The heart of Yosemite National Park, where throngs of tourists are awe-struck by cascading waterfalls and towering granite features like El Capitan and Half Dome, will be closed as firefighters try to corral a huge wildfire just to the west that has cast a smoky pall and threatened the park’s forest, officials said Tuesday.

Yosemite Valley will be closed for at least four days beginning at noon Wednesday, along with a winding, mountainous, 20-mile (32-kilometer) stretch of State Route 41, park spokesman Scott Gediman said.

At least a thousand campground and hotel bookings will be canceled — to say nothing of the impact on day visitors, park workers and small businesses along the highway, Gediman said.

“We’re asking people here tonight to leave tomorrow morning,” he said. “And anyone that’s incoming tomorrow will get an email or phone call stating that their reservation is canceled.”

The last time the 7.5-mile-long (12-kilometer-long) valley was closed because of fire was 1990, he said.

Yosemite wasn’t under imminent danger from the Ferguson fire, officials were quick to point out. Authorities decided on the closure to allow crews to perform protective measures like burning away brush along roadways without having to deal with traffic in the park that welcomes 4 million visitors annually.

Yosemite Valley is the centerpiece of the visitor experience, offering views of landmarks such as Half Dome, Sentinel Dome, Bridal Veil Fall, El Capitan and Yosemite Falls. The glacial valley’s grand vista of waterfalls and shear granite faces has been obscured by a choking haze of smoke from a nearby fire.

Visitors are advised to “limit activity during the periods of poor air quality,” the park said in a statement. “Some facilities and services are closed or diminished.”

Over nearly two weeks, flames have churned through more than 57 square miles (147.6 square kilometers) of timber in steep terrain of the Sierra Nevada just west of the park. The fire was 25 percent contained Tuesday morning.

Mandatory evacuations are in place in several communities, while others have been told to get ready to leave if necessary.

More than 3,300 firefighters are working the fire, aided by 16 helicopters. One firefighter was killed July 14, and six others have been injured.

Gediman suggested valley visitors divert to Tuolumne Meadows, on Yosemite’s northern edge, or to Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks to the south.

“There are wonderful places to visit in the region, so we’re asking people to consider alternative plans,” he said.

In the state’s far north, a nearly 4-square-mile (10.3-square-kilometer) wildfire has forced the evacuation of French Gulch, a small Shasta County community that dates to the Gold Rush.
…

your ad here

When North Korean leader Kim Jong Un agreed in June to help return the remains of American troops killed in the 1950-53 Korean War, it was seen as one of the more attainable goals to come out of his summit with U.S. President Donald Trump.

American officials expect North Korea to hand over around 50 sets of remains in coming days or weeks, but the drawn-out process of negotiations to get to this point highlights the complications involved in the issue.

At the heart of the difficulty, former officials involved in previous recovery missions say, are likely demands from North Korea for cash compensation, as well as the unsolved tensions over the North’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile arsenal.

More than 7,700 U.S. troops who fought in the Korean War remain unaccounted for, with about 5,300 of those lost in what is now North Korea, according to the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA), the U.S. military agency tasked with tracking down prisoners of war and troops missing in action.

The Korean War ended in a truce, not a peace treaty, leaving the United States and North Korea still technically at war.

Soon after the June summit, Trump announced North Korea had returned the remains of 200 soldiers that had already been found, but this has yet to take place and negotiations over the actual handing over of the remains have dragged on.

Trump told an audience of veterans on Tuesday that he hoped “fallen warriors” would begin to come home “very soon.”

Bill Richardson, a former U.S. diplomat with experience negotiating with North Korea, including during the recovery of the remains of seven Americans in 2007, said Pyongyang was using the issue as “a bargaining chip.”

“They’re stalling,” he told Reuters. “I think in the end the North Koreans will turn over the majority of the remains that they have — but it will have a price. Not just a financial price.”

Remains returned

Between the 1990s and 2005, more than 400 caskets of remains found in North Korea were returned to the United States, and the bodies of some 330 Americans were accounted for, according to the DPAA.

Decades-old remains that North Korea has handed over in the past have not always been identifiable as U.S. troops.

The U.S. and North Korea worked together on so-called joint field activities (JFAs) to recover remains from 1996-2005, until Washington halted operations, expressing concerns about the safety of its personnel.

A Congressional Research Service (CRS) report said the United States paid $28 million to North Korea for assistance in the effort.

“To the best of my knowledge, it was never based on a per body calculation. Payments were made in support of each field mission — each joint recovery operation,” said Frank Jannuzi, a former Democratic Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffer focusing on East Asian and Pacific affairs. Payments were to compensate North Korea for direct expenses incurred such as fuel costs, disruption of agricultural planting, or equipment costs, he said.

In 2011, President Barack Obama’s administration agreed with Pyongyang to restart recovery missions, offering to pay $5,669,160 in “compensation” for services provided by North Korea.

Those planned missions never happened, however, as Washington called off the deal after North Korea tested a rocket in early 2012, said Paul Cole, author of POW/MIA Accounting.

“If the past is any indicator, the [North Koreans] are demanding upfront deliveries of food, fuel and at least $5 million in cash,” Cole told Reuters. “In the era of ‘maximum pressure,’ the dilemma for the Trump administration is whether to give the [North Koreans] massive amounts of food, fuel, trucks, SUVs and millions in cash, or cancel the deal.”

Former officials say typically North Korea has not asked for compensation when it unilaterally returns remains it recovers, such as the roughly 200 currently being discussed.

But if the United States hopes to send its own teams into North Korea, there will likely be a cost.

Asked whether the cost of future joint field activities would be similar to what was paid in the past, the Pentagon’s DPAA Public Affairs Office said: “As of yet, there are no JFAs scheduled in North Korea so we cannot speculate on what such activities may cost.”

The U.S. State Department did not have an immediate comment on the negotiations, but Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said last week North Korea had committed to return the first remains “in the next couple of weeks.”

According to CRS, the United States also paid for recovery operations in Vietnam. As with North Korea, critics complained the Vietnamese government charged “extraordinarily high fees for providing support … and that the services received are by no means as lavish as the bills presented indicate.”

South Korea’s former vice minister of foreign affairs and trade, Kim Sung-han, said Pyongyang would likely want to use the return of remains to improve its relations with Washington, while avoiding addressing more touchy subjects such as denuclearization.

“North Korea wants the war declared ended sooner rather than later, so trust can be built and progress on its international standing can be made,” he said, adding that any “reimbursements” were likely to violate sanctions.

Besides being politically sensitive, however, handing the North Korean government stacks of cash offers no guarantee that authenticated U.S. servicemen’s remains would be recovered, Jannuzi said.

“We might spend a million dollars and come up with nothing.”
…

your ad here

More than 450 immigrant parents who were separated from their children when they entered the United States illegally are no longer in the country though their children remain behind, according to a joint court filing on Monday by the federal government and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The absence of the 463 parents, which U.S. government lawyers said was “under review,” could impede government efforts to reunite separated families by Thursday, the deadline ordered by a federal judge. The filing did not say why the 463 parents had left the country, but government officials previously acknowledged that some parents had been deported without their children.

As of Monday, 879 parents had been reunited with their children, according to the filing.

About 2,500 children were separated from their parents after the Trump administration announced a “zero tolerance” policy in April aimed at discouraging illegal immigration. The policy was ended in June amid an international outcry about the government’s treatment of immigrant children.

U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw in San Diego ordered last month that the government had to reunite the children with their parents in a case brought by the ACLU.

On Monday, the government also said 917 parents were either not eligible to be reunited or not yet known to be eligible to be reunited with their child. That number includes parents no longer in the country as well as those deemed unsuitable because of criminal convictions or for other reasons.

Immigration advocates have expressed alarm about parents deported without their children, saying it can create problems with the children’s immigration cases.

“How can we go forward on a case if we don’t know the parent’s wishes?” Megan McKenna, spokeswoman for Kids in Need of Defense, told Reuters earlier this month.

While Monday’s report indicated progress with reunifications, the ACLU made clear its frustrations with the process. The rights group said it did not have a list of parents who signed a form electing to be deported without their child.

“These parents urgently need consultations with lawyers, so that they do not mistakenly strand their children in the United States,” the ACLU wrote in the court filing.

The ACLU asked Sabraw to order the government to turn the information over by the end of Tuesday.

The government said it had cleared an additional 538 parents for reunification pending transport.
…

your ad here

“The fundamental basis for the alliance” between the United States and South Korea “would continue” and grow stronger, even after North Korea’s nuclear threat and tension on the peninsula are reduced, a former U.S. ambassadors to South Korea said.

Although the pace of the denuclearization effort by North Korea has been slow since it made a commitment to work toward “complete denuclearization” at the summit in Singapore held in June, the level of threat from the regime has declined, Gen. Vincent Brooks, top U.S. commander in South Korea, said.

“We’ve gone now 235 days without a provocation, so we saw a big change occur,” Brooks said at the Aspen Security Forum via video link on Saturday. “To be sure, the physical threats and capabilities are still in place. But it’s evident through words and action that the intent to use them has changed.”

US-South Korea alliance

Even if North Korea’s nuclear threat is reduced and tension on the peninsula de-escalates, the U.S.-South Korea alliance will remain unchanged. The relationship is bound by the Mutual Defense Treaty, signed at the conclusion of the Korean War in 1953, to provide a basis for the continued U.S. troop presence on the Korean Peninsula to deter a North Korean attack on South Korea and to provide a nuclear umbrella in the region.

“The fundamental basis for the alliance would continue, in terms of mutual defense commitment under the original treaty,” said Alexander Vershbow, who served as ambassador to South Korea during the George W. Bush administration. 

Vershbow also said, in the long run, the absence of a North Korean threat could potentially reduce the U.S. troop presence in South Korea.

“In the context of the much-reduced threat from the North, one could see the basis for the reduction of the U.S. presence,” Vershbow told VOA. 

Before the June 12 Singapore summit, President Donald Trump had asked the Pentagon to consider reducing U.S. troops on the peninsula in May.

After meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Singapore, Trump called for the suspension of “war games” with South Korea.

The annual Ulchi Freedom Guardian joint military exercises conducted by the U.S. and South Korea that usually takes place in August have been suspended, fueling concerns of possible U.S. force reduction on the peninsula.

During his visit to Seoul in June after Trump’s summit with Kim, U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said the U.S. will maintain the current level of military presence in South Korea and that U.S. commitment to the country will remain “ironclad.”

Currently, there are 28,000 U.S. troops in South Korea.

‘Overarching goal’

Vershbow said if there is going to be a reduction of U.S. troops, it is after achieving a unified and “overarching goal of denuclearization as a precondition for any fundamental change when it relates to the North.”

Mark Lippert, who served as the U.S. ambassador to South Korea from 2012 to 2017, said even if the security situation on the peninsula changes, the U.S.-South Korean alliance that has “modernized and adapted in very, very strong capable ways to keep it relevant” will continue to grow robust, “not just on the Korean peninsula but helping the U.S. and Korea work on issues in the region and around the world.” 

Vershbow echoed Lippert, saying the alliance will continue to serve a purpose beyond deterring North Korean because it will continue by providing a deterrent throughout northeast Asia as envisioned in the defense treaty.

“The U.S. is not going to necessarily change the broader deterrent posture in the region,” he said. 

Mentioning that North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member states found “strong overriding” reasons for the U.S. “to stay in and engage in Europe with its military and security forces” even after the fall of the Soviet Union, Lippert said, “There are all sorts of data points to suggest it’s beyond the [Korean] peninsula at this point.”

Lippert pointed out that America’s largest overseas military base is Camp Humphreys in South Korea, as evidence that the U.S.-South Korean alliance is “one of the world’s greatest alliance, if not the greatest.”

Ending 70 years of presence in Seoul, the U.S. military headquarters in South Korea relocated to Pyeongtaek in late June, about 45 miles south of the capital.

The newly expanded Camp Humphreys took more than $10 billion to build, of which Lippert said South Korea paid about 92 to 96 percent. It is expected to house approximately 45,000 troops and their families by 2022. 

“One of the most important indicators of [the alliance growing strong] is the current move to Camp Humphreys,” Lippert said. “This is a great symbol of alliance. … And you noticed nobody is making negative noises about Camp Humphreys and our troop presence there. I think that suggests durability over time.”

Another factor suggesting the alliance remains strong and that “positive change is coming is that the Blue House has made comments that the alliance is not just about North Korea. It’s about other countries, other issues … in a form of global Korea,” Lippert added.

South Korean President Moon Jae-in said during his three-day visit to Singapore that started July 11, “South Korea and the U.S. maintain a firm stance about the role and importance of U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) for peace and stability in the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia.”

Moon also responded to the suspension of military drills possibly leading to the reduction of U.S. troops in South Korea, saying, “USFK is a completely different issue. It is a matter of the South Korea-U.S. alliance, not something that can be discussed in denuclearization talks between North Korea and the U.S.”

By providing a foundation of security and stability in northeast Asia, U.S. military presence on the peninsula and the alliance and relationship that Lippert said has grown in “multidirections” will continue to help create a condition for “unbridled economic and cultural success” in the region.
…

your ad here

U.S. President Donald Trump spoke warmly of Mexico’s incoming leftist president on Monday, saying he expected to get “something worked out” on NAFTA, while a top Mexican official said there was scope to revive the trade talks this week.

“We’re talking to Mexico on NAFTA, and I think we’re going to have something worked out. The new president, terrific person,” Trump said in a speech at the White House about American manufacturing.

“We’re talking to them about doing something very dramatic, very positive for both countries, he said, without giving more details.

Talks to reshape the 1994 trade accord have been underway since last August. But they stalled in the run-up to the July 1 presidential election in Mexico, which produced a landslide victory for veteran leftist Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador.

The United States, Mexico and Canada have been at odds over U.S. demands to impose tougher content rules for the auto industry, as well as several other proposals, including one that would kill NAFTA after five years if it is not renegotiated.

Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo, who last week expressed hope an agreement in principle on NAFTA could be reached by the end of August, is due to hold talks with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer at the end of the week in Washington.

He will be accompanied by Jesus Seade, the designated chief NAFTA negotiator of the incoming Mexican administration.

“There’s clearly a window of opportunity to be able to bed down a series of open issues which are not numerous, but are very complex,” Guajardo said on the sidelines of a summit of the Pacific Alliance trade bloc in the western coastal city of Puerto Vallarta.

Guajardo is due to meet his Canadian counterpart Chrystia Freeland on Wednesday, also to discuss NAFTA.

After the election, top officials from both the outgoing and new Mexican governments met in Mexico City with senior Trump administration officials led by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Seade said the visit had sent out “excellent” signals.

“We hope these signals translate into a willingness to move forward,” Seade told reporters in Puerto Vallarta.

The talks have been clouded by tit-for-tat measures over trade after the Trump administration slapped tariffs on U.S. steel and aluminum imports.

The United States is also exploring the possibility of imposing tariffs on auto imports, though Guajardo said it was too early to speculate on how that would play out.

Mexico’s foreign ministry said on Monday that South Korea had initiated the process of seeking associate membership in the Pacific Alliance, which comprises Colombia, Chile, Mexico and Peru and is seeking to deepen free trade.

Singapore, Australia, New Zealand and Canada were last year admitted as associate members by the alliance. For Mexico, the expansion is part of a push to diversify its trading partners in the wake of Trump’s previous threats to pull out of NAFTA.

Guajardo indicated that despite his optimism about reaching a deal, risks still exist.

“The biggest risk is that instead of moving forward with an agenda of opening and integration, we move backwards, closing our economy and really undoing what we’ve built in the last two and a half decades,” Guajardo said.
…

your ad here