U.S. President Donald Trump has “made a very firm commitment to work as hard as possible to try to return” American detainees and Japanese abductees from North Korea, said William Hagerty, the U.S. ambassador to Japan.

“This is a very sensitive issue for us and a high priority for both leaders that was covered extensively,” said Hagerty in a telephone briefing that followed a meeting Wednesday between Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

Abe said Trump had pledged that during his planned meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, he would raise the issue of Japanese nationals abducted by Pyongyang decades ago. Trump met with the abductees’ families in Japan last November during a visit.

Three detained

Three Korean-Americans are currently imprisoned in North Korea. Tony Kim and Kim Hak Song were teaching at the Pyongyang University of Science and Technology, the only private university in the country. They were separately detained in 2017 and accused of participating in anti-state activities and trying to overthrow the government.

The third detainee, Kim Dong Chul, was arrested in Rason on the northeast tip of North Korea in October 2015. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison with hard labor in 2016 after being convicted of espionage.

Freeing the prisoners would be seen as a sign of goodwill by North Korea’s leader. It would also mark a personal success for Trump, who has highlighted the issue.

Hagerty told reporters that while the agenda of the highly anticipated meeting between Trump and Kim was still “being formed,” Washington has “more clarity” in terms of the “direction” in which it will go with Pyongyang.

He noted Trump’s “intention” to see all of the weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, eliminated from the Korean Peninsula.

Discussion on liaison office

Earlier this month, the Trump administration was said to be looking into incentives for North Korea, including the consideration of establishing a U.S. liaison office in Pyongyang, if the North were to take concrete actions toward denuclearization, according to media reports quoting South Korean government sources.

“We are aware of these reports. I cannot go into details regarding internal U.S. government preparations, but a comprehensive, whole-of-government effort in support of the president is under way,” said Katina Adams, spokeswoman for the State Department’s Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs.

“We will do things differently; now is the time for bold action and concrete steps toward denuclearization. In the meantime, the global maximum pressure campaign will continue until North Korea denuclearizes,” Adams told VOA, adding that the U.S. was committed to having close coordination with South Korea and Japan on a unified response to North Korea.

When asked about the veracity of the reports about a liaison office, Heather Nauert, acting undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs, said recently, ​”I’ve seen those reports. I highly doubt that that is something that we would do.” 

Some experts say establishing such an office may be constructive, particularly following CIA Director Mike Pompeo’s recent secret meeting with Kim in Pyongyang. Pompeo’s is Trump’s pick to become secretary of state.

“I think if the Trump-Kim summit occurs and a diplomatic process focused on implementing a deal on denuclearization, it might be useful,” Robert Manning, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a global affairs think tank in Washington, told VOA. 

Manning said a Trump-Kim summit would be a “steppingstone” to normalized relations between the United States and North Korea, “which I’m guessing would be part of a resolution of the nuclear issue. It is useful to the degree we have business to conduct with North Korea.”

Previous planning for office

Manning, a former State Department official, was involved in planning for a U.S. liaison office in Pyongyang in the 1990s. The move at the time was part of diplomatic efforts to engage North Korea that grew out of the U.S. concerns Pyongyang was trying to attain the capacity to build nuclear weapons.

A U.S. liaison office in Pyongyang was first considered and prepared for in 1992 by then-President George H.W. Bush, according to Manning.

“The State Department had designated an official to open it, but North Korea backed off. It was considered again in 1996, but Pyongyang, in the end, decided against it a second time, perhaps because of the cost of a D.C. office, and/or reluctance to see Americans poking around in Pyongyang,” Manning said.

When asked whether a liaison office would be an incentive for North Korea’s denuclearization, Hagerty said, “The notion of the liaison office is a very specific tactical result of what I think is going to have to be a broader, strategic discussion.

“We’re still in the process of establishing the parameters for that strategic discussion.”
…

your ad here

The number of undocumented people taking refuge in places of worship across the United States has increased six-fold in the past 15 months. Nationwide, there are now at least 42 people trying to avoid deportation by living in sanctuary in 28 U.S. cities. 

“We didn’t see the numbers go up until after the [presidential] elections … when it was like seven people. Now you have over 40 people that are currently taking sanctuary,” Myrna Orozco, an associate with the Church World Service’s Immigration and Refugee Program, told VOA. 

The number of churches, mosques and synagogues offering sanctuary nationwide has also grown. According to CWS, the number of interfaith congregations that have signed up to be part of the sanctuary movement has increased from 400 to more than 1,100. 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement regards places of worship as sensitive locations, along with schools and hospitals, and avoids making arrests at those places.

“Enforcement actions may occur at sensitive locations in limited circumstances, but will generally be avoided,” ICE spokesman John Mohan wrote in response to a VOA query. 

But ICE’s policy is just a policy and not protected by law. And it is subject to change. While immigrant advocates have long regarded courthouses as sensitive locations, ICE does not, having issued a policy directive just this past January for enforcement actions in courthouses.

As a result of their murky status, sensitive locations are a sensitive subject with immigration lawyers and advocates, many of whom declined to talk to VOA about the issue.

Knocking on sanctuary doors

Though she cannot leave the South Congregation Church on Maple Street in Springfield, Massachusetts, Gizella Collazo sees her two American born children regularly. They come and go as they please, as does Collazo’s U.S. citizen husband.

A Peruvian who has lived in the U.S. for 17 years, Collazo is the latest undocumented immigrant to seek sanctuary in a church; she has been at South Congregation since late March avoiding a deportation order.

She had hardly been there a week when Springfield officials conducted a health and safety inspection at the church. With a warrant issued by Western District Housing Court, city officials found no major housing code violations although the church did have to do some minor fixes including replacing a door lock. 

Local news outlets reported that the inspection was at the instigation of Springfield Democratic Mayor Domenic Sarno who opposed the church’s decision to offer sanctuary. 

Sarno told MassLive that he is in favor of legal immigrants but will not defend the ones who’ve broken the law.

“And I’m not going to become a sanctuary city,” he told MassLive, although sanctuary jurisdictions, which choose not to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, are different from places of worship that offer sanctuary. 

CWS’ Orozco says congregations that offer sanctuary are careful to upgrade housing codes and regulations, a process that can take months before sanctuary is ever offered.

“Cities where people are living have the right to make sure that the living codes are up to date and it’s a little different from like an actual enforcement action from immigration [authorities,] because the city has to make sure that there are living conditions where people are at,” she says.

Orozco thinks the inspection was just “the mayor trying to take retaliation” against this particular church. 

“If immigration were to show up at a congregation, most of the congregations that are having somebody would expect that they would do so with a warrant. And knowing that they would be essentially violating their own policy of not conducting enforcement operations at places and houses of worship.”

Sanctuary congregations, she says, ensure nobody comes in without an official warrant signed by a judge.

Victim or lawbreaker?

At the heart of the controversy, Gizella Collazo remains at the church.

She has no criminal record, but immigration officials say she entered the country with “fraudulent” documents. She has been trying to adjust her status since her marriage in 2006. But immigration advocates say she had complications changing her status due to “multiple legal errors” thus putting her on a path to an order of removal. 

“She just wants to be with her family. This is the country of her kids and her husband. She wants to stay here with them. This is the country that she knows as her own and she’s been here 17 years. This is where she got married,” Emily Rodriguez, community organizer at Pioneer Valley Project told VOA.

Collazo must now fight the deportation order in court before adjusting her status. 

“It has taken her 11 years to work on her documents, something that could’ve been done within three years, has taken her over 11 years to, to be able to fix her status because of a wrong assessment in her case,” Rodriguez said. 

ICE says that Collazo entered the U.S. illegally on a fraudulent passport. She was granted voluntary departure by a judge in 2012. ICE said she had agreed to voluntarily leave the U.S. after multiple appeals were denied.

“However, after originally agreeing to voluntarily depart the country Ms. (Collazo), on March 26, 2018, took refuge at a church in Springfield, Massachusetts in an attempt to avoid complying with a federal judge’s order,” ICE’s Mohan wrote.
…

your ad here

Pakistan says its diplomats working in the United States are facing additional restrictions on travel from the host government.

 

“Regarding travel restrictions on Pakistani diplomats in Washington, yes, we have received official communication regarding certain measures that the U.S. intends to implement beginning May 1, 2018. The issue is primarily of reciprocity. Both sides are in touch and we are hopeful that the matter will be resolved,” Mohammad Faisal, the spokesman for Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said in his weekly press briefing in response to a question Thursday.

“Yes, we’ve seen Pakistan’s statement.  We regularly talk to Pakistan about a wide range of issues, but we are not prepared to announce anything on this matter,” the U.S. State Department said later in the day.

 

U.S. officials have been ambiguous on the issue since Pakistan media reports on the new restrictions surfaced this month .

 

Last week, Under Secretary for Political Affairs Thomas Shannon, in an interview with VOA’s Uzbek service, had hinted at the change in policy.

 

“Our diplomats are under travel restrictions and they can travel farther (than capital Islamabad) but they have to notify the government of Pakistan, so we’ve taken reciprocal steps. it’s very common in diplomacy,” he said.

 

Previously, Pakistani diplomats in Washington could travel around the country unrestricted.

 

Asked specifically to comment on Shannon’s comment to VOA, a State Department spokesperson said, “Under Secretary Shannon was referring to our regular and ongoing dialogue with the government of Pakistan on many issues involving reciprocity across a range of topics. To clarify, there are no restrictions on travel for Pakistani diplomats in the United States. We have nothing further to announce at this time.”

Reports in the Pakistani media said the U.S. government had notified Pakistani authorities that diplomats at its Washington embassy and consulates will be barred from traveling more than 40 kilometers from their posts without prior permission. The reports said the restrictions could take effect as early as May 1 unless “certain issues” were resolved before that

Most foreign diplomats, including Americans, face travel restrictions in Pakistan. They have to inform the Pakistani government in advance if they plan to travel to most areas outside of the capital Islamabad.  

 

Pakistani government cites security concerns for placing the restrictions. 
…

your ad here