One of Canada’s premier schools, McGill University, will go to court to try to get a court order to break up a pro-Palestinian camp that has been growing on its Montreal campus.

It’s been more than two weeks, and the university wants the protesters to take down their tents and leave the land. McGill’s administration says that immediate action is needed to stop the camp from becoming more dangerous and tensed up.

This week, there was a “illegal” pro-Palestinian camp at Montreal’s McGill University. Now, the leader of Quebec has said that police should start taking down the camp. This comes as students at Canada’s biggest universities demand that the schools cut ties with groups with ties to Israel.

François Legault told reporters, “The camp is illegal.” “I expect the police to take down these illegal campsites, as McGill has asked,”

The biggest protest camp in the country is at McGill University. The school has asked the police to help, but as of Friday, nothing had been done to remove the protesters.

Earlier this week, two students asked a Quebec court to move the camp to a different site, but the court refused. The students told the judge that the protest’s present location makes it unsafe for them to go to class.

Pro-Palestinian protesters free speech

The judge, Chantale Masse, said that the students had not shown “irreparable harm” and that removing the protesters would “significantly” damage their right to free speech.

On Thursday, there was a line of cops between the pro-Palestinian camp and the counter-demonstrators waving Israeli flags. There were no arrests, according to the police.

Three post-secondary schools in British Columbia and one at the University of Ottawa have also turned into camps for students. At all of the protests, police have been present, but no one has been arrested in Canada yet, while more than 2,000 people have been held in the US.

Thursday morning, University of Toronto students broke through a fence and set up dozens of tents on campus. They did this even though the school had told them earlier in the week that any camp would be considered “trespassing.”

Organizers say they will stay on school grounds until the university tells them about its investments and gets rid of any that “support Israeli apartheid, occupation, and illegal settlement of Palestine.” They also want the university to end its partnerships with some Israeli academic institutions.

No Safety for Jewish students at McGill University

Sandy Welsh, vice-provost of students at the University of Toronto, said that the protesters could stay as long as their actions were “peaceful.” This was a change from what she had said before, when she said that the school would remove the camp that night.

“We are becoming more worried about safety,” Welsh said in a statement. “You asked people to join your protest, and since this afternoon, the number of people who have done so has grown a lot.” We’re worried that a lot of the people there might not be U of T students or other U of T community members.

When asked what they thought about the camps, Justin Trudeau’s office pointed to a speech he gave on Tuesday in which he said, “Universities are places of learning and freedom of expression, but that only works if people feel safe on campus.” Right now… There is no safety for Jewish kids. “That’s not right.”

Some Jewish groups have said that the protesters are racist, but the organizers say that’s not true because some of the protesters are Jewish.

Source: The Guardian

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin replaced Sergei Shoigu as defense minister on Sunday in a Cabinet shakeup as he begins his fifth term.

In accordance with Russian law, the entire Russian Cabinet resigned Tuesday following Putin’s spectacular inauguration in the Kremlin. Most members were widely anticipated to preserve their posts, although Shoigu’s status remained uncertain.

The Kremlin reported that Putin signed a decree on Sunday naming Shoigu as secretary of Russia’s Security Council. The appointment was revealed shortly after Putin requested that Andrei Belousov replace Shoigu as the country’s defense minister.

Shoigu’s new job was announced after 13 people were killed and 20 more injured in Russia’s border city of Belgorod when a 10-story apartment building partially collapsed due to what Russian officials claimed was Ukrainian shelling. Ukraine has not commented on the incident.

Putin Replaces Shoigu As Russia’s Defense Minister As He Starts His 5th Term

Russia’s upper chamber of parliament must accept Belousov’s candidacy, the Federation Council. On Sunday, it was claimed that Putin had also submitted ideas for additional Cabinet seats, but Shoigu is the only minister on the list who is being changed. Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin, whom Putin reappointed on Friday, offered several new federal ministry candidates on Saturday.

Shoigu’s deputy, Timur Ivanov, was detained last month on suspicions of bribery and ordered to be held in custody pending an official inquiry. Despite Shoigu’s close personal ties with Putin, the arrest of Ivanov was widely regarded as an attack on him and a likely precursor to his dismissal.

According to Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, Putin chose a civilian as defense minister because the ministry should be “open to innovation and cutting-edge ideas.” He also stated that the increased defense budget “must fit into the country’s larger economy” and that Belousov, who previously served as first deputy prime minister, is the best candidate for the position.

Belousov, 65, held senior roles in the prime minister’s office’s finance and economic departments and the Ministry of Economic Development. In 2013, he was appointed Putin’s adviser, and seven years later, in January 2020, he was named first deputy prime minister.

Peskov promised that the change would not affect “the military aspect,” which “has always been the prerogative of the Chief of General Staff,” and that Gen. Valery Gerasimov, who now holds this position, will continue to operate.

Tatiana Stanovaya, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, wrote in an online commentary that Shoigu’s new appointment to Russia’s Security Council demonstrated that the Russian leader saw the institution as “a reservoir” for his “‘former’ key figures — people he can’t let go of, but doesn’t have a place for.”

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has also been named to the Security Council. Medvedev has served as the body’s deputy chairman since 2020.

Putin Replaces Shoigu As Russia’s Defense Minister As He Starts His 5th Term

Shoigu was chosen to the Security Council instead of Putin’s longtime supporter, Nikolai Patrushev. Peskov announced on Sunday that Patrushev is taking on a new job and promised to divulge more details in the coming days.

Shoigu is largely seen as a crucial role in Putin’s decision to deploy Russian soldiers into Ukraine. Russia expected the operation to easily crush Ukraine’s much smaller and less-equipped army and for Ukrainians to warmly welcome Russian troops.

Instead, the conflict inspired Ukraine to launch a fierce resistance, giving humiliating blows to the Russian army, including a retreat from an effort to seize the capital, Kyiv, and a counteroffensive that drove Moscow’s forces out of the Kharkiv area.

Shoigu spent over 20 years conducting varied tasks before being named defense minister in 2012. In 1991, he was appointed head of the Russian Rescue Corps disaster response organization, which later became the Ministry of Emergency Situations. He got visible in the post. As the rescue corps absorbed the armed Civil Defense Troops, he was promoted to general despite having no military background.

Shoigu does not have the same power level as Patrushev, who has long been the country’s top security official. However, the post he will occupy — the same job that Patrushev fought to elevate from a low bureaucratic role to one of significant influence — will still have some weight, according to Mark Galeotti, the president of the Mayak Intelligence consultancy.

Despite the changes at the top, high-level security materials destined for the president’s eyes will continue to transit through the Security Council Secretariat. “You can’t just institutionally turn around a bureaucracy and how it works overnight,” he stated.

Thousands of civilians have fled Russia’s resumed ground offensive in Ukraine’s northeast, which has targeted towns and villages with artillery and mortar fire, officials said Sunday.

The fierce fighting has caused at least one Ukrainian battalion to evacuate from the Kharkiv region, ceding more territory to Russian forces across less-defended villages in the so-called contested gray zone near the Russian border.

By Sunday afternoon, Vovchansk, one of the major towns in the northeast with a prewar population of 17,000, had emerged as a battleground.

Volodymyr Tymoshko, the chief of the Kharkiv regional police, stated that Russian forces were approaching the town from three angles.

An Associated Press team stationed in a nearby village witnessed plumes of smoke billowing from the town as Russian forces fired shells. Evacuation teams worked tirelessly throughout the day to transport inhabitants, most of whom were elderly, out of harm’s way.

At least 4,000 citizens have fled the Kharkiv region since Moscow’s forces initiated the operation on Friday, according to Gov. Oleh Syniehubov’s social media statement. Heavy fighting raged Sunday along the northeast front line, with Russian soldiers attacking 27 towns in the last 24 hours, he added.

Analysts believe the Russian effort is intended to take advantage of ammunition shortages before promised Western supplies reach the front lines.

Putin Replaces Shoigu As Russia’s Defense Minister As He Starts His 5th Term

The Ukrainian military said the Kremlin is employing the standard Russian technique of launching disproportionate amounts of fire and infantry assaults to deplete Ukrainian troops and weapons. By increasing fighting in what was previously a static sector of the front line, Russian forces threatened to shut down Ukrainian soldiers in the northeast while also gaining ground further south.

It follows Russia’s increased attacks on energy infrastructure and settlements in March, which many anticipated were part of a coordinated effort to prepare the stage for an onslaught.

The Russian Defense Ministry announced on Sunday that its forces had conquered four villages near the border with Ukraine’s Kharkiv area, in addition to the five villages reported to have been taken on Saturday. Because of the dynamic combat and continual intense shelling, these regions were most likely under-fortified, allowing Russia to move more easily.

Ukraine’s leadership has not acknowledged Moscow’s advantages. However, Tymoshko, the commander of the Kharkiv regional police, stated that Strilecha, Pylna, and Borsivika were under Russian possession and that infantry was being brought in from their direction to organize attacks in other beleaguered villages, such as Hlyboke and Lukiantsi.

SOURCE – (AP)

The Biden administration has halted a shipment of military supplies to Israel in a blatantly political move to sway voters in critical swing states. Presidents have faced impeachment for far less. Nine Republican has urged impeaching Joe Biden for withholding US aid from Israel, and the president’s biggest Senate friend has gone against him, saying the IDF should ‘finish the job’ in Rafah.

Sen. Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat, is Biden’s main worldwide surrogate. His public split with Biden’s policy is almost unique. Coons told the Senate floor on Thursday that he spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last night.

You don’t just have right to defend the Israeli people against Hamas, you have the obligation,’ Coons said he told Netanyahu. ‘You have go after them. You have to finish the job. You have to go into Rafah.’

Still, he called on Israel to allow Palestinian civilians a pathway out of Rafah.

The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA) oversees the use of monies appropriated by Congress. It was intended to restore Congress’ sovereignty over the purse and prevent the president from simply substituting their own funding decisions for those of Congress.

While it was originally an obscure law limiting spending, the public may remember it for its brief appearance in President Donald J. Trump’s first impeachment. According to the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry report:

President Trump Impeached for Suspending Aid to Ukraine

President Trump ordered the suspension of $391 million in critical military assistance required by Ukraine, a strategic partner, to confront Russian aggression. Because the aid was appropriated by Congress on a bipartisan basis and signed into law by the president, its expenditure was mandated by law.

The president, acting directly and through his subordinates inside the US administration, withheld military assistance from Ukraine for no valid foreign policy, national security, or anti-corruption reasons.

The president did so despite Congress’s longstanding bipartisan support, unanimous support across federal departments and agencies for providing military assistance to Ukraine, and his obligations under the Impoundment Control Act.

If you replace Ukraine with Israel and Hamas with Russia, the rest of the paragraph will remain same. Except, of course, that Trump denies improperly withholding the help, while President Biden has not.

How awful is it for a president to withhold congressionally authorized military aid to another country? And to do this to a democratic ally fighting an existential war? Why, it is nothing short of a “abuse of power”—as then-Presidential candidate Joe Biden put it in 2020.

Foreign Aid Controlled by Congress

The ICA does allow the president to withhold or delay the delivery of funds in certain circumstances, but it also includes very specific procedures that the administration must follow in order to notify Congress, which still has the authority to approve or disapprove of the President’s decision. None of these procedures were followed here.

What does it say about a president who unilaterally decides not to observe the law, particularly the ICA? It would imply that “we have a president who believes there is no limit to his power.” We have a president who believes he can do whatever he wants without consequences. We have a president who thinks he’s above the law. Or at least it was how then-candidate Biden rationalized the appearance of impropriety in 2020.

Some may argue that, while wrong, this behavior does not constitute the high crimes and misdemeanors that could lead to a president’s impeachment. Nonetheless, as the US Government Accountability Office discovered in January 2020, this type of illegal judgment has very substantial constitutional implications.

“The president cannot substitute his own policy preferences for those that Congress has placed into law through faithful implementation of the law.

In fact, Congress was concerned about exactly these types of withholding when it adopted and later amended the ICA… All federal officials and employees swear an oath to maintain and protect the Constitution and its essential tenants, including the congressional authority of the purse.”

In fact, in its Principles of Federal Appropriations Law, Fourth Edition, Ch. 1 (2016), the GAO referred to the legislative authority of the purse as “the most important single curb in the Constitution on presidential power.”

Numerous lawmakers have already contacted the White House, seeking explanations and accountability. The deadline for responding to at least some of those letters has gone.

So, what should happen to a president who acts like a king? It’s difficult to say in these trying circumstances, but at least some people believe that this “will leave Congress with no choice but to initiate impeachment proceedings.” Or at least, it is what then-candidate Biden believed in 2020, when that was the most popular response.

Experts, such as Colonel John Spencer, head of urban warfare at West Point, believe Israel is fighting a righteous war in the most humanitarian manner conceivable. The shortest way to halt the war, save as many Israeli, Palestinian, and American lives as possible, and preserve the globe safe for democracy is to defeat Hamas. And the president understands this, even if potential voters in Michigan do not.

Making actions that harm our own national security and the security of our allies for personal political benefit is the “definition of corruption.” Or so said then-candidate Joe Biden in 2020, when he wasn’t doing it himself.

Source: NewsWeek