHAT THE SHELLAC WANT TO DO WITH THE COLONY ON THE PLANET. THIS SECTION DEALS WITH THE RIGHT OF EACH PARTY TO CONFER WITH THE OTHER IN THE EVENT SOMETHING SCREWY HAPPENS WITH THE TREATY. THIS MAY TAKE THE FORM OF NORMAL EM SPECTRUM COMMUNICATION, SUBSPACE EM COMMUNICATION, FACE-TO-FACE MEETINGS, TELEPHONE TAG, MESSAGES IN BOTTLES OR ANY OTHER WATER-TIGHT FORM OF ENCLOSURE, GOSSIP, HALF-TRUTHS, OUTRIGHT LIES, OR FACE-TO-FACE MEETINGS. INTERRUPTION OF TREATY COMPLIANCE SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE (1.00 X 10E0) STANDARD UFP SOLAR YEAR (EXCEPT DURING THE MONTH OF JULY). SEE TECHNICAL TA48589.1742A-C(58945) FOR CODE INPUTS. LCARS UPDATES ON TREATY COMPLIANCE INTERRUPTIONS SHALL TAKE PLACE AT EACH STARBASE LAYOVER, OR WHEN COMMANDED BY RANKING UFP (OR OTHER DESIGNATED BODY) OFFICIALS AT STARFLEET HEADQUARTERS, 24-593 FEDERATION DRIVE, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, EARTH, SOL SECTOR. REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE MAY BE PLACED BY TRANSMISSION TO STANDARD STARFLEET BOOSTER STATION FOR CHANNELING TO UFP TREATY OFFICE (SOL SECTOR).

SECTION 74543 ACCEPTABLE IF APPROPRIATE NOTIFICATION IS GIVEN TO FEDERATION BUREAU OF TREATIES (SOL SECTOR). SEE TA 98745.234EE-E FOR SCHEDULE OF CODES AND TEMPORAL ADJUSTMENT FACTORS. THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS. THIRD PARTY ASSISTANCE MAY BE REQUESTED FROM A FEDERATION IF THE DISTANCE FROM THE VESSEL TO SOL SECTOR IS GREATER THAN 5,000 LIGHTYEARS, UFP STANDARDS MEASUREMENT BUREAU UNITS. ASSISTANCE MAY ALSO BE REQUESTED IF THE VESSEL IS LESS THAN 1,000 LIGHTYEARS OF A STANDARD UFP SUBSPACE RELAY BOOSTER STATION. AND THAT'S THE WAY IT IS.

[vaporize-employers]

What Would a Replacement Nominee Mean for US-Israel Policy?

US-Israel policy under Kamala Harris would probably resemble that of the current administration. First thing’s first, Harris would have to decide whether to retain Biden’s trusted foreign policy advisors, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and Secretary of State Antony Blinken. Keeping two of Biden’s key staffers would suggest a continuity in US foreign policy. That said, even if Harris decided to shake up her cabinet and introduce fresh faces, her policies are not likely to diverge from those of her would-be predecessor. Harris would likely continue Biden’s work to reach a hostage/ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas while maintaining ironclad support for Israel’s security, a position that she held even before the current war. During the 2020 election cycle, Harris promised that any administration she serves would continue unconditional security assistance to Israel despite disagreements with Israeli leaders. Harris’s experience as a US Senator from California also offers a glimpse into what her policies toward Israel might hold. Speaking in front of the American Jewish Committee, then Senator Harris reflected on her time serving on the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Homeland Security Committee, telling the crowd that she “will do everything in [her] power to ensure broad and bipartisan support for Israel’s security and right to self-defense.” Like many of her colleagues in Congress, Harris consistently rejected external efforts to apply pressure on Israel to reach a peace agreement. In 2017, Harris cosponsored a Senate resolution that objected to United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334, which condemned Israel for its expansion of settlements and disregard for a two-state solution based on the 1967 lines. While Harris said she opposed any Israeli effort to unilaterally annex the West Bank, the Senate resolution explicitly objected to the Security Council’s condemnation of Israel’s settlement policies in the occupied territory. Harris also gained attention for her stance on Israel in the lead up to the 2020 presidential election when she came out in opposition of S.1, otherwise known as the “Strengthening America’s Security in the Middle East Act of 2019.” The bill provided for security assistance to strengthen Israel’s military, among several other provisions. Notably, Harris was one of 22 Democrats who voted against the bill “out of concern that it could limit Americans’ First Amendment rights.” Though not a supporter of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement targeting Israel, Harris expressed concern over S.1’s authorization to state and local governments to demand that contractors declare that they do not support BDS or settlements in the West Bank. A review of her previous positions on Israel and Palestine suggests that a Harris presidency would likely spell a continuation of Biden-era policies. Harris has shown a commitment to support Israel while exhibiting a willingness to use a more critical tone in public on occasion. For a Harris presidency to offer a radically different policy approach would be quite a surprise, and it is more than likely that there would be few substantive policy changes under her leadership.

Arab Center Washington DC, Jul 17, 2024

[eelhound]

"We live in a time of crisis. Consider three interwoven ones.

First, climate change. Every year brings more forest fires and less breathable air, the result of an economic system predicated on burning fossil fuels and working long hours to fuel energy-intensive consumption.

Second, overwhelmed families. Even though people in the Global North live in the richest societies the world has ever known, the majority still find themselves overworked and overwhelmed. Practically every family, especially with young kids, is stressed and strained, struggling to balance the unbalanceable demands of care with no support and work with no flexibility.

Third, millions of poor and working-class people are profoundly unfree in that they have no time for anything but the constant scramble to stay ahead of the bills. In Europe, the average woman in a couple with children works a massive seventy-one hours per week when you include her unpaid care labor. In New York, a single mother on minimum wage would need to labor for an astounding (and impossible) 117 hours every week to meet her basic needs. We live in an epidemic of time poverty, where compulsory overwork defers dreams and crushes aspirations under the relentlessness of Sisyphean toil.

Imagine, for a moment, a different kind of society where the standard job was part-time, but also a good job, offering decent pay and benefits as well as flexibility and career advancement. Public provision of essential services would provide a background of economic security: from health care to childcare, pensions to transit (and, ideally, a basic income as well). With their basic needs met, individuals wouldn’t have to rely on their jobs nearly as much to get by — and working substantially less than forty hours would be something to be desired rather than feared.

The Research on Part-Time Work

Recent scholarly evidence shows that slashing work hours is key to confronting climate change. For example, Jonas Nässén and Jörgen Larsson find that “a decrease in working time by 1% may reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions by about 0.7% and 0.8%, respectively.” David Rosnick and Mark Weisbrot find that if the United States were to slash its working hours to Western European levels, energy consumption would drop by 20 percent. The most rigorous study to date is probably that of Jared Fitzgerald and colleagues, who performed a longitudinal study on fifty-two countries. They confirmed the results of other studies that more working time leads to more energy consumption, and that this relationship is intensifying over time for both rich and poor countries.

We know that under regular conditions, capitalist economies grow and grow, but so far only by producing more and more emissions. Global emissions have only fallen four times over the last sixty years — 1981, 1992, 2009, and 2020 — precisely when the world was in the throes of economic recession. This is the cold reality of neoliberal capitalism: it forces us to choose between environmental destruction or the social misery of mass unemployment.

Good part-time work offers us a structural escape hatch — a new model to immediately reduce emissions without putting people out of work.

Of course, part-time work isn’t enough by itself. A pro-worker climate agenda must also include national and global agreements on carbon caps, a Green New Deal that unleashes massive state investment fueling decarbonization (for instance, shifting toward clean energy and building new public transit infrastructure), and so on. But good part-time work is a necessary, if insufficient condition, for preventing ecological disaster.

In terms of work-life balance, the evidence is even stronger. The academic literature finds again and again that bringing down work hours alleviates family stress and strain. To cite one of many examples, Rosemary Crompton and Clare Lyonette report in a 2006 paper that in every one of the five countries they studied, “working hours were the most significant predictor of work-life conflict.”

We also know that free time is foundational for individual freedom. To live the life one wants, free time is essential to devise and accomplish any of one’s life goals. One cannot be deeply engaged with family, friends, art, activism, sport, music, education, or any of the variegated projects that animate people’s aspirations if one is always on the clock.

The US vs. Western Europe

For hundreds of years, a vibrant strand of socialism has aspired to build a world with substantial freedom from toil — a world where machines do much of the work so humans don’t have to, freeing us to pursue our aims, develop our capabilities, and flourish in whatever directions we see fit. This is a world where artificial intelligence and robots actually make human life better and easier, rather than ushering in unemployment, fear, and inequality.

But is good part-time work really possible?

For those of us living in North America, part-time employment usually means poorly paid and precarious, with few benefits and even less autonomy. However, there’s nothing inevitable about this. Western European examples show that it’s completely possible to transform crappy part-time jobs into good, secure jobs.

In Denmark, for example, part-time work is usually good work. Whereas the hourly wage gap between full-time and part-time women is more than 20 percent in Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom, in Denmark, it is about zero. Danish part-timers also enjoy robust benefits and pensions; a person who works part-time at 75 percent for ten years then full-time for the rest of their career, will end up with a pension worth 98 percent as much as someone who worked full-time their whole career.

A single mother working at the lowest wage (there is no official minimum wage in Denmark, since wages are set through collective bargaining) for thirty hours per week earns €27,600, while the living wage is roughly €15,000. Danish part-timers appear to be very happy with their situation. The percentage of part-time women who say they are “dissatisfied” with their job is only 4 percent, and the percentage of part-time workers who are dissatisfied with their life as a whole is just 0.4 percent.

The Netherlands is another illuminating example. It is the world’s first so-called “part-time economy,” with the highest proportion of part-time jobs in the world. Amazingly, close to 50 percent of the entire labor force works part-time (compared to only 18 percent in the EU27).

Since implementing the Equal Treatment (Working Hours) Act in 1996, it has been illegal for Dutch employers to discriminate between full- and part-time workers in the provision of pay, benefits, holidays, and employment opportunities. Part-time jobs are mostly open-ended contracts, not a precarious form of nonstandard employment — part-timers are not significantly more likely to work unsocial hours like evenings, nights, or weekends — and the country boasts the highest proportion of firms in Europe with part-time positions at high levels of qualification (47 percent). The result is that the gap between hourly part-time and full-time wages is only about 5 percent, with very little part-time work being involuntary (only 5 percent of female and 10 percent of male part-timers would prefer to be full-time).

Crucially, the cluster of policies boosting part-time work exists against a background of relatively robust economic security. The country’s National Old Age Pension guarantees every citizen a flat-rate pension by sixty-five, regardless of previous employment or earnings. A living wage for a single mother in the Netherlands is today about €15,000, whereas her income from working thirty hours per week on minimum wage is roughly €19,000. A family with two adults, both working thirty-hour weeks, earns a median income of roughly €60,000 — easily surpassing the living wage floor for the whole family (two adults, two kids) of €43,000. Part-time work, in other words, is perfectly feasible for everyone.

Things could hardly be more different in the United States.

In California, a living wage for a four-person family is roughly $110,000. If both adults worked part-time (thirty hours per week) the family would take in a median income of just $70,000. If part-time work is unattractive for the bottom half of the population, the situation is far worse for the poorest. A single mother in Los Angeles working thirty hours per week at a minimum wage job will bring in only $24,180 — pitifully short of a living wage, which for such a family is more than three-times greater, at over $80,000.

The reason the living wage in the United States is so much higher than in Europe is because social democratic welfare states provide their citizens with free or subsidized health care, childcare, transport, housing, etc. The amount of private money that anyone needs to acquire their basic needs (the “living wage”) is therefore much less. A good life based on part-time work is completely feasible in many parts of Europe.

Germany is another example. Although the country has many fewer part-time jobs than the Netherlands, they have done an excellent job of shrinking the number of hours worked in standard full-time jobs. Germany currently has the shortest working hours in the world — an average of 1,341 a year — which is, remarkably, 26 percent, or the equivalent of eleven full working weeks, shorter than in the United States. In Berlin, a living wage today is about €15,000 — within reach of anyone on a part-time income, since even a minimum-wage part-time worker makes €18,720.

A Transformative Demand

The bottom line is that constructing an economic system where part-time jobs are both good and widely available is possible. Doing so requires the standard social democratic tools of unions, high taxes, and progressive governments willing to regulate the market on behalf of workers. None of this is easy to achieve, particularly in countries with as weak a labor movement and as powerful a business class as the United States. But political will, not technical feasibility, is what is standing in the way of a good life for the majority.

In these times of crisis, it is easy to feel dispirited and hopeless. And when hope departs, cynicism grows. The vision of a freer society built around good part-time work is one antidote to such cynicism. It is a bold, feasible demand — at once radical and realistic in the medium term. The elements that are required already exist in various places around the world.

The result would not be a utopia. It would not solve all our problems. But it could transform our lives."

- Tom Malleson, from "We Should All Be Working Part Time for Full-Time Pay." Jacobin, 22 November 2023.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Betsy Klein and Alayna Treene at CNN:

President-elect Donald Trump has not yet submitted a series of transition agreements with the Biden administration, in part because of concerns over the mandatory ethics pledge vowing to avoid conflicts of interest once sworn in to office, CNN has learned. As president, Trump repeatedly came under fire from ethics groups for potential conflicts of interest relating to his businesses and brands. Both Trump’s and his family’s foreign business ties have also come under intense scrutiny throughout his time in office and on the campaign trail.

Trump and his transition team are already behind in accessing key transition briefings from the Biden administration, as they have failed to sign a pair of agreements to unlock critical information before taking over the federal government in 72 days. The holdup revolves in part around the mandatory agreement over ethics issues. A source familiar with the process acknowledged that details are still being worked out with the Biden administration regarding the ethics agreement, which is required by law under the Presidential Transition Act and which applies to all members of the transition team. Updates to that bill requiring the ethics pledge were introduced by Trump ally Sen. Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican, and signed into law by Trump himself in March 2020. The source would not expand further on the Trump team’s concerns over the ethics pledge. Trump’s most recent financial disclosures as a candidate showed that he has continued to make millions off his properties, books and licensing deals. He and his family recently launched a new cryptocurrency business.

A sizable share of his net worth, meanwhile, is tied to the publicly traded parent company of Truth Social, the conservative social media network. Trump is the dominant shareholder and said Friday that he has no intention of selling his 114.75 million shares, worth about $3.7 billion. The Trump team ignored a pair of key preelection deadlines to unlock transition activities with the Biden administration’s General Services Administration and the White House. Experts are sounding the alarms about impacts to Day 1 national security preparedness. The GSA agreement, due September 1, gives Trump’s team access to office space and secure communications, among other provisions. And the White House agreement, due October 1, serves as the gatekeeper for access to agencies and information and lays groundwork for Trump’s team to receive security clearances necessary to begin receiving classified information. The ethics agreement was also due by October 1. The Trump adviser told CNN the president-elect intends to sign the ethics pledge, but said the transition team’s main priority is selecting and vetting candidates for top Cabinet roles. It is unclear when Trump will sign the pledge.

Walking ethics scandal Donald Trump has yet to sign a presidential transition ethics agreement required due to concerns over the mandatory ethics pledge vowing to avoid conflicts of interest.

[mariacallous]

Pity the Peruvian negotiators who, five years ago, signed an agreement with the Chinese giant Cosco Shipping Ports. The agreement was about the Port of Chancay, located near Lima, which was to become a megaport and “the gateway from South America to Asia,” as one Cosco manager told The Associated Press. But now, as the massive port nears completion, an “administrative error” by unnamed officials in Peru has given Cosco Shipping Ports exclusivity over operations at the Port of Chancay, the Peruvian port authority (APN) announced in March. Other infrastructure operators still hoping for large Chinese investments should pay heed.

That’s bad news, because the two-terminal construction is be completed later this year, and Peru has great expectations. Cosco acquired 60 percent ownership over the port when the deal was announced in 2019, and together with Peruvian mining company Volcan, it has invested a staggering $3.5 billion in the project, which intends to turn the natural deep-water port into a cargo megaport.  The Peruvian government, though, assumed that the Chinese shipping giant would merely be using the port that it will majority-own, not have exclusive rights to it. But during the negotiations, Cosco somehow gained precisely these rights. Now APN is trying to rescind the exclusivity, saying it made a mistake.

Oh, to be a fly on the wall at APN headquarters or the office of new Peruvian new Economy Minister José Arista, who has to help sort this mess out. A mere five years ago, Cosco’s investment in Chancay, which is located a mere 40 miles to the north of the capital city of Lima, seemed to be unmitigatedly good news.

Chancay will indeed gain two massive terminals. There will be a new container terminal with 11 berths and new a four-berth terminal for bulk cargo, general cargo, and rolling cargo, World Cargo News reported. How many countries just happen to have a natural deep-water port in a strategic location and then manage to attract Chinese money to massively expand it?

In what seemed to be even better news for Peru, sailing from Chancay will dramatically cut the travel time for vessels headed to China from the region. That, of course, means increased revenues and regional power for Peru. So exciting was Chancay’s future that in March, Arista took Brazilian Planning Minister Simone Tebet to the port to discuss prospective Brazilian exports from it. Brazil—a major food-exporting nation—is interested in shipping soybeans and corn from Chancay, which would cut the transit time to Asia by some two weeks compared to the Panama Canal route, Reuters reported. (China is Brazil’s top buyer of soybeans.)

The joy was, alas, abruptly halted last month, when Cosco sent Arista’s Economy Ministry a letter disputing the contents of a message that it had received from APN. In its letter, the port authority had explained its “administrative error” and pointed out that it doesn’t have the authority to grant exclusive port access. The Chinese firm, though, is standing its ground, even implying that it could pull out if it doesn’t get exclusive access.

The Peruvian government may—like countless other governments in countries ranging from Italy to Sri Lanka that, until recently, enthusiastically courted Chinese infrastructure investments—simply have gotten cold feet about Cosco in Chancay, especially since Cosco is ultimately owned by the Chinese state through its mainland-based parent company, Cosco Shipping. Or APN may in fact have been outfoxed in the negotiations. Last year, the U.S. government told Lima that it was concerned about Chinese infrastructure control in Peru.

Either way, the Peruvian government is now in a massive bind, with the port scheduled to be completed and start operations at the end of this year.

That raises the question of how many other governments have enthusiastically negotiated agreements with Chinese infrastructure investors without understanding all the fine print.

According to research by the Council on Foreign Relations, Chinese firms have invested in 92 active ports outside China, including Hamburg, Rotterdam, and seven other EU ports as well as three in Australia. And 13 of those 92 ports, including two container terminals in Spain and Greece’s Port of Piraeus, have majority-Chinese ownership. In 10 ports with Chinese investments, the Council on Foreign Relations identified “physical potential for naval use.”

In the United States, meanwhile, security services have discovered secretly installed communications equipment in Chinese-built cargo cranes operating at U.S. ports. How many port projects that are not yet complete have unwittingly granted Chinese firms exclusive access? We likely have no way of knowing until they’re operational. But we may see more Chancays.

There are plenty of strategic reasons for these Chinese investments. At the Doraleh Container Terminal in Djibouti, the Chinese operator China Merchants Port Holdings (whose ultimate owner is also the Chinese state) is trying to dislodge the Emirati firm DP World from a long-standing contract granting the latter exclusive access. In 2017, the Chinese military opened its first overseas military base—also in Djibouti.

Many countries’ enthusiasm for China has waned. Last year, a Pew Research Center poll covering 24 countries across all inhabited continents found that a median of 67 percent of people viewed China unfavorably, compared to only 28 percent who viewed it favorably. That’s a dramatic increase from a median unfavorability rating of 41 percent that Pew found less than five years ago.

Such sentiments, though, are unlikely to discourage Chinese firms from trying to gain a stake in overseas infrastructure. In the Arctic Norwegian port town of Kirkenes (population: 3,404 people), located just 13 kilometers (8 miles) or so from the Russian border and home to the closest NATO port to Russia, no fewer than six Chinese companies are seeking to establish operations. The prospective investors include a textile manufacturer, an automotive manufacturer, a technology firm, an investment fund, a construction firm, and a shipping company.

Chinese firms are also interested in building and financing the Kirkenes Port, Norwegian National Radio reported. Kirkenes is, of course, also conveniently located near the Northern Sea Route, which goes along Russia’s Arctic coast and would slash the travel time for ships traveling from northern Europe to the Chinese East Coast or vice versa. The investment would be a big boost, but also raises security concerns for a town already on high alert. In February this year, a Russian citizen was arrested photographing military installations in Kirkenes.

Are Norwegian port representatives and other officials up to negotiating a complex deal with a Chinese company such as Cosco without giving away the store, should the suitors present a strong offer?

As attractive as Chinese money can be, let’s hope that strategic sense might sometimes prevail.

[tokenlauncher]

Top Reasons Why Mint Tokens Are the Future of Digital Finance in 2024

Introduction

The world of digital finance is rapidly evolving, with innovations emerging at an unprecedented pace. One of the most promising developments in this space is the rise of mint tokens. These digital assets are redefining the way we think about finance, offering new opportunities for investment, transactions, and economic growth. As we look ahead to 2024, it’s clear that mint tokens are poised to play a crucial role in shaping the future of digital finance. In this blog, we’ll explore the top reasons why mint tokens are set to dominate the financial landscape in the coming year.

What Are Mint Tokens?

Understanding Mint Tokens

Mint tokens are digital assets created on a blockchain network. Unlike traditional cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, which are mined through complex computational processes, mint tokens are typically created through a process called minting. This involves the issuance of new tokens directly on the blockchain, often by a centralized entity or through decentralized protocols.

Types of Mint Tokens

Mint tokens can serve various purposes, including utility tokens, security tokens, governance tokens, and even memecoins. Each type of token has its unique characteristics and use cases, contributing to the diverse ecosystem of digital finance.

1. Enhanced Security and Transparency

Blockchain Technology

One of the primary reasons mint tokens are gaining traction is their inherent security and transparency. Built on blockchain technology, these tokens benefit from decentralized and immutable ledgers, which record every transaction. This ensures that all token movements are transparent and verifiable, reducing the risk of fraud and enhancing trust among users.

Smart Contracts

Mint tokens often utilize smart contracts, which are self-executing contracts with the terms directly written into code. These contracts automatically enforce agreements and transactions, eliminating the need for intermediaries and further enhancing security and efficiency.

2. Accessibility and Inclusivity

Democratizing Finance

Mint tokens have the potential to democratize finance by providing access to financial services for individuals who are underserved by traditional banking systems. With just a smartphone and internet connection, anyone can participate in the digital economy, regardless of their location or socio-economic status.

Lower Barriers to Entry

Creating and trading mint tokens is often more accessible than traditional financial instruments. Platforms that facilitate the minting process have simplified the creation of new tokens, allowing users to launch their digital assets without extensive technical knowledge or significant capital investment.

3. Decentralized Finance (DeFi) Integration

Expanding the DeFi Ecosystem

Mint tokens are integral to the growth of decentralized finance (DeFi), a movement that aims to create an open and permissionless financial system. By integrating with DeFi protocols, mint tokens enable a wide range of financial activities, such as lending, borrowing, trading, and staking, without relying on centralized institutions.

Yield Farming and Liquidity Provision

One of the key features of DeFi is yield farming, where users earn rewards by providing liquidity to decentralized exchanges (DEXs) and other DeFi platforms. Mint tokens can be staked in liquidity pools, generating passive income for holders and contributing to the overall liquidity and stability of the DeFi ecosystem.

4. Enhanced Interoperability

Cross-Chain Compatibility

As the blockchain ecosystem grows, interoperability between different networks becomes increasingly important. Mint tokens are often designed to be cross-chain compatible, allowing them to move seamlessly between various blockchains. This enhances their utility and opens up new possibilities for decentralized applications (dApps) and financial services.

Bridging Traditional and Digital Finance

Mint tokens can also serve as a bridge between traditional financial systems and the emerging digital economy. By tokenizing real-world assets such as stocks, bonds, and real estate, mint tokens enable fractional ownership and easier transfer of these assets, making them more accessible and liquid.

5. Innovation in Tokenomics

Dynamic Supply Mechanisms

Mint tokens offer innovative tokenomics models that can adapt to changing market conditions. For example, some mint tokens have dynamic supply mechanisms that adjust the token supply based on demand, helping to stabilize prices and incentivize user participation.

Incentive Structures

Many mint tokens incorporate incentive structures to encourage long-term holding and active participation in the ecosystem. These incentives can include staking rewards, governance rights, and access to exclusive services or benefits, driving user engagement and loyalty.

6. Environmental Considerations

Energy Efficiency

Traditional proof-of-work (PoW) mining methods used by cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are often criticized for their high energy consumption. In contrast, mint tokens typically use more energy-efficient consensus mechanisms, such as proof-of-stake (PoS) or delegated proof-of-stake (DPoS), reducing their environmental impact.

Sustainable Growth

As the world becomes more conscious of environmental issues, the sustainability of financial systems is gaining importance. Mint tokens, with their lower energy requirements and innovative approaches to consensus, align with the growing demand for environmentally friendly financial solutions.

7. Regulatory Compliance

Aligning with Regulations

As the cryptocurrency market matures, regulatory compliance is becoming a critical factor for the long-term success of digital assets. Mint tokens can be designed to comply with regulatory requirements, providing greater assurance to investors and facilitating wider adoption.

Enhancing Investor Confidence

Regulatory compliance enhances investor confidence by ensuring that mint tokens adhere to established legal and financial standards. This can attract institutional investors and contribute to the overall legitimacy and stability of the digital finance ecosystem.

8. Increased Adoption and Market Growth

Expanding Use Cases

The versatility of mint tokens is driving their adoption across various industries, from finance and gaming to supply chain management and healthcare. As more use cases emerge, the demand for mint tokens is expected to grow, further solidifying their position in the digital economy.

Mainstream Acceptance

Mint tokens are gaining mainstream acceptance as more businesses and individuals recognize their potential benefits. High-profile endorsements, partnerships, and integrations with established platforms are helping to drive awareness and adoption, paving the way for widespread use.

Conclusion

Mint tokens are poised to revolutionize digital finance in 2024, offering enhanced security, accessibility, and innovation. Their integration with DeFi, cross-chain compatibility, and environmentally friendly features make them a compelling choice for investors and users alike. As the digital finance landscape continues to evolve, mint tokens are set to play a pivotal role in shaping the future of the economy.

By understanding the unique advantages of mint tokens and staying informed about the latest developments, investors can position themselves to capitalize on the opportunities presented by this exciting and transformative technology. Whether you are a seasoned investor or new to the world of digital finance, mint tokens offer a promising avenue for growth and innovation in the years to come.

[phuketattorney]

U.S.-Thailand Treaty of Amity

The U.S.-Thailand Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation, signed on March 3, 1833, represents a cornerstone in the bilateral relationship between the United States and Thailand. This treaty, one of the earliest diplomatic agreements between the U.S. and a Southeast Asian nation, laid the groundwork for a strong and enduring partnership that has continued to evolve over the centuries.

Historical Context

In the early 19th century, as the United States expanded its global reach, it sought to establish diplomatic relations with various nations, including those in Asia. Thailand, then known as Siam, was an independent kingdom that had maintained its sovereignty amidst the colonial ambitions of European powers. The Treaty of Amity aimed to promote trade, commerce, and friendly relations between the two countries.

Key Provisions

The treaty contained several important provisions that established the framework for the U.S.-Thailand relationship:

Mutual Respect and Friendship: The treaty affirmed the commitment of both nations to maintain peaceful and friendly relations.

Trade and Commerce: It facilitated trade between the United States and Thailand, allowing for the exchange of goods and services.

Consular Privileges: The treaty granted consular privileges to the representatives of both countries, ensuring smooth diplomatic relations.

Settlement of Disputes: It established mechanisms for the peaceful resolution of disputes that might arise between the two nations.

Impact and Legacy

The U.S.-Thailand Treaty of Amity has had a profound and lasting impact on the bilateral relationship. It provided a legal and diplomatic foundation for cooperation in various areas, including trade, investment, defense, and cultural exchange. Over the years, the relationship has grown stronger, with both countries recognizing the importance of their partnership in promoting regional stability and prosperity.

Today, the United States and Thailand continue to work closely together on a wide range of issues. The treaty serves as a reminder of the historical ties that bind the two nations and provides a framework for future cooperation. As the world continues to evolve, the U.S.-Thailand relationship is poised to remain a vital and enduring partnership.

[thailandlawyerss]

Prenuptial Agreements in Thailand

Prenuptial agreements, or prenups, have become increasingly common in Thailand as couples seek to protect their assets and define their financial futures. While the concept might seem foreign to some, in Thailand, it’s a legally recognized and enforceable contract that can provide significant benefits for both Thai and foreign spouses.

The Legal Framework

Thailand’s Civil and Commercial Code governs prenuptial agreements. Key provisions include:

Written Contract: The prenup must be in writing and signed by both parties in the presence of at least two witnesses.

Separate Legal Counsel: Each party is strongly advised to have independent legal counsel to ensure their rights are protected.

Pre-Marital Agreement: The agreement must be made before the marriage. Post-nuptial agreements are not recognized in Thailand.

Registration: The prenup must be registered at the same time as the marriage.

Limitations: While prenups offer flexibility, they cannot completely override statutory property rights. They can modify management of common property but cannot eliminate the statutory system.

What Can Be Included in a Prenuptial Agreement?

Asset Division: A clear delineation of each spouse’s assets and liabilities.

Property Management: How shared property will be managed during the marriage.

Spousal Support: Provisions for spousal support in case of divorce.

Child Custody and Support: While not typically included due to potential legal challenges, it’s possible to outline preferences.

Estate Planning: How assets will be distributed upon the death of one spouse.

The Importance of Clear and Comprehensive Agreements

A well-drafted prenup is essential to avoid misunderstandings and potential disputes. Key considerations include:

Full Disclosure: Both parties must fully disclose their financial situation, including assets, debts, and income.

Fairness: The agreement should be fair to both parties, considering their respective contributions to the relationship and financial standing.

Clarity: The language used should be clear and unambiguous to prevent future disputes.

Flexibility: While specific provisions are important, the agreement should also allow for flexibility in case of unforeseen circumstances.

Challenges and Considerations

Cultural Differences: For mixed-nationality couples, cultural differences in attitudes towards money and property can complicate negotiations.

Enforcement: While Thai law generally upholds prenuptial agreements, there may be challenges in enforcing certain provisions, especially related to child custody and support.

Changing Circumstances: Life circumstances can change over time, and a prenup may need to be revisited and updated.

Seeking Professional Advice

Given the complexities of Thai law and the potential implications of a prenuptial agreement, it is highly recommended to consult with an experienced Thai family law attorney. They can help ensure that the agreement is legally sound, protects your interests, and complies with all relevant laws.

https://sites.google.com/view/thailand-lawyers/family/prenuptial-agreements-in-thailand

[workersolidarity]

🇺🇲🇺🇳 🚨 UNITED STATES SIGNALS SUPPORT FOR U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION ON GAZA

The United States has signaled potential support for a draft resolution in the United Nations Security Council on the genocide ongoing in the Gaza Strip, with a vote on the resolution set to be held later Friday, diplomatic sources told the Times of Israel.

This will make for the fourth attempt at getting a resolution passed on the Gaza conflict as negotiators try to win the support of the United States- a veto-holding permanent member of the Security Council.

The U.S. previously vetoed a resolution calling for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip on December 9th. The U.S. rejected that proposal due to its lack of condemnation of Hamas and its actions on October 7th.

The new proposal's wording now calls “for urgent steps to immediately allow safe and unhindered humanitarian access, and also for creating the conditions for a sustainable cessation of hostilities.”

No steps to enforce a "sustainable cessation of hostilities" are included in the resolution, however, if passed, the resolution would mark the first time cessation of hostilities is mentioned in a Security Council resolution on the current conflict.

Negotiators scaled down the initial wording of the proposal, from a previous draft introduced by the Arab bloc which called for an "immediate humanitarian ceasefire" -something the U.S. vociferously opposed, arguing it would leave the current Hamas leadership in place.

The newest draft does, however, include calls for an “urgent and extended humanitarian pauses” in the fighting and the opening of humanitarian corridors throughout the enclave “for a sufficient number of days to enable full, rapid, safe and unhindered humanitarian access.”

This clause is a repeat of a previous resolution passed on November 15th, prior to the agreement on a 7-day truce beginning November 24th which led to the release of more than 100 hostages being held by Hamas and an Israeli release of at least 150 Palestinian prisoners.

The current draft resolution focuses on surging humanitarian aid into the war-torn enclave, and its authors initially sought to include a passage giving the Secretary General, Antonio Guterres "exclusive" control over inspections of aid trucks entering Gaza, however it was later removed from the text of the resolution due to opposition from the U.S. and Israel.

Security Council resolutions, though legally binding according to International Law, many parties choose to ignore the Council's demands for action. General Assembly votes on the other hand are not legally binding.

The latest resolution also demands that all sides "allow and facilitate the use of all… routes to and throughout the entire Gaza Strip, including border crossings… for the provision of humanitarian assistance.”

The resolution is also expected to call for the “immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.”

The resolution under consideration is sponsored by the United Arab Emirates and was amended in several key areas to ensure compromise and U.S. support.

The latest postponement came as the US, which has opposed several proposals during the resolution’s drafting this week, said it was ready to support it in its current form.

#source

@WorkerSolidarityNews

[attorneyinthenetherlands]

Entire Agreement Clause under Dutch Law

In the realm of Dutch contract law, understanding the nuances of contractual clauses, particularly the entire agreement clause under Dutch law, is crucial. Let's delve into what this clause entails under Dutch law and its interaction with the Haviltex principle.

What is an entire agreement clause under Dutch law?

An entire agreement clause, frequently present in Dutch contracts, serves as a vital legal provision. It explicitly states that the written contract encompasses all agreed terms, excluding any prior agreements, discussions, or representations not documented within. This clause aims to prevent parties from relying on pre-contractual statements or agreements, promoting clarity and reducing disputes over ambiguous verbal or written understandings.

Dutch Supreme Court Ruling: Relativity of the Entire Agreement Clause

A landmark ruling by the Dutch Supreme Court emphasized that the impact of the entire agreement clause in Dutch law varies depending on the contract's specifics. In the case of Lundiform B.V. v. Mexx Europe B.V., the court highlighted that a strict textual interpretation may not be conclusive, particularly in standard, unadvised contracts. This underscores the significance of the Haviltex principle in contractual interpretation.

Dutch entire agreement clause: key points

Key aspects regarding the entire agreement clause under Dutch commercial contract law include:

Interpretation Flexibility: The Dutch Supreme Court clarified that the entire agreement clause does not automatically preclude considering pre-contractual statements or conduct when interpreting the contract.

Contextual Relevance: The effectiveness of the entire agreement clause depends on various factors, such as contract wording, negotiation circumstances, and the parties' intentions.

Haviltex Principle Primacy: Dutch courts prioritize understanding the parties' intentions over strict textual interpretation, especially in cases involving basic contracts without extensive negotiations.

What is the purpose of an entire agreement clause in a contract under Dutch law?

The primary purpose of an entire agreement clause in a Dutch contract is to establish the written document as the comprehensive and final agreement between the parties. It aims to:

Enhance Certainty: By limiting the agreement's terms to those expressly stated in the written contract, it promotes clarity and certainty.

Exclude Prior Agreements: It excludes any prior negotiations or representations from having contractual effect, minimizing ambiguity.

Prevent Disputes: By restricting interpretation to the contract text, it mitigates the risk of parties claiming additional terms or promises outside the written document.

Common examples of entire agreement clauses in Dutch contracts

Examples of typical entire agreement clauses include:

"This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties…"

"This Agreement, including the exhibits attached hereto, contains the entire understanding of the parties…"

"This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations…"

The Haviltex Principle in the Netherlands

In Dutch contract law, the Haviltex principle plays a pivotal role in contractual interpretation. Unlike common law jurisdictions, where literal wording often prevails, Dutch law focuses on discerning parties' intentions. This principle underscores the contextual understanding of contractual clauses.

Significance of the Entire Agreement Clause under Dutch Law

The entire agreement clause, although common in Dutch contracts, has a limited effect compared to common law jurisdictions. While it asserts the contract's completeness, its interpretation is context-dependent, with Dutch courts prioritizing parties' intentions over strict textual interpretation.

For comprehensive legal assistance in the Netherlands, our adept team at MAAK Advocaten is at your service. Contact us via our website, email, or phone for tailored legal solutions suited to your needs.

[lloydlawcollege]

An Overview of Contract Law, India

Explore the fundamentals of Contract Law as defined by the Indian Contract Act, 1872. This blog offers a comprehensive overview of the Act, detailing its key provisions and principles that govern legal agreements in India. Learn about the essentials of forming, enforcing, and interpreting contracts, including essential elements like offer, acceptance, consideration, and legality. Whether you're a student, professional, or someone interested in legal frameworks, this guide will help you understand how contracts are managed and regulated in India.

[antiwaradvocates]

All power to the rail workers! Solidarity against strikebreakers!

Since last winter, railroad unions and the managers of America’s seven dominant freight-rail carriers have been struggling to come to an agreement on a new contract. The key points of contention in those talks have been scheduling in general and the provision of paid leave in particular. Unlike nearly 80 percent of U.S. laborers, railroad employees are not currently guaranteed a single paid sick day. Rather, if such workers wish to recuperate from an illness or make time to see a doctor about a nagging complaint, they need to use vacation time, which must be requested days in advance. In other words, if a worker wants to take time off to recover from the flu, they need to notify their employer of this days before actually catching the virus. Given that workers’ contracts do not include paid psychic benefits, this is a tall order.

[unpluggedfinancial]

The FIT21 Act: Paving the Way for a New Era in Digital Finance

Introduction: Today marks a pivotal moment for the digital finance sector as the U.S. House of Representatives considers the Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act, commonly known as the FIT21 Act. This legislation is set to bring much-needed regulatory clarity to the digital asset ecosystem, promising to enhance consumer protections while fostering innovation.

Background: Non-compete agreements have traditionally been used by companies to prevent employees from joining competitors or starting similar businesses for a specified period. However, these agreements have often been criticized for limiting worker mobility and stifling innovation. On the other hand, the FIT21 Act aims to address the digital finance sector, which has been plagued by regulatory uncertainty. This act seeks to establish a comprehensive framework for digital asset regulation, delineating clear roles for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Key Provisions of the FIT21 Act:

Consumer Protections: The FIT21 Act mandates comprehensive disclosures from digital asset developers and customer-serving institutions, such as exchanges and brokers. These requirements are designed to ensure that consumers have access to accurate and relevant information, enhancing transparency and accountability.

Regulatory Jurisdiction: The Act provides a clear division of regulatory authority between the CFTC and the SEC. The CFTC will oversee digital assets classified as commodities, particularly those with decentralized blockchains. The SEC will regulate digital assets deemed securities, focusing on those with less decentralized structures.

Operational Requirements: Entities required to register with either the CFTC or the SEC will need to adhere to strict operational requirements. These include safeguarding customer assets, providing detailed disclosures, and reducing conflicts of interest.

Implications for Employees and Employers:

For Employees: The FIT21 Act, by reducing the ambiguity in digital asset regulation, could create new job opportunities in the fintech sector. Enhanced consumer protections and regulatory clarity may lead to increased trust and investment in digital assets, driving job growth and innovation.

For Employers: Companies in the digital asset space will need to adapt to the new regulatory landscape. This includes complying with detailed disclosure requirements and operational standards set forth by the CFTC and SEC. While this might increase compliance costs, it also provides a more stable and predictable regulatory environment, which can be beneficial in the long run.

Future Outlook: The passage of the FIT21 Act represents a significant step forward for the U.S. digital asset market. However, potential legal challenges could arise, focusing on the extent of regulatory authority and compliance requirements. Despite these challenges, the Act aims to position the United States as a leader in the global digital finance landscape by fostering innovation and providing robust consumer protections.

Conclusion: The FIT21 Act is a landmark piece of legislation that promises to bring much-needed regulatory clarity to the digital asset ecosystem. By enhancing consumer protections and delineating clear regulatory responsibilities, the Act aims to foster innovation and secure the United States' position as a global leader in digital finance. As we await the outcome of today's vote, it's clear that the FIT21 Act could reshape the future of digital assets and employment within this burgeoning sector.

We Want to Hear from You! Share your thoughts and experiences related to today's topic in the comments below. Make sure to subscribe to our blog for the latest updates and in-depth analyses on this and other crucial financial subjects.

[dailyunsolvedmysteries]

Munich Games Massacre

The Munich Games marked the first return of the Olympics to a German city since the 1936 Games in Berlin. Adolf Hitler’s use of those Games as a platform for the propagation of Nazi ideology was roundly criticized, as was the blatant racism and anti-Semitism that characterized the Games. The West German invitation had been extended, in part at least, to offer the world a contrast to the horrifying spectacle of Berlin.

For more than a week, the Games unfolded without incident. The day of terror began at 4:30 AM on September 5, 1972, when eight Palestinian militants affiliated with Black September—a militant offshoot of the Palestinian group Fatah—scaled a fence surrounding the Olympic Village in Munich. Disguised as athletes and using stolen keys, they forced their way into the quarters of the Israeli Olympic team at 31 Connollystrasse. As they attempted to enter Apartment 1, they were confronted by Yossef Gutfreund, a wrestling referee, and Moshe Weinberg, a wrestling coach. Weinberg was shot while fighting with the attackers, who forced him at gunpoint to lead them to the rooms of the remaining Israeli coaches and athletes. It has been proposed that Weinberg led the attackers past Apartment 2—which was also being used by the Israeli team—because he believed that the wrestlers and weightlifters in Apartment 3 would be better able to fight back. However, Black September had detailed plans of the Olympic Village and the dispositions of the Israeli athletes. Shaul Ladany, a race walker who survived the attack after escaping from Apartment 2, suggested that it was much more likely that his room was bypassed because he was housed with members of the Israeli shooting team. The terrorists had struggled to subdue the unarmed men in Apartment 1; it is unlikely that they had wished to engage in a close-quarters gun battle with world-class marksmen in the opening minutes of their operation.

In Apartment 3 the terrorists gathered more hostages and forced them back to Apartment 1. Wrestler Gad Tsabari broke from the group and dashed down a flight of stairs toward an underground parking garage, and Weinberg took advantage of the confusion to again fight the attackers. Weinberg had nearly gained control of a terrorist’s gun when he was shot and killed. Despite being on crutches due to an injury during competition, Yossef Romano, a weightlifter, also made an attempt to disarm one of the terrorists. Romano was killed and his mutilated body was left on the floor of Apartment 1 as a warning. While two Israelis lay dead in the Olympic Village and nine others were being held hostage, International Olympic Committee (IOC) chairman Avery Brundage insisted that the games continue. The terrorists demanded the liberation of more than 200 Palestinians held in Israeli prisons, the release of Andreas Baader and Ulrike Meinhof of the Red Army Faction from German prisons, and the provision of an airplane to fly them to a safe destination in the Middle East. While negotiations were ongoing, a planned rescue attempt had to be called off when it was realized that actions of West German police were being broadcast live to nearly 1 billion people around the world and to the many televisions throughout the Olympic Village. At about 10:00 PM on September 5, believing they had reached an agreement, the terrorists led their bound and blindfolded hostages from their quarters into buses that transported them to waiting helicopters.

The helicopters carried them to Fürstenfeldbruck Air Base, 15 miles (25 km) west of the Olympic Village, where police were lying in ambush. Although the German army had better training and equipment for such a mission, under West Germany’s postwar constitution, the armed forces were forbidden from aiding the civilian police. The police snipers used in the operation had not received formal training as sharpshooters, they were improperly placed and inadequate in number, and they lacked radios to communicate with each other or with commanders. In addition, they were armed with assault rifles rather than sniper rifles, and their weapons had neither long-range scopes nor night-vision capability. On the air base tarmac was a Boeing 727 filled with 17 police officers disguised as a Lufthansa flight crew. It was intended that these officers would subdue the terrorists once they had boarded the plane, but the police unanimously chose to abandon their posts. Armoured cars that were to have aided in the rescue of the Israelis were dispatched too late and became stuck in traffic. With myriad failures in both planning and execution, the result was a disaster on virtually every level.

The helicopters arrived about 10:30 PM, and two terrorists went to inspect the jetliner. Finding it empty and becoming aware of the deception, they shouted to their comrades, at which point West German police fired upon them. A gun battle ensued, and several terrorists and one police officer were killed. The helicopter flight crews ran for cover, but the Israeli athletes were bound together and trapped. After the initial fusillade, in which the terrorists also shot out the floodlights that had been illuminating the tarmac, the scene settled into a tense stalemate punctuated by sporadic gunfire. Onlookers surrounded the airfield, and sportscaster Jim McKay, who was anchoring Olympic coverage for the U.S. network ABC, provided television viewers with preliminary updates. At midnight, a German official announced that all the hostages had been freed and all the terrorists had been killed, a report that proved to be tragically premature. Just after midnight, a terrorist tossed a hand grenade into one of the helicopters, killing all but one of the Israeli hostages aboard; David Berger, an American-born wrestler, succumbed to smoke inhalation before rescue personnel could reach him. A second terrorist sprayed the interior of the other helicopter with bullets at close range, murdering the five remaining Israelis.

Too late to aid in the rescue effort, the armoured cars finally reached the runway, but their crews had no knowledge of the deployment of police personnel in the field and no way to communicate with them. A gunman ran toward a position where one of the helicopter pilots and a police sniper had taken cover. The terrorist was shot and killed by the sniper, but the movement on the darkened runway drew fire from one of the armoured cars, and both the pilot and sniper were seriously wounded by friendly fire. By 12:30 AM on September 6, the shooting had stopped, and the 20-hour reign of terror was over. Eleven Israelis had been killed, along with one Munich policeman, and five Black September terrorists lay dead. Three of the gunmen were captured. At 3:00 AM McKay, who had been broadcasting from the Olympic Village for 14 straight hours, summarized the tragic outcome of the botched rescue with the words “They’re all gone.” For the first time in history, the Olympic Games were suspended, for 24 hours, in tribute to the murdered athletes.