Like everywhere else in Puerto Rico, the small mountain city of Adjuntas was plunged into total darkness by Hurricane Maria. When residents left their homes to take stock of the damage, they found themselves not only without power and water, but also totally cut off from the rest of the island. Every single road was blocked, either by mounds of mud washed down from the surrounding peaks, or by fallen trees and branches. Yet amid this devastation, there was one bright spot.

A Solar Oasis

Just off the main square, a large, pink colonial-style house had light shining through every window. It glowed like a beacon in the terrifying darkness.

The pink house was Casa Pueblo, a community and ecology center with deep roots in this part of the island. Twenty years ago, its founders, a family of scientists and engineers, installed solar panels on the center’s roof, a move that seemed rather hippy-dippy at the time. Somehow, those panels (upgraded over the years) managed to survive Maria’s hurricane-force winds and falling debris. Which meant that in a sea of post-storm darkness, Casa Pueblo had the only sustained power for miles around.

Click Here: mochila fjallraven

And like moths to a flame, people from all over the hills of Adjuntas made their way to the warm and welcoming light.

Already a community hub before the storm, the pink house rapidly transformed into a nerve center for self-organized relief efforts. It would be weeks before the Federal Emergency Management Agency or any other agency would arrive with significant aid, so people flocked to Casa Pueblo to collect food, water, tarps, and chainsaws — and draw on its priceless power supply to charge up their electronics. Most critically, Casa Pueblo became a kind of makeshift field hospital, its airy rooms crowded with elderly people who needed to plug in oxygen machines.

Dear Members of the US Senate and House of Representatives, 

On July 1, Mexicans will go to the polls to elect a new president, both houses of Congress, and thousands of local and state officials. As scholars and representatives of civil society organizations that focus on Mexico, we are concerned about the serious challenges surrounding these elections. We are also concerned about the potentially negative role that the US government may play in light of recent comments from this administration and a mixed track record when it comes to supporting democracy in Mexico and other countries in the hemisphere.

It is important that Mexico, one of the US’s closest allies and trading partners, has a vibrant democracy, one in which citizens can freely and fairly exercise their right to vote, without restrictions or outside interference. We therefore respectfully call on you and your congressional colleagues to do everything in your power to ensure that US government policy with regard to Mexico’s elections remains neutral and supportive of basic democratic norms.

Mexico has a troubling, checkered record when it comes to elections, with frequent reports of major irregularities, vote buying, and the manipulation of results. The 1988 and 2006 presidential elections were strongly denounced as fraudulent by both the political opposition and independent civil society groups. The legitimacy of the most recent presidential elections, in 2012, has also been called into question due to revelations of illegal funding, vast vote-buying schemes, and the lack of independence of official electoral institutions and much of the broadcast media.

The recent 2017 regional elections in Mexico State and Coahuila demonstrated that unfair and fraudulent electoral practices remain a major problem today. In both these elections, there were credible allegations regarding the illegal use of public and private funds in the campaigns of the winning candidates (both belonging to the party of the sitting national government), numerous serious reports of vote buying, reports of attacks and intimidation targeting opposition campaigns, and widespread doubts about the fairness of the vote counting itself.

We are also concerned by recent developments that undermine basic civil liberties, such as freedom of association, freedom of speech, and the right to peaceful protest, all of which are a prerequisite to a healthy electoral climate. Among other things, reports have emerged indicating that the Mexican government has been involved in spying on opposition activists through the use of “Pegasus” software, and has engaged in covering up the role of security forces in the 2014 mass disappearance of 43 students from Ayotzinapa, Guerrero. The government also has recently approved a new Internal Security Law that gives the armed forces a greater role in policing, causing many to fear that these forces could be used to suppress legitimate political opposition and social protest.

At the same time, there is growing discontent in Mexico with increasing levels of corruption and violence. Last year, four former state governors were arrested on charges of corruption. Mexico scored at the bottom of Transparency International’s index of perceived public sector corruption, with 61 percent of those polled affirming that the level of corruption had increased. Violent crimes have also risen, with 2017 being the worst year on record in terms of the number of homicides that Mexico has experienced. As in the case of the 43 disappeared of Ayotzinapa, frequent and credible allegations of state security agents’ involvement in disappearances and homicides are rarely investigated.

These and other serious problems currently plaguing Mexico can only be resolved by Mexicans. But for Mexicans to be able to effectively and collectively tackle these issues, they need to have institutions and public officials that they can rely on and believe in. Clean and fair elections are essential to achieving this.

In this context, it is imperative for the US government to support a fair and democratic electoral process in Mexico, and avoid premature statements or actions that could lend legitimacy to elections that are strongly contested on the basis of credible reports of fraud.

Unfortunately, US administrations have at times adopted unhelpful positions with regard to elections in Mexico and other countries in the region.

In last year’s elections in Honduras, the US government was quick to recognize and support elections that raised serious doubts, both within Honduras and internationally. The same occurred after the Mexican presidential elections of 1988 and 2006. Such positions embolden entrenched political actors to carry out further fraudulent and unfair electoral practices. Such a scenario should not repeat itself in the upcoming elections in Mexico.

We urge you and your colleagues to make every effort to ensure that the US supports Mexican democracy by insisting on the strict adherence to fair electoral practices and compliance with laws by supporting the peaceful transition of power, and by publicly condemning any electoral irregularities or human rights violations. The US government should maintain the utmost respect for Mexican national sovereignty and the popular vote and express its commitment to building a strong relationship with any new Mexican administration.

We also encourage you to closely monitor the selection of the next United States ambassador to Mexico, subsequent to the departure of current ambassador Roberta Jacobson on May 1^st, so as to ensure that he or she is equipped with the necessary experience and diplomatic skills to effectively navigate the complex and critical bilateral relationship.

Many Mexican and international electoral monitors, including many signers of this letter, will be on the ground in Mexico providing independent reports and evaluation of the elections. We will keep you posted on these monitoring efforts, and look forward to sharing key observations with you before, during, and following the July 1 electoral process.

Sincerely,

*Affiliation for identity purposes only

Guadalupe Correa-Cabrera, Associate Professor, Schar School of Policy and Government, George Mason University

Laura Carlsen, Director, Americas Program, Center for International Policy

Christy Thornton, Assistant Professor, Johns Hopkins University

Tony Payan, Fellow and Director, Baker Institute Mexico Center, Rice University

Gilbert Joseph, Farnam Professor of History and International Studies, Yale University

Mary Kay Vaughan, Professor Emerita, University of Maryland, College Park

Horacio Larreguy Arbesu, Associate Professor of Government, Harvard University

Jonathan Fox, Professor, American University

Robert A. Blecker, Professor of Economics, American University

Maureen Meyer, Director for Mexico and Migrant Rights, Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)

Vanessa Freije, Assistant Professor, University of Washington

Ted Lewis, Human Rights Director, Global Exchange

Manuel Pérez-Rocha, Associate Fellow, Institute for Policy Studies 

Karin Alejandra Rosemblatt, Associate Professor of History, University of Maryland

Alexander Aviña, Associate Professor of History, School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies, Arizona State University

David Shirk, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of San Diego

Lisa VeneKlasen, Executive Director, JASS (Just Associates)

Salih Booker, Executive Director, Center for International Policy (CIP)

Margaret Chowning, Professor of History, University of California Berkeley

José Antonio Lucero, Associate Professor of International Studies, University of Washington

Christopher Boyer, Professor, University of Illinois – Chicago

Renata Keller, Assistant Professor, University of Nevada, Reno

John Lindsay-Poland, Coordinator, Project to Stop US Arms to Mexico

Vicki Gass, Senior Policy Advisor for Central America & Mexico, Oxfam

Stephen Morris, Professor, Dept of Political Science and International Relations, Middle Tennessee State University

Paul Gillingham, Director of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, Associate Professor of History, Northwestern University

Kevin P. Gallagher, Director, Global Development Policy Center, Boston University, USA

Louise Walker, Associate Professor of History, Northeastern University

John M. Ackerman, Law Professor, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)

James Cohen, Professor, North American Studies, University of Paris 3-Sorbonne Nouvelle

Alexander Main, Senior Associate for International Policy, Center for Economic and Policy

Research

Jocelyn Olcott, Associate Professor of History, Duke University

Tanalís Padilla, Associate Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Daniella Burgi-Palomino, Senior Associate, Latin America Working Group

William I. Robinson, Professor of Sociology and Global and International Studies, University of California-Santa Barbara

Greg Grandin, Professor of History, New York University

Yolanda Zorayda Avila Toledo, Leadership and Capacity Building Manager, Alianza Americas

Mark Weisbrot, Co-Director, Center for Economic and Policy Research

Geoff Thale, Vice President for Programs, Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)

David Montejano, Professor Emeritus of Comparative Ethnic Studies, University of California at Berkeley

Carla Garcia Zendejas, Director People, Land and Resources Program, Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)

Dan La Botz, Murphy Institute, City University of New York

Casey Marina Lurtz, Assistant Professor of History, Johns Hopkins University

Ericka Beckman, Associate Professor of Romance Languages, University of Pennsylvania

James E. Sanders, Professor of History, Utah State University

Barbara Weinstein, Professor of History, New York University

Raymond Craib, Professor of History and Director, Latin American Studies Program, Cornell University

Amy Offner, Assistant Professor of History, University of Pennsylvania

Luis Herran Avila, Visiting Assistant Professor of History, Carleton College

Entering office as Cuba’s new president, Miguel Diaz-Canel said Thursday that he would focus his leadership on ensuring that “the revolution continues its course”—promising the modernization of the island nation’s economy but making clear that he would fiercely defend its socialist system from outsiders who have pressured Cuba to change.

“In Cuba there is no space for those who aspire for a restoration of capitalism,” Diaz-Canel told the National Assembly in his inauguration speech. “The mandate given by the people to this house is to give continuity to the Cuban revolution in a crucial historic moment.”

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani on Sunday placed blame for a terrorist attack at a parade in southwestern Iran on a U.S.-backed Persian Gulf state, and said he planned to “confront” the U.S. over tensions between the two countries at the upcoming United Nations General Assembly this week in New York.

The attack took place Saturday at an annual event in Ahvaz, killing at least 29 people, including several civilians, and injuring nearly 70 others. ISIS and a separatist group with Saudi connections, the Ahvaz National Resistance, both claimed responsibility for the attack, in which attackers disguised as soldiers opened fire at a military parade. But Rouhani suggested one of the United States’ allies in the region, including Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates (UAE), had been involved.

“It is Americans who instigate them and provide them with necessary means to commit these crimes,” Rouhani said of the countries he was accusing.

Following the attack, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif also held regional U.S. allies responsible in a statement on Twitter.

Click:high temperature gate valves

The rise of xenophobic, right-wing extremists intent on stoking bigotry and prejudice against foreigners in Europe and elsewhere has startled observers around the world—but former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton angered critics Thursday when she revealed her belief that the onus lies with European leaders to curb migration in order to appease those same extremists, rather than to protect the rights of asylum seekers.

In an interview with the Guardian, the 2016 presidential candidate perfectly illustrated the rift between so-called centrist Democrats and progressives as she suggested Europe should end its attempts to resettle the world’s 25.4 million refugees whose home countries have become unlivable due to war, unrest, and poverty—frequently thanks to actions  by the U.S. and its European allies. 

“I think Europe needs to get a handle on migration because that is what lit the flame” of right-wing power in Europe, Clinton told the Guardian. “I admire the very generous and compassionate approaches that were taken particularly by leaders like Angela Merkel, but I think it is fair to say Europe has done its part, and must send a very clear message—’we are not going to be able to continue provide refuge and support’—because if we don’t deal with the migration issue it will continue to roil the body politic.”

Clinton’s comments drew immediate criticism from European leaders and progressive Americans, who in addition to calling for Democrats to stand with refugees as they exercise their internationally-recognized right to seek asylum, denounced her remarks as a capitulation to extremists like President Donald Trump and his European counterparts.

To underscore the planetary emergency and denounce the U.K. government’s inaction on the climate crisis, a new group calling itself Extinction Rebellion rallied over 1,000 people to block Parliament Square in London on Wednesday. The direct action marks the launch of a mass civil disobedience campaign, with the group issuing a “Declaration of Rebellion” against the government because the activists “refuse to bequeath a dying planet to future generations by failing to act now.”

Police arrested 15 people taking part in the action, but organizers say the wrong people were taken into custody. “If we lived in a democracy,” Extinction Rebellion declared in a tweet, “the police would be here to arrest the criminal politicians who are wrecking the planet.”