Mediaboss Marketing

Each year on 12th June, the World Day against Child Labour calls on governments, employers, workers organizations and civil society to highlight the global extent of child labour and the actions and efforts needed to eradicate it.

The European Union supports this appeal to ensure inclusive and equitable quality of education and to promote learning opportunities for all. The European Union calls for immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of all forms of child labour by 2025.

In line with international conventions as the Minimum Age Convention and the Worst Forms of Child Labour both ratified by the Government of Sudan, the European Union funds several initiatives to protect children, to stop their exploitation and guarantee them a proper childhood and a resourceful future.

The 22 million programme Education Quality Improvement Programme in Sudan funded by the European Union in seven Eastern and Southern States. It supports forcibly displaced populations and host communities, improving the quality of basic education and making it accessible to all.

The European Union also takes actions to protect the socio-economic situation of families, a major cause of child labour exploitation. The European Union specifically supports the most vulnerable among refugees, internally displaced persons (IDPs), and host communities, to enhance their working conditions. The EU also funds projects on Technical Vocational Education and Training in Khartoum, Gedaref and Kassala, with an allocation of 5 million Euros, providing specific skills required by the labour-market to increase job opportunities and ability to respond to crisis situations.

Ambassador Jean-Michel Dumond, Head of Delegation of the European Union to Sudan said "We undertake actions to protect children, to avoid their exploitation and guarantee them a proper childhood and a resourceful future. In line with the Sustainable Development Goals and ILO Conventions, we once again reaffirm our strong commitment in restlessly carrying on all necessary actions to completely eradicate child labour.

Khartoum 14th June 2017

Read the original here:
European Union Fights Child Labour through better education and decent work [EN/AR] - ReliefWeb

At last there is a bit of good news for those of us who view Brexit as a massive disaster in the making. No, if readers will forgive the double negative, I am not referring to the recent election result, although that was not unhelpful. But rather to what President Macron told Theresa May in Paris on Tuesday afternoon that the possibility of the UK remaining in the European Union is an option until Brexit negotiations have been concluded.

Adding to the significance of this statement was the fact that the German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schuble said much the same thing on the same afternoon. Referring to the British, he observed: If they want to change their decision, of course they would find open doors, but I think its not very likely.He was speaking to Bloomberg Television.

What this means is that we can stop the process immediately if we so wish.This is a big surprise. For instance the well-informed commentator on the Financial Times, Martin Wolf, wrote just before the announcements that unfortunately, it might be difficult for the UK to withdraw its application to leave.Now it turns out that it would not be difficult at all.

Given the strong Franco-German relationship on European matters, this looks like a deliberately coordinated initiative taken in response to the British election result. The two leaders had jointly decided to leave the door slightly ajar.

However, for the time being, we Remainers will have to keep this possibility in the back of our minds. For there is as yet scarcely any sign that British voters want to exercise this option. After all, over 80 per cent of voters have just supported the two parties, Conservative and Labour, which intend to take Britain out of the European Union. And according to a CNN/ComRes poll taken six months after the referendum, some 47 per cent of British voters said they would vote Leave, with 45 per cent saying they would choose to Remain.

Yet only a quarter of them (24 per cent) said they thought they would be personally better off financially as a result of Brexit. By contrast, nearly half (44 per cent) said they personally expected to be worse off financially. The other third (32 per cent) of respondents said they didnt know.

Now this stance of voting according to your heart rather than your wallet is about to be challenged. For economic conditions are deteriorating largely as a consequence of the Brexit decision that has weakened the exchange rate between pounds and euros.

Yesterday, the most recent figures for prices and wages were published and they showed the biggest decline in real wages since August 2014. In the three months to April, average wages grew by just 2.1 per cent compared with prices rising by 2.7 per cent in that period. And this supports what the vast majority of economists expect.The decision to leave the EU will hit growth in the medium to longer term. And even more miserably, it turns out that between 2007 and 2015 the UK had the worst real wages performance of any advanced economy except Greece.

Theresa May should admit result is a rejection of hard Brexit, says EU negotiator

We can assume, too, that as the Brexit talks wind on, Britains economic performance will continue to deteriorate, not just because the pound will remain weak to the detriment of peoples spending power, but because business managers will postpone decisions to invest in expansion until the terms of any exit from the European Union are known.

Nonetheless I must be frank and state that, unfortunately, I dont believe that any of this is going to affect support for Brexit, counter intuitive though that may be. The Leavers took an emotional decision rather than one of calculation.

However there is one more factor that will determine whether the door left ajar by the French and German leaders will be pushed open in time the attitude of the young voters.

They are mostly Remainers rather than Leavers. In addition the recent general election has taught us that they are much more likely to vote than was formally the case. Thus if any group of electors were to feel inclined to heed the gesture of the French and German leaders, it is the 18 to 40 year olds. It may not be too much of an exaggeration to say that the future of our country is in their hands.

Read the original here:
Macron may say that the UK can stay in the EU, but Brexiteers will make sure that never happens - The Independent

JUDY WOODRUFF: The Trump administration, as you heard, is taking steps to increasing Americas military presence in Afghanistan, after years of reducing U.S. forces there.

William Brangham has the story.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Since taking office, the Trump administration has been conducting a review of Americas 16-year war in Afghanistan. The current U.S. commander there, General John Nicholson, has recommended sending 3,000 to 5,000 more troops to augment the 10,000 Americans and 3,000 allied forces that are already in the country.

Today, Defense Secretary James Mattis announced that the president had now given him the authority to decide appropriate troop levels.

For more on all of this, we turn to retired Lieutenant General Douglas Lute. He served on the National Security Council staffs in both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations, where he focused on Afghanistan, Iraq, and South Asia. For the past four years, he served as U.S. ambassador to NATO, and hes now a senior fellow at Harvard University.

Welcome to the NewsHour.

LT. GEN. DOUGLAS LUTE (RET.), Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO: Good to be here.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: So, lets talk first off about this decision by the president to hand General or Secretary of Defense James Mattis the decision-making for troop levels. How unusual is that?

LT. GEN. DOUGLAS LUTE: Well, it is unusual, but I think we should first appreciate that we should have confidence in the entire Pentagon chain of command, starting with Secretary Mattis, but all the way down through Central Command, and then ultimately to General Nicholson, Mick Nicholson, who you mentioned, who is our commander, four-star commander in Afghanistan.

So, this is a very experienced team, responsible individuals. Theyre going to take this, this new authority seriously. I also think there is a logic. There is a rationale to providing the Pentagon some flexibility. It gives them more agility to fit the number of troops to the task in Afghanistan, and that all makes sense.

It does, however, raise one concern, and thats the concern that strategy is made up of a lot more than just the Pentagon piece. And so I would be concerned, or I would be interested in hearing how the administration intends to make sure that the other pieces, the political side of the equation, the diplomatic equation, the economic assistance equation, the intelligence communitys role, how all these various pieces are fit together in a coherent hole.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Well, you raise a very good question, because, traditionally, we think of a strategy being set from the top, from the president, with advice from all of the relevant agencies below.

What do you think this does to the decision-making process for a country like Afghanistan?

LT. GEN. DOUGLAS LUTE: Well, I think its too soon to tell.

The traditional role is that the National Security Council would have this oversight role, this coordinating role, to make sure that the strategy stays aligned over time and that all the pieces relate to one another in a coherent way.

Its not clear whether this move to give additional authorities, additional autonomy to the Pentagon is just the opening step, or whether there will still be a role for the NSC, the National Security Council, led by H.R. McMaster, to oversee the whole process.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: So, we have said Mattis and Nicholson both believe that more U.S. troops to Afghanistan is a good idea. Do you share that belief?

LT. GEN. DOUGLAS LUTE: Well, I think a few more a few thousand or even 10,000 more U.S. troops

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Ten thousand more?

LT. GEN. DOUGLAS LUTE: Im saying that I think that, hypothetically, an increase on that scale, lets say, for example, a doubling of U.S. troops there are some 8,500 there now can help sustain the current security stalemate.

But I dont believe that troops alone will actually be decisive in the end. Troops alone cant win this war. Troops alone will not remove the stalemate. The stalemate fundamentally rests on the political side of the equation.

So, alongside any military surge, any the addition of any number of U.S. troops, I will be very interested to hear the administrations ambitions in terms of how theyre going to deal with the politics.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Well, explain what the challenges are there for the politics in Afghanistan.

LT. GEN. DOUGLAS LUTE: Well, I look at this as a three-part equation on the political side.

So, first of all, inside the Afghan government itself, here you have zero-sum politics among the different national players. You have a high level of corruption. You have the patronage network. You have a long period of time where you have actually had stalemate from the central government itself.

Second, you have stalemate between Afghanistan and its neighboring states, most prominently Pakistan, but not just Pakistan. We only have to look at the map and see the geographic equation here, which includes Iran to the west, Central Asia, and Russia to the north, and beyond, to the northeast China, and further to the east, India.

So this is a very complex regional diplomatic equation. All those players I have just mentioned have some impact on what happens inside Afghanistan. And then, ultimately, to bring this war to a conclusion, a political end, which the military equation should be in support of, it involves politics between the Afghan government and the Taliban, the opponent.

And so on all three of these fronts, inside Kabul, in the region, and between the government and the insurgents, theres a real need for a political surge.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Among those neighbors, Pakistan obviously looms very large in Afghanistan, and provide a consistent safe haven for the Taliban that are waging this massive insurgency in the country.

How can the U.S. get Pakistan to help us in that fight?

LT. GEN. DOUGLAS LUTE: Well, first of all, I think you have to place our requirements, our demands on Pakistan in this part of the arena, that is, their support for the Taliban, in the context of our other interests in Pakistan.

And we actually have several interests in Pakistan which I think surpass our interest in dealing with the Afghan Taliban. I would label Pakistans internal stability itself. Here you have more than 180 million Pakistanis in a country where you have not just the Afghan Taliban, but the Pakistani Taliban, remnants of al-Qaida, and other regional terrorist groups, all of which threaten the stability of the state.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: A nuclear-powered state.

LT. GEN. DOUGLAS LUTE: And a state which has the fastest growing, the fastest expanding nuclear arsenal in the world.

So, that very dangerous cocktail of terrorists, extremists, and nuclear weapons is actually probably more of a vital national interest to us than Pakistans support for the Afghan Taliban. So, theres a large array of complex interests here which are at play.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Even if the administration articulates a strategy, do you think that this administration can execute that strategy?

LT. GEN. DOUGLAS LUTE: Well, I think, right now, theyre working with a handicap. And that is, while the National Security Council itself, those who set strategy and overwatch the strategy, is largely in place, the implementers of the strategy are largely not in place, because they have a large number of vacancies among those officials who are yet to be nominated and confirmed by the Senate, especially in the Defense Department and the State Department.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Former Ambassador Douglas Lute, thank you very much.

LT. GEN. DOUGLAS LUTE: Thank you.

Go here to see the original:
Can more US troops in Afghanistan help end the war? - PBS NewsHour

"At noon yesterday, President Trump delegated to me the authority to manage troop numbers in Afghanistan," Mattis told the Senate Appropriations Committee during a hearing on the Pentagon's budget request.

"The delegation of this authority, consistent with the authority President Trump granted me two months ago for Iraq and Syria, does not at this time change the troop numbers for Afghanistan," Mattis added.

"This assures the department can facilitate our missions and nimbly align our commitment to the situation on the ground," he said of the new authority.

"Our overall mission in Afghanistan remains the same, to train, advise and assist the Afghan forces so they can safeguard the Afghan people and terrorists can find no haven in Afghanistan for attacking us or others," Mattis said, saying the new strategy for Afghanistan will be presented to Trump in the "coming weeks."

This is a change from the Bush and Obama administrations, where the White House approved troop levels, largely because tens of thousands of personnel were involved.

A US senior defense official told CNN that the decision concerning troop levels in Syria and Iraq was communicated via an internal policy memo on April 20.

There are currently about 8,400 US troops devoted to Operation Resolute Support in Afghanistan, which encompasses both US counter terrorism forces to fight ISIS and the Taliban as well as the effort to train, advise and assist Afghan forces in a separate effort.

The Pentagon and White House have been reviewing an option to send 3,000 to 5,000 additional US forces solely in that training and advisory role.

The Pentagon is now conducting a broader military review involving both Afghanistan and Pakistan, so a decision on exactly how many additional troops might not come for several more weeks, defense officials have said in recent days.

The issue of troop levels became especially sensitive in the Obama administration because precise so-called "force management levels" were set for US deployments to Iraq and Syria. But those troop levels quickly became relatively meaningless because they were increased several times, and did not account for temporary deployments or the use of private contractors.

More here:
Mattis confirms White House has given him authority to set Afghanistan troop levels - CNN International

President Trump has authorized his secretary of defense, James Mattis, to determine American troop levels in Afghanistan. Mattis confirmed this Wednesday morning in a hearing before the Senate Appropriations committee. "At noon yesterday, President Trump delegated to me the authority to manage troop numbers in Afghanistan," Mattis said.

The New York Times had reported Tuesday night that Trump had given Mattis that authority. "Mr. Mattis is believed to favor sending several thousand more American troops to strengthen the effort to advise Afghan forces as they push back against gains made by the Taliban, the Islamic State and other militant groups," reported the Times. "But officials said he had not yet decided how many more forces to send to Afghanistan, or when to deploy them."

During both the Obama and Bush administrations, Afghanistan troop levels were watched closely by the president and the White House. But while the policy is changing, Mattis told the Senate that there are no immediate plans to change troop levels. "The delegation of this authority, consistent with the authority President Trump granted me two months ago for Iraq and Syria, does not at this time change the troop numbers for Afghanistan," he said.

Mattis told the Senate Armed Services committee on Tuesday that the administration would have a new strategy on Afghanistan by mid-July. Last month the president's national security team presented a strategy proposal to Trump that would, among other changes, raise troop levels. Mattis and Trump's national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, are believed to be particularly strong advocates for the plan.

The White House has not said whether or not Mattis's "mid-July" promise is accurate or consistent with the president's timeline. "It is indeed what Mattis said," said one White House official.

Senate Passes Russia Sanctions, But White House Has No Position Yet

The Senate voted 97-2 Wednesday to pass a package of new sanctions against Russia. The two nays were Republicans Rand Paul and Mike Lee.

The Associated Press writes the sanctions were designed as a rebuke against Russia's interference in last November's presidential election. "The measure has been attached to a bill imposing penalties on Iran that the Senate is currently debating and also has strong support," reports the AP.

But the sanctions are also seen as a response the Trump administration's lack of admonishment for Russia. A White House official tells me the administration is still reviewing the sanctions amendment and will not take a position until after the House of Representatives considers it and the full bill makes it to the president's desk.

"The administration remains committed to existing sanctions against Russia and will keep them in place until Moscow fully honors its commitments to resolve the crisis in Ukraine. We believe that the existing executive-branch sanctions regime is the best tool for compelling Russia to fulfill its commitments," said the White House official. "In its current form, the legislation poses a number of risks to the administration's ability to conduct foreign policy. However, we are not opposed to tough legislation involving Russia sanctions. We remain committed to working with Congress on this issue."

White House Reacts to Scalise Shooting

The White House was relatively quiet Wednesday after the early-morning shooting in Alexandria, Virginia, that left five peopleincluding House majority whip Steve Scaliseinjured.

"The Vice President and I are aware of the shooting incident in Virginia and are monitoring developments closely. We are deeply saddened by this tragedy. Our thoughts and prayers are with the members of Congress, their staffs, Capitol Police, first responders, and all others affected," said President Trump in a statement issued shortly after the first news reports broke.

Later on Wednesday, the president spoke from the White House about the incident. "Congressman Steve Scalise, a member of House leadership, was shot and badly wounded, and is now in stable condition at the hospital, along with two very courageous Capitol police officers," Trump said.

The president singled out Scalise, the third-ranking member in the House of Representatives, calling him a "patriot and a fighter."

"Steve, I want you to know that you have the prayers not only of the entire city behind you but of the entire nation and, frankly, the entire world," said Trump. "I spoke with Steve's wife, Jennifer, and I pledged to her our full and absolute support. Anything she needs."

Trump offered praise to the Capitol police, who were on the scene as part of Scalise's security detail. "Our brave Capitol police perform a challenging job with incredible skill. Their sacrifice makes democracy possible," said Trump. He also lauded the first responders in Alexandria, Virginia, where the group of congressmen and their aides were practicing for Thursday's charity baseball game against Democratic members of Congress.

The president closed with a message to the country. "We may have our differences, but we do well in times like these to remember that everyone who serves in our nation's capital serves because above all they love our country. We can all agree we are blessed to be Americans," he said.

Trump Disapproval at All-Time High

More Americans than ever disapprove of the job Donald Trump is doing as president. According to Gallup's daily approval metric, Trump's disapproval rate hit 60 percent for the first time on Tuesdaya worse rating than Gallup ever recorded for FDR, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, or Barack Obama. Meanwhile, the percentage of Americans who approve of Trump's performance shrunk to 37 percent.

Trump's weekly approval rating is also trending downward, polling at 41 percent, 38 percent, and 37 percent over the last three weeks.

One explanation for the slide could be the president's highly publicized fight with fired FBI director James Comey. Trump and Comey have each accused the other of lying about the nature of their relationship in the early months of the administration. A Politico poll released on Wednesday reports that 45 percent of voters trust Comey's version of events, while only 32 percent trust Trump's.

Despite Trump's slipping ratings, his own party appears to be sticking with him: 81 percent of Republican voters still approve of his job performance, according to the poll.

Visit link:
Trump Delegates Afghanistan Troop Levels to Mattis - The Weekly Standard