Monthly Archives: April 2021

Two incidents in which police officers pulled Eroc Arroyo-Montano over and drew their guns revealed insights about police reaction and response, he said.

Ive been pulled over by police two times where they drew guns, Arroyo-Montano said. At one time, I missed a stop sign, and another time I hadnt updated my license plates. And both times they pulled guns on me, and to be very clear, I was also with Black folks.

Arroyo-Montano, a community activist, Kathleen OToole, police officer and lawyer, and Ricardo Arroyo, a Boston city councilor, spoke about criminal justice and police reform at a virtual panel on Tuesday sponsored by the African and African Diaspora Studies Program and the Irish Studies Program.

Also on Tuesday, Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin was found guilty of third-degree murder, second-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter for the death of George Floyd. The verdict of this highly anticipated trial changed Tuesdays discussion, Arroyo-Montano said.

This panel wouldnt have been this panel, Arroyo-Montano said. This would have been a different moment.

In light of the Floyd protests, Arroyo-Montano said has seen more people recognize the impact of a police system powered by white supremacy and anti-blackness.

Those uprisings made me cautiously optimistic, Arroyo-Montano said. People were up in every state I saw a lot of participation from people who were saying enough is enough.

But Arroyo-Montano emphasized that conversations about the impact and traumatization of police brutality must continue.

OToole, BC 76, said she has seen policing evolve to some extent over the years, but that there is still significant room for improvement.

Yes, the last year has been particularly difficult, and I think it underscores the sense of urgency for all of us to undertake and to embrace more reform [and] more innovation in our police services, OToole said.

Arroyo, the first person of color to hold his position as city councilor of district five on the Boston City Council, said that people of color in the United States have often been taught to avoid making white people uncomfortable.

After Floyds death, Arroyo said he saw a noticeable shift in peoples abilities to have difficult conversations about race, aggressive policing, white supremacy, and oppression.

Ive seen more courage and more bravery in the way in which we talk about and handle these situations, Arroyo said.

Arroyo said he does not believe police make people feel safe or bring safety to neighborhoods.

And so our laws and what we do in this society often, is we criminalize poverty, addiction, mental health issues, Arroyo said.

Arroyo said he supports decreasing police interaction in neighborhoods and communities.

I dont think police interaction solves much, and I, you know, I struggle with what they do necessarily solve, but I certainly dont think that they solve issues with homelessness or mental health breakdowns or trauma or addiction issues, Arroyo said. I know they dont do that. And yet thats probably what they respond to the vast majority of the time.

Arroyo-Montano said that he supports defunding the police and reallocating resources toward people who are trained to help those in distress.

I am an abolitionist, Arroyo-Montano said. I do believe we need to defund the police. I think we need to reallocate.

OToole said that people should be intentional about reallocating resources.

I think we should be much more thoughtful about the way we allocate our resources, but I want to be certain that we dont just apply knee-jerk reactions and defund the police and cut their budgets by 50 percent, she said.

Everyone should come together with a community safety approach, rather than a policy approach, to harness resources and develop plans accordingly, OToole said.

Im just saying lets be really thoughtful so that when people do dial 911 we have an alternative for them, OToole said. If its not police, you know, lets be certain that we have the right systems in place before we make radical decisions that could actually cause greater harm than good.

In response to OTooles comment, Arroyo said that people need to focus on the reality that policing in the United States does not serve its citizens.

Its not for us, its not about us, its to control, Arroyo said. Its to deal with the reality that theres classism, theres racism in this country, theres hierarchies to that, and theres a specific control factor to ensuring that those things continue to exist unabated. And policing as it currently exists allows for that reality.

Arroyo said he believes reforming the system requires examining what the institution of policing does and reimagining budgets and systems to replace policing.

The people who are being defunded are not the police, according to Arroyo-Montano, but the people impacted by policing.

Right now, whos been defunded are the folks who work with addicts, teachers, schools have been defunded, Arroyo-Montano said. Community centers have been defunded.

Arroyo-Montano also said that Boston College itself has a history of racism, citing when the University denied the admission of two Black basketball recruitsElton Tyler and Jonathan DePinawho had already verbally committed to attend and passed minimum NCAA standards for eligibility in 1996.

It is important to have conversations about racism and be comfortable with the possibility of making someone else uncomfortable, according to Arroyo-Montano.

OToole said that it is important to recruit the right people for policing.

Unless you have a police service that reflects the community it serves, it will not be legitimate, it will not be credible, [and] it will not be effective, she said.

Featured Image by Amy Palmer / Heights Editor

The rest is here:

Panelists Talk Criminal Justice and Police Reform The Heights - The Heights

The Authoritarians War: Assessing Russian Intervention in the Syrian Civil War

By Connor Hirsch

Russian intervention in the Syrian Civil War braced the regime during its nadir and helped reestablish President Bashar al-Assads political dominance over much of Syria just two years later. Despite its importance, Russian intervention did not change the character of the counterinsurgency campaign. Rather, the similarities in Russian and Syrian approaches to counterinsurgency preserved Assads strategy and optimized Russian intervention, integrating formidable capabilities into an already brutal campaign. Leaders in Moscow and Damascus were aligned in their approaches. Effective patron-client politics facilitated strategic and tactical cooperation and enabled counterinsurgent forces to strike the insurgencies center of gravity by targeting Syrian civilians. Forced displacement and the intentional slaughter of noncombatants became a primary means for Russia and Syria to achieve key strategic objectives and turn the tide of the war. However, favorable short-term outcomes do not necessarily presage long-term success. The counterinsurgents punished civilians instead of addressing root causes. Assad has largely avoided addressing popular grievances and influential conditions and his brutality has left Syria ripe for insurgent exploitation. Although Assads short-term success seemingly demonstrates the efficacy of authoritarian approaches to counterinsurgency, the conflicts long-term outcomes remain unclear. As with all insurgencies and counterinsurgencies, it is essential to consider that the results of the Syrian Civil War may change over time.

Russias 2015 intervention proved a crucial turning point in the ongoing Syrian Civil War. While Syrian President Bashar al-Assads government appeared destined for collapse earlier that year, Russias deployment of weapons, air support, and specialists rejuvenated the regimes flagging counterinsurgency. This last-minute intervention helped Assads forces achieve military superiority over domestic rivals by the end of 2017. This article examines Russian and Syrian approaches to counterinsurgency, patron-client politics, and the strategic and tactical character of the Syrian Civil War from 2014when the rise of Islamist insurgents expanded the conflict to a transnational levelto 2017when the regime regained dominance over most Syrian battlefieldsthrough the end of 2020, when the regimes survival appeared all but assured.

In general, Russian intervention did not change the character of Assads counterinsurgency campaign. Russia and Syria have employed authoritarian approaches to counterinsurgency throughout their modern history. From Afghanistan to Chechnya, the Russians have intentionally punished civilians to undermine insurgent movements. Syria has also employed violent coercion against the Syrian population during campaigns against domestic rebel groups. The allies maintained these approaches throughout the Syrian Civil War.

Approach alignment fostered effective patron-client relations following Russian intervention. By embracing violence against civilians to extinguish popular support for the insurgencies, Russia and Syria reduced strategic friction and promoted tactical cooperation. This synergy allowed Russia to integrate deadlier capabilities into Assads already brutal campaign, inflict greater suffering upon the population, and ultimately turn the tide against the insurgents.

The short-term results may challenge the typical Western notion of good counterinsurgency. Russia and Syria have achieved notable tactical and operational successes and improved the regimes immediate strategic position while eschewing the population-centric principles that define the counterinsurgency doctrines of the United States and several European powers. Targeted violence against civilians has proven an effective short-term resolution to insurgency in Syria. The regimes short-term success may ignite debate about the most effective approach to counterinsurgency as a result. At the very least, the short-term outcomes of the Syrian Civil War demonstrate the advantages that authoritarian countries like Russia and Syria have over liberal democracies like the United States when waging counterinsurgency.

The long-term effects on Syrias internal stability are more difficult to discern. The counterinsurgents elected to approach the campaign by punishing civilians instead of addressing root causes. Assad largely ignored popular grievances through the end of 2020, while his heavy-handed actions have entrenched and exacerbated common drivers of insurgency. Although regime forces have regained control over much of Syrias territory and population, the country faces a long road to recovery. Many Syrians live in poverty and without access to basic services, while the remnants of insurgent groups still demonstrate potent military capabilities through attacks against regime forces and Syrian civilians. Despite the apparent efficacy of the counterinsurgency and favorable short-term results, it is essential to consider that the outcomes of the Russian intervention in Syria may change over time.

SYNERGISTIC AUTHORITARIAN APPROACHES TO COUNTERINSURGENCY

Permissive political and strategic cultures allow Russia and Syria to take authoritarian approaches to counterinsurgency campaigns. Many authoritarian regimes are largely unburdened by domestic and international judgement, enabling them to jettison concerns about appropriate use of force, legal norms, and political approval. The authoritarian approach permits counterinsurgents to attempt to resolve the wicked problems of insurgency with preponderant violence and cruelty.[1] Authoritarian synergy facilitated effective cooperation between Damascus and Moscow following Russian intervention in the Syrian Civil War.

Before and after Russian intervention, counterinsurgent forces used violence expressly to increase the costs for civilians supporting the insurgency or even simply living in rebel-controlled areas.[2] The continuity of violence against civilians demonstrates the operational freedom enjoyed by authoritarian regimes waging counterinsurgency. As leaders of two of the most authoritarian countries in the world,[3] Assad and Russian President Vladimir Putin were generally free to prosecute counterinsurgency as they saw fit. Although Assad espoused population-centric rhetoric about winning hearts and minds in 2015,[4] his words were duplicitous. Terrorizing, coercing, and massacring civilians remained integral to the counterinsurgency despite strategic shifts and evolutions in battlefield dynamics throughout the war.

Applying extreme violence against contested and insurgent-held areas has defined Syrias approach to counterinsurgency for decades. The regime kills rebel fighters and coerces the population to degrade bases of insurgent support and demonstrate its omnipotence. Both Hafez and Bashar al-Assad used sheer brutality to displace Syrians living in rebel-held areas during their respective campaigns against the Muslim Brotherhood in the early 1980s and opposition insurgents at the beginning of the Syrian Civil War.[5]

Brutalizing combatants and civilians alike remained the guiding principle of the younger Assads approach to counterinsurgency even as his strategy evolved throughout the conflict.[6] The regimes proclivity for indirect fire from massed artillery and restrained deployment of ground troops often decimated the population along with insurgents in urban areas.[7] In later years, the regime intentionally employed a myriad of coercive means against its own people to force civilians from rebel-held zones.[8] Assad intentionally bombed bakeries, hospitals, and schools to prevent insurgents from providing public services, drive Syrian civilians from rebel territory, and ultimately diminish popular support for opposition groups.

Russian counterinsurgency also generally shuns population-centric principles. Inherited from the Soviet approach to counterinsurgency in Afghanistan and honed during the Chechen Wars, the modern Russian approach relies heavily on air and artillery assets to inflict maximum suffering on rebels and local populations while limiting the exposure of infantry and mechanized units to close-quarter combat.[9] In Afghanistan, the Soviets sought to eliminate support for the Mujahedin insurgents by punishing rural Afghans. Soviet forces used violence as a tool of reprisal against populations suspected of supporting insurgents and intentionally destroyed economic and physical infrastructure in many communities across the country. The Afghan population suffered immensely, as Soviet counterinsurgency operations directly and indirectly killed over one million people and displaced over three million.[10]

Russia took a similar approach while waging counterinsurgency in Chechnya. During the Second Chechen War, Russian forces often encircled rebel-held areas before employing prolonged artillery bombardments to pound the enemy into surrender.[11] The Russians deployed overwhelming firepower against rebel positions during combat in Grozny and Komsomolskoye in 2000, and displayed little regard for killing or displacing civilians or destroying infrastructure. Both cities were depopulated and virtually obliterated during the fighting.[12]While the Russians took some steps to limit non-combatant attrition,[13] estimates still place the number of Chechen civilian casualties from 1994-2004 as high as 250,000 with around 300,000 more displaced. In fact, Russian forces were widely reported to have used cluster munitions and other banned weapons in populated areas.[14]

RUSSIAN AND SYRIAN COUNTERINSURGENCY STRATEGIES

The similar Russian and Syrian approaches to counterinsurgency allowed Assad to maintain his strategy following Russian intervention in the Syrian Civil War. Since the earliest days of the insurgency, the regime had followed the classic Syrian approach by pairing conventional military operations with punishment of populations in contested areas. Assads selective deployment of politically loyal military units, cultivation of supportive militia groups, and use of armored forces and indirect fire to clear and hold rebel population centers in 2011 and 2012 reflect the foundational elements of his fathers strategy against the Muslim Brotherhood during the uprising from 1979 to 1982.[15]During this campaign, the elder Assad relied on an Alawite-majority force while entrusting family members and close associates with military command to prevent defections. Hafez also cultivated a large and loyal paramilitary network, increasing the size of the counterinsurgencys fighting force and helping to counter the Muslim Brotherhood across the country. The regime used its loyal professional and militia forces to systematically clear insurgents from cities and hold on to the locality, but also displayed a propensity for using artillery to level urban areas when facing determined resistance. Notably, regime forces heavily bombarded Hama during the siege in 1982, killing many civilians and destroying much of the historic old city before retaking it.[16]

While Hafez decisively put down the Muslim Brotherhood, Bashar failed to reconcile the limitations of his available forces with his preferred strategic approach as the Syrian Civil War dragged on. Like his father, the younger Assad relied heavily on Alawites to form the core of the counterinsurgency, preventing mass defection but constraining the regime to using as little as one-third of its total military force in operations against insurgents.[17] It is difficult to ascertain the effect of combat attrition on regime forces because the government stopped publishing official figures at the end of 2012. However, the Syrian Arab Army had already suffered nearly 8,000 soldiers killed and an additional 30,500 wounded at that time, representing a sizable portion of Assads already reduced military.[18]

Selective deployment and combat attrition helped give loyalist militias prominent roles in the counterinsurgency, as Assad attempted to augment his limited professional combat forces with paramilitary fighters. This strategy decentralized the regimes control over counterinsurgent forces. As militias became enmeshed with army units, Assad sought to enhance operational capacity by empowering junior officers and militia commanders to pursue broad strategic goals independent of the Syrian Arab Armys chain of command.[19] Some militia groups used their operational freedom to massacre Sunni civilians.[20]

Assads selective deployment of Syrian Arab Army units hindered the counterinsurgencys ability to effectively execute clear and hold operations. Like his father, Assad became reliant on artillery and airpower to clear insurgents from population centers. This approach limited regime casualties but ultimately led to the large-scale destruction and depopulation of many urban zones.[21]In concert with militia atrocities, the regimes efforts to conduct clear and hold operations through air and artillery strikes contributed to the escalation of the insurgency.[22] Mass displacement from regime bombardments and paramilitary brutality compounded popular grievances, helped spread localized discontent across a greater geographic area, and prevented regime forces from establishing effective government control over the population. Opposition and jihadist insurgent groups benefitted from the regimes limited military capacity and violence against civilians to gain territory and build support.[23]

Early in 2015, Assad changed the counterinsurgencys strategy by replacing large maneuver operations against insurgents in population centers with more judicious campaigns designed to establish and maintain the regimes presence in key cities and the border areas. This new army in all corners strategy sought to preserve Syrias territorial integrity, assert regime control over the population, and project an image of political legitimacy domestically and internationally.[24] Moreover, the strategic shift indicated Assads acknowledgement of the inevitability of a prolonged and difficult struggle for survival. The regimes undermanned forces had become concentrated in the countrys south and west,[25] facilitating the emergence of extremist factionsincluding the Islamic Statewhich exploited the chaos to sweep through much of the country and push the regime to the brink by the end of 2014. Assad had even announced in early 2015 that a political resolution was necessary to conclude the conflict and that he was amenable to dialogue with insurgents.[26] The army and all corners strategy therefore represented a pragmatic alignment of ways and means to garner more favorable conditions for a political settlement.

Contemporaneously, Assad began working to rationalize his claims of political legitimacy and excuse his increasingly brutal tactics to the international community by casting Syrias insurgent movements as elements of a jihadist constellation and framing the counterinsurgency as a campaign against transnational terrorist groups. His efforts were effective, as Russia soon publicly announced military support for the regime while the discourse in the United States began to begrudgingly paint Assad favorably when contrasted with the Islamic State and al Qaeda affiliates.[27]

Assad did not replace the army in all corners strategy upon the arrival of Russian forces in Syria in 2015. Russias primary objective was not the immediate reconquest of the country, but rather to support Assads campaigns to recapture and defend key areas by providing the capabilities needed to gradually turn the tide in the regimes favor.[28] Moscow had assessed that ensuring Assads survival required military intervention and that a potential collapse would adversely affect Russian security interests. Given the unfavorable battlefield dynamics in 2015 and string of diplomatic failures, Russian planners deemed military intervention to be the only feasible resolution.[29] Ostensibly to roll back the rampant Islamic State, Russian forces formally entered the conflict to brace Assads regime and help expand his control over Syrias population and territory.[30]

Russias intervention assured Assads survival by bolstering the counterinsurgencys capabilities. Russian air assets and special forces augmented the Syrian Arab Army and loyal militia groups, which still served as the counterinsurgencys primary maneuver forces.[31] Almost immediately, Russian aircraft began targeting civilians to forcibly depopulate rebel-held areas, reportedly launching 1,292 combat flights against 1,623 targets in October 2015.[32]

Despite Moscows assertions that the intervention sought to destroy terrorist organizations in Syria, limited action against the Islamic State suggests that the counterinsurgents preferred to target more moderate opposition groups to reduce the number of politically viable competitors to the regime. Some reports indicate that Russian aircraft struck the Islamic State on just 26% of missions in the first quarter of 2016 and on just 17% of missions by the third quarter of that same year.[33] Instead, the counterinsurgency used Russian airpower to strike opposition positions in western Syria, reportedly targeting rebels around Aleppo, Idlib, and Homs more frequently than the Islamic State in Deir ez-Zor, even in the immediate wake of the ceasefire that began on February 27, 2016.[34] Human Rights Watch also accused the counterinsurgency of war crimes after airstrikes in Aleppo killed over 440 civilians in September and October 2016.[35]

The Russian military presence in Syria also shielded the regime from unilateral military intervention by foreign powers, who worried about escalation and potential confrontation with Russian forces.[36] Safe from meaningful Western reprisal, Assad increased his barbarism by unleashing cluster bombs, incendiary munitions, and poison gas upon Syrian civilians while targeting bakeries, hospitals, and schools.[37]

Although Russian intervention did not substantively alter Assads strategic approach to the war between 2015 and 2017, it gave him the necessary capabilities and security to ramp up the degradation of insurgent groups and coercion of civilian populations living under rebel control. Even by early 2016, Russian officials were pleased with the outcomes, believing the intervention had helped the regime gain control over more of Syrias territory and population at relatively minimal cost in Russian blood and treasure.[38]

RUSSIAN AND SYRIAN COUNTERINSURGENCY TACTICS

Congruent Russian and Syrian approaches to counterinsurgency allowed for tactical continuity following Russian intervention. Assads forces bombarded populated areas independent of operations against insurgents before and after the implementation of the army in all corners strategy. The counterinsurgency maintained the tactic after Russian intervention to forcibly displace civilians living under insurgent control.

Assads use of massed artillery against populated areas in rebel-held zones dates back to the 2012 siege of Homs, when regime forces encircled and bombarded the city for a month before sending infantry to systematically clear the remains.[39] Although pairing indirect fire from massed artillery with ground maneuvers brought operational success in the wars early stages, Assads forces revised their tactical approach after troop deficiencies ultimately voided the viability of the initial clear-and-hold strategy.[40] After first taking Homs in 2012, dwindling personnel led the regime to bombard civilians in opposition territory even though no ground troops were available to assault and occupy the zone.[41]

Assad has targeted civilians with great effect, employing cluster bombs, barrel bombs, and surface-to-surface ballistic missiles against populated insurgent territory, and specifically against nodes of infrastructure, to undermine insurgents ability to provide essential goods and services.[42] As large maneuver operations decreased under the more restrained army in all corners strategy, tactics designed to forcibly depopulate insurgent territory assumed greater prominence. In concert with targeted siege-and-starve operations and the selective use of chemical weapons, the regimes bombing of civilians in insurgent-held areas contributed to an enormous increase in civilian suffering.

Estimates of the number of displaced Syrians jumped from close to six-million in early 2013 to 11.5 million just over two years later. Of the 220,000 Syrians estimated to have been killed by early 2015, at least 76,000 were killed in 2014 alone.[43] The forced depopulation of insurgent territory helped the regime establish control over perhaps as much as 72% of Syrias remaining population by 2015, demonstrating progress towards Assads strategic goals of dominating Syrias human terrain and projecting political legitimacy by the time Russia intervened.[44]

Russian intervention enhanced the effectiveness of the counterinsurgencys tactics by providing greater capabilities for the recapture and defense of key locations and strikes against civilians in rebel-held areas. The first notable tactical improvement for the counterinsurgency was the superior coordination with fire support stemming from communication between Russian specialists embedded with regime forces and an integration center headquartered at Khmeimim Air Base near Latakia.[45]

Russian-led combined arms operations became integral to the counterinsurgencys efforts to win back territory. Russian specialists notably exploited human and signals intelligence and satellite imagery to direct a bombing campaign in support of regime ground forces battling to encircle Aleppo in mid-2016. Once the city had been surrounded, counterinsurgent airstrikes systematically destroyed rebel positions until resistance collapsed and the regime reclaimed the zone.[46] Throughout 2017, Russian and Syrian air assets provided crucial tactical support for Syrian ground forces fighting to recapture cities including Homs from opposition rebels and Palmyra and Deir ez-Zor from the Islamic State.[47]

The second key tactical improvement following Russian intervention was the counterinsurgencys enhanced capabilities when targeting civilians in rebel-held areas. While Russias intervention did not introduce new tactics for punishing civilians (regime hospital bombings date back to 2011, while Assads forces killed over 1,400 Syrians with sarin gas around Ghouta in 2013),[48] Russian capabilities and international political clout facilitated more brazen and efficient employment of the regimes brutality to make rebel-held areas essentially uninhabitable.

Although Moscow fervently denies such claims, international sources verified 172 attacks on hospitals or other medical facilities in the second half of 2016, 73 of which occurred in insurgent-controlled areas of Aleppo as counterinsurgent forces battled to reclaim it.[49] Russian air superiority also enabled the regimes use of sarin gas against civilians, notably in the town of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province in April 2017.[50]

OPERATIONAL AND TACTICAL SUCCESS

Throughout 2014 and much of 2015, the regime struggled at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels, leading observersincluding analysts in Moscowto assess that Assad faced a serious threat of defeat.[51] The troop deficiencies that unraveled Assads initial clear-and-hold strategy had also enabled the emergence of more numerous and powerful rebel factionsmost notably the Islamic Statewhich exploited the chaos and scant government presence in much of the country to grow into serious challengers throughout 2014.[52] Early the following year, the Islamic State conquered Palmyra while an extremist coalition led by Jahbat al-Nusra commenced an offensive in the countrys northwest. The head of Russias General Staff assessed that Assads regime controlled just 10% of Syrian territory in 2015 and was just months away from falling to the Islamic State.[53] While that claim may be dubious, it demonstrates Russias belief that Assad was at best navigating dangerous waters in the face of several strong insurgent movements.

Russian intervention helped turn the operational and tactical tides by providing counterinsurgent forces more capable means to degrade insurgent fighters and supportive populations. In the short-term, the intentional targeting of civilians often effectively separated the population from the insurgents either by forcibly depopulating the rebel-held zones or even turning Syrians against the rebels, who they blamed for their suffering at the hands of the regime.[54] Russian military and logistical capabilities also improved the counterinsurgencys combined arms operations by deploying more air assets and facilitating more effective communication between air and ground forces.[55]

Tactical and operational success defined the period of Russian intervention and made it a vital phase of the Syrian counterinsurgency. Superior capabilities and logistics improved tactics and operational art and steadied the regime during its nadir in 2015. Tactical improvements empowered a string of operational triumphs in subsequent years, including the recapture of Aleppo, Homs, Palmyra, and Deir ez-Zor, reducing opposition rebel territory to Idlib and a few small pockets in the west while virtually eradicating the Islamic States territory. By 2017, Russian support had helped Assad reassert himself as Syrias preeminent political leader. Assads political longevity seemed assured by the end of 2020 largely because the Russians backed the counterinsurgency through perhaps the most complex and violent years of the conflict.

However, Russian intervention was not solely responsible for the counterinsurgencys successes. Several antecedent conditions existing in Syria between 2014 and 2020 also contributed to the result. First, the U.S.-led coalition and U.S-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) shouldered substantial responsibility in the campaign against the Islamic State, which was perhaps Assads greatest threat at the time of Russian intervention. Although Assad excoriated coalition airstrikes against the Islamic State in Syria, the regime used the coalitions commitment to reallocate significant air assets deployed against Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor to strike rebel positions and civilians in Idlib, Daraa, and Hama.[56]

Second, many of the oppositions international backers began to sever ties as the regime gained momentum throughout 2017. That year, the United States canceled a Central Intelligence Agency program which had supported opposition insurgent groups against Assad since 2013.[57] Jordan also began pressuring Syrian rebels to relinquish the vital Nasib border crossing, which they had held since 2015.[58]

Finally, the insurgency in Syria was a splintered patchwork of diverse groups with differing objectives. The general lack of coordination and centralization between rebel elements led to fighting between groups and allowed the counterinsurgency to more effectively isolate and destroy insurgents.[59] While these conditions should not eclipse the significance of the tactical and operational successes which followed Russian intervention, their importance should be recognized in the context of the counterinsurgency environment.

APPROACH ALIGNMENT AND PATRON-CLIENT POLITICS

Russias successful intervention in the Syrian Civil War demonstrates the importance of alignment between host and expeditionary nations counterinsurgency approaches for both patron-client politics and campaign outcomes. By embracing authoritarian approaches to counterinsurgency, Russiathe patronand Syriathe clientavoided many of the pitfalls that can compromise counterinsurgency alliances. As a result, approach alignment and effective patron-client politics proved vital to the strategic, operational, and tactical cooperation that yielded favorable short-term results for Assads regime.

Misaligned counterinsurgency approaches can prevent even the most capable expeditionary powers from helping an allied host government to wage effective counterinsurgency. Although clients and patrons may broadly share the goal of defeating an insurgency, they can still possess fundamentally different interests and may not necessarily have consensus on their approach. Kings College Londons Walter Ladwig III relates the issue of patron-client politics in counterinsurgency to the classic principal-agent problem: divergent priorities can create friction between partners.[60] Disparate approaches to waging counterinsurgency can damage patron-client relations and inhibit strategic, operational, and tactical cooperation.

Recent American counterinsurgency expeditions demonstrate the potentially deleterious effects of misaligned approaches and ineffective patron-client politics in counterinsurgency alliances. Approach alignment is often overlooked or taken for granted in American expeditionary counterinsurgency planning.[61] As a result, the United States has seen several expeditionary counterinsurgency endeavors undermined by the divergent priorities and illiberal tendencies of the host government.

In American doctrine, expeditionary counterinsurgency operations work to confer legitimacy to the host government by preparing it to meet basic local expectations for acceptable governance.[62] However, host governments approaches and priorities often differ from Washingtons, leading to ineffective patron-client politics and impeding the United States expeditionary counterinsurgency efforts. Ladwig III notes that host governments in counterinsurgency warfare tend to have certain unscrupulous aspects which often fueled the insurgency in the first place.[63] Retired U.S. Marine Colonel T.X. Hammes contends that the United States insistence upon population-centric approaches to counterinsurgency can cause friction with host governments which often democratize slowly and may prefer more authoritarian measures during counterinsurgency campaigns.[64] In Iraq, Prime Minister Nouri al-Malikis sectarianism marginalized many Iraqi Sunni, which helped galvanize support for Sunni insurgencies like the Islamic State. Likewise, Afghan President Hamid Karzais cronyism largely alienated Afghanistans population from the counterinsurgency, diminishing popular support.[65] In both countries, misaligned approaches and priorities meant the counterinsurgency could not confer legitimacy to the host government, and thus could not achieve its strategic objectives.

In contrast to the United States recent expeditionary experiences, congruent Russian and Syrian approaches to counterinsurgency helped the allies largely avoid the principal-agent problem, foster effective patron-client politics, and achieve successful results in the Syrian Civil War. The two countries had few reservations about strategies of punishment, purposefully unleashing conventional and banned weapons against non-combatants to eliminate the insurgents sources of support. Effective patron-client politics facilitated Russian integration into Assads army in all corners strategy and allowed Russia to maintain a light footprint throughout its intervention. The counterinsurgency used preponderant aerial and artillery force to brutally demonstrate that the rebels could not provide effective security for the people, helping to reestablish Assads omnipotent image in the eyes of the population. The improvements in capabilities also led to tactical and operational successes which expanded Assads control over Syrias population and territory. As a result, even fervent supporters of political opposition begrudgingly accepted Assads leadership, if only as a means of survival.[66]

LINGERING STRATEGIC QUESTIONS

The outcomes at the strategic level are more ambiguous for the counterinsurgency. At first glance, operational and tactical success had mostly achieved the aims of the army in all corners strategy. The regime ended 2017 in control of the cities of Aleppo in the northwest and Qamishli in the northeast and within striking distance of Daraa in the southwest and Abu Kamal in the east.[67]

However, two notable challenges complicate assessment of the counterinsurgencys strategic results. First, the SDFs emergence as a domestic rival and Turkeys entrance into the conflict complicated Assads plans to regain control of Syria. While Assad was focused primarily in the west, the SDF had established control over northeast SyriaQamishli being the notable exceptionand had taken Raqqa and Syrias largest oil field during the campaign against the Islamic State.[68] Favoring decentralized governance, the predominantly Kurdish SDF proved unwilling to relinquish the de facto autonomy it had claimed, even when facing the threat of conflict with the regime.[69] Hundreds of Turkish soldiers had also entered Syrian territory in late 2017 to establish a buffer along the border zone in Idlib.[70] The involvement of powerful foreign states with diverse interests prevented Assad from merely pursuing further military action and forced another protraction in the conflict.

Second, the long-term effects of Assads brutality against civilians had transformed Syria into a fertile recruiting ground for extremist groups and opposition insurgencies.[71] The partnership with Russiaan infamous adversary of Islamist movementsfurther reduced the number of reconcilable rebels with whom the regime could hope to reach a political settlement.[72] The authoritarian approach to counterinsurgency and intentional slaughter of the population undoubtedly yielded tactical, operational, and even short-term strategic advantages while likely incurring long-term strategic costs. Such a tradeoff is common for counterinsurgents employing an authoritarian approach, as the reliance on coercion often precludes consideration of root causes and appropriate remedies while obfuscating the future price of brutality.[73]

SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM PROSPECTS FOR INSURGENCY IN SYRIA

The counterinsurgents authoritarian approach prioritized short-term stability over long-term sustainability. In the short-term, there can be little question that Russian intervention helped the counterinsurgency decimate opposition and extremist insurgents alike. The oppositions loss of Aleppo and Homs and the Islamic States loss of Palmyra and Deir ez-Zor left the insurgent groups with control over just a small share of Syrias population. Counterinsurgency scholar David Galula famously opined that insurgency is a war for the population,[74] and thus through forced displacement and improved tactical effectiveness, Assad and Russia managed to deprive the rebels of their center of gravity. As a result, Russian intervention may have catalyzed the inexorable decline of this iteration of opposition and extremist insurgents in Syria.

The short-term success of Assads authoritarian campaign is also notable because it demonstrates the potential efficacy of violent counterinsurgency while challenging the tenants of the oft-lauded population-centric approach. Russian and Syrian achievements support some scholarly arguments that brutality is central to effective counterinsurgency. International security scholar Jacqueline Hazelton notably contends that deliberate violence against civilians can be vital for governments seeking to defeat insurgencies.[75] By contrast, population-centric orthodoxy typically seeks to ameliorate the conditions that lead people to take up arms against their government.[76] Assads campaign suggests that such efforts may be needless. While it is almost certain that the regime will continue brutalizing Syrian civilians while waging counterinsurgency, future studies could assess the pervasiveness of authoritarian approaches globally, as governments seek short-term resolutions to insurgencies instead of long campaigns to establish human security, political participation, and economic vitality.

The long-term prospects for Syrias insurgents are more ambiguous precisely because the counterinsurgency focused on punishing and coercing civilians, rather than addressing root causes. Though many Arab Spring protesters in Syria did not initially call for Assads ouster, the regime did not attempt to treat root causes by meeting demands for political and economic reforms. Instead, Assads violent response to the demonstrations in 2011 sparked outright rebellion, facilitated easier recruitment for opposition insurgent groups, and accelerated extremist proselytization. The regimes subsequent reliance on Alawites and other Shia to staff the military entrenched sectarian divides that further alienated the Sunni majority, while the intentional slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Syrians ensures many will never accept a social contract with Assad.[77] Though the insurgents lost most of the cities, tens of thousands of internally displaced Syrians remain in refugee camps or detention centers with few prospects for political assimilation.[78]

Assads neglect of Syrias economic privation offers another grievance which insurgent movements could exploit in the future. Although the regime moved swiftly to rebuild power grids and attract foreign investment as it won back territory in 2017,[79] the United Nations estimated that 83% of Syrians lived below the poverty line two years later.[80] Rampant poverty is compounded by high inflation, which has reached historic levels. At points during 2020, the average Syrian could only afford just over two watermelons with one months wages.[81] Across regime-held territory, Syrians wait in line for diminishing amounts of increasingly expensive subsidized bread.[82]

Although successful Russian and Syrian counterinsurgency cooperation and Assads brutality may have suppressed insurgents in the short-term, the Syrians living in informal settlements and experiencing crushing poverty are ripe for incipient opposition and extremist ideas. The Islamic States massacre of nearly 40 regime soldiers near Deir ez-Zor on December 30, 2020 demonstrates the lingering will and capacity of Syrias insurgents.[83] Despite tactical and operational success following Russian intervention, Assads long-term position is far from unassailable.

[4] Bashar al-Assad, Syria's President Speaks: A Conversation With Bashar Al-Assad,Foreign Affairs94, no. 2 (2015): 64, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24483482.

[7] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 19-26.

[8] Kozak, An Army in All Corners, Institute for the Study of War: 11.

[11] Oliker, Return to Grozny, in Russia's Chechen Wars, 57-58.

[12] Oliker, Return to Grozny, in Russia's Chechen Wars, 79.

[13] Oliker, Return to Grozny, in Russia's Chechen Wars, 43, 58.

[15] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 10-19.

[16] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 10-12.

[17] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 14-15.

[18] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 28-29.

[19] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 29.

[20] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 21.

[21] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 19-20.

[22] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 9-10.

[24] Kozak, An Army in All Corners, Institute for the Study of War: 10-11.

[25] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 10.

[26] Al-Assad, Syria's President Speaks,Foreign Affairs.

[27] Kozak, An Army in All Corners, Institute for the Study of War: 9.

[29] Samuel Charap, Elina Treyger, and Edward Geist, Understanding Russia's Intervention in Syria (Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2019), 12, https://doi.org/10.7249/RR3180

[31] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[32] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[33] Daher, Three years later, Atlantic Council.

[37] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[39] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 15-16.

[40] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 16.

[41] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 20.

[42] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 24-25.

[44] Kozak, An Army in All Corners, Institute for the Study of War: 10-11.

[45] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[46] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[47] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[49] Czuperski et al., Breaking Aleppo, Atlantic Council.

[50] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[51] Charap et al., Understanding Russia's Intervention in Syria, 4.

[52] Kozak, An Army in All Corners, Institute for the Study of War: 10-11.

[53] Charap et al., Understanding Russia's Intervention in Syria, 4.

[54] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 20.

[55] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

The rest is here:

The Authoritarians' War: Assessing Russian Intervention in the Syrian Civil War - smallwarsjournal

The jury started deliberating in Derek Chauvin's murder trial, who faces three charges in the death of George Floyd. USA TODAY

MINNEAPOLIS Attorneys for the prosecution and defense in the murder trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin, charged in George Floyd's death,were presenting their closing arguments Monday, summarizing their respective evidence and witness testimony andtrying to focus jurors on the most important elements.

Prosecutor Steve Schleicher said Chauvin "chose pride over policing" last Memorial Day, calling Chauvin's knee on Floyds neck "unnecessary, gratuitous and disproportionate."

"And he did it on purpose. This was not an accident. He did not trip and fall and find himself on George Floyds neck," Schleicher said, adding,"Believe your eyes. What you saw, you saw."

Lead defense attorney Eric Nelson, meanwhile, urged jurors to take into account "the totality of the circumstances." He said focusing on the 9 minutes and 29 seconds Chauvin's knee was on Floyd's neck"ignores the previous 16 minutes and 59 seconds."

Assault or 'reasonable' policing? Takeaways from Derek Chauvin murder trial closing statements

Prosecution attorney Jerry Blackwell countered some of Nelson's arguments in his rebuttal andtold jurorsabout a46th witness, one more than the number of people who testified: "Common sense."

"You can believe your eyes, ladies and gentlemen," Blackwell said. "It was unreasonable use of force, it was homicide."

The prosecution rested its case last weekafter calling 38 witnesses and playing dozens of video clips over the course of 11 days. The defense rested Thursday after calling seven witnesses over two days.

Stay updated on the Derek Chauvin trial: Signup for text messages of key updates, follow USA TODAY Networkreporters on Twitter, orsubscribe to the DailyBriefing newsletter.

Latest updates:

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz cited the potential for "further civil unrest" following protests over the police shooting death of Daunte Wright and the anticipation of additional events following the Chauvin jury verdict in issuing a peacetime emergency declaration for seven Minnesota counties.

The action enables federal law enforcement agencies and police agencies from other states to assist Minnesota state agencies in quelling any violence.

Since Wright's April 11 death, "many Minnesotans have expressed their frustrations in a peaceful and constructive manner," wrote Walz. "However, some individuals have engaged in unlawful and dangerous activity, including looting and damaging public and private property."

He added, "Local and state resources have been fully deployed, but they are inadequate to address the threat."

Judge Peter Cahill dismissed the defense's request for a mistrial based on statements made Saturday by Rep. Maxine Waters, but said her comments could be grounds for the defense to appeal.

The California Democratjoined protests over the weekend in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, where shetold the press"we are looking for a guilty verdict" in Chauvin's trial.Waters encouraged demonstrators to "get more active,""more confrontational" and "to make sure that they know that we mean business"if Chauvin is acquitted.

"If nothing (happens), then we know ... we've got to not only stay in the streets, that we've got to fight for justice. That I am very hopeful, and I hope that we're going to get a verdict that is a guilty, guilty, guilty. And if we don't, we cannot go away," Waters said,according tovideoobtained by local CBS affiliate WCCO.

After attorneys presented theirclosing arguments,Cahill said protestersinfluenced by Waterscould get more confrontational if there is not a guilty verdict. He called some of the comments "abhorrent."

Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned,Cahill told Chauvin's attorney, Eric Nelson.

He added, I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case, especially in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law and to the judicial branch."

The judge denied Nelson's verbal motion for a mistrial, noting he trusted jurors are following his instructions to avoid all news about the trial.

"A congresswoman's opinion really doesn't matter a whole lot," Cahill said.

The protests followedtheshooting death of 20-year-oldBlack motorist Daunte Wrightin Brooklyn Center, a Minneapolis suburb,by former police officer Kim Potter during a traffic stop. She later resigned from the Brooklyn Center Police Department.

Derek Chauvin's defense attorney argued that Rep. Maxine Waters' comments regarding the trial could have been grounds for a mistrial. USA TODAY

Attorney Jerry Blackwell delivered the rebuttal for the state Monday afternoon, reviewing what he characterized as "stories" told by the defense to the jury.

He referred to trial testimony that in half or more cases where someone has died of insufficient oxygen, there's no sign of that in body tissues during autopsies. Blackwell also made a point of repeatedly noting the prosecution argument that "subdual, restraint and compression of the neck" caused Floyd's death.

And he sought to focus the jurors on testimony fromthe prosecution's star witness, Dr. Martin Tobin, an expert in the physiology of breathing. Tobin testified that a healthy person would have died if subjected to the same restraint and pressure as Floyd.

Of police officers who do not provide medical aid for a suspect who passes out under pressure by arresting officers, Nelsonsaid,"That's wrong."

Answering defense arguments that bystanders posed a potential threat to Chauvin and the other officers, Blackwell said the group, including young children, were "torn" between concern and inability to help Floyd, and respect for the Minneapolis Police Department.

"They didn't deserve to be called unruly, because they weren't," he said.

Blackwell also displayed for jurors an exhibit with one dot for each of the 17,026 days of George Floyd's life.

"He was living, he was breathing, he had a being, every day," despite the medical conditions and drug issues the defense argued caused his death. The difference, argued Blackwell, was that on the last day of Floyd's life, "deadly force was applied" by Chauvin.

Blackwell countered Nelson's argumentsthat Chauvin and other officers had to make quick decisions during the struggle saying, "There was no split seconds, there was no moment to moment."

Cahill interrupted Blackwell twice, once to tell him not to repeat subjective descriptions ofdefense arguments as "stories," and again to strike from the record a statement that the defense was "shading the truth."

However, Blackwell got the last word as he ended his rebuttal.

"You were told, for example, that Mr. Floyd died because his heart was too big," he said."The truth of the matter is that the reason George Floyd is dead is because Mr. Chauvin's heart was too small."

Chauvin took his face mask off during the first part of closing by lead defense attorney Eric Nelson, who took aim at the states case for about two and half hours before Judge Peter Cahill called for a lunch break.

Most of Nelsons argument focused on urging the jury to consider the totality of the events of the evening of May 25, 2020 not just the nine minutes and 29 seconds that the state argued is the heart of the case and the charges against Chauvin.

Nelson walked jurors through his views on the videos, police policies and cause of Floyds death.

"The proper analysis is to take those 9 minutes and 29 seconds and put it into the context of the totality of the circumstances. The proper analysis starts with what did the officers or what would a reasonable officer know at the time of dispatch," he said.

In this image from video, former Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin listens as his defense attorney Eric Nelson gives closing arguments as Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill preside Monday, April 19, 2021.(Photo: AP)

Nelson, who noted Floyds large size at over 200 pounds, said Chauvin followed the policies in place at the time of Floyds death, including the knee restraint he used something barred by Minneapolis police in the wake of Floyds death.

Nelson said Floyds death was "tragic," but argued Chauvin did not cause his death. He drew the jurys attention to Floyds history of drug use, including fentanyl and methamphetamine, and his heart problems.

Nelson also took aim at Dr. Martin Tobin, a pulmonologistand star witness for the state who testified that Floyd died of asphyxia, or low oxygen, because of the police restraint. Noting that Tobin had many hundreds hours to review videos and other evidence, Nelson argued Tobin was misleading the jury by giving an incomplete picture of the struggle. "His entire testimony is filled with theory, speculation, assumption, Nelson said.

On the toxicology, Nelson said it's clear that Floyd had taken drugs soon before the struggle. "For the medical experts to minimize the timing and the amount of illicit drugs that were found in Mr. Floyd's bloodstream, is just simply incredible to me, is incredible," he said.

After lunch, Nelson apologized yet again to the jury for the length of his argument and continued to argue that Floyd's death was "multifactorial."

"I would submit to you that it is nonsense to suggest none of these other factors had any role," Nelson said.

Nelson concluded by telling the jury that when they finish their "thorough, honest"analysis of all the evidence, they will conclude "the state has failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt."

"And, therefore, Mr. Chauvin should be found not guilty," Nelson said.

Closing arguments began in the trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin in the death of George Floyd. USA TODAY

Prosecutor Steve Schleicher gave the closing argument for the state Monday morning, repeating "9 minutes and 29 seconds" through his one-hour and 45-minute remarks.

"George Floyd's final words on May 25, 2020, were: 'Please, I can't breathe.' He asked for help with his very last breath," Schleicher said. "This was a call about a counterfeit $20 bill. All that was required was compassion."

Schleicher's argument evoked the testimony last week ofTobin, who described Floyds last minutes indetail, pointing out his scraped knuckles against the back tire of the police squad car. "He was trapped," Schleicher said."He was trapped with the unyielding pavement underneath him as unyielding as the men who held him down. Pushing him."

Calling Chauvins actions a "shocking abuse of police power," Schleicher recalled testimony from previous weeks horrified bystanders calling the police on the police, and the presence of a 9-year-old watching Floyd restrained under Chauvins knees.

Schleicher said Chauvin's actions were "not policing" but "an assault."

"This is not a prosecution of the police, its a prosecution of the defendant," he said. "And theres nothing worse for good police than bad police, who doesnt follow the rules, who doesnt follow training."

Schleicher reminded jurors Chauvin had hundreds of hours of training over his 19 years with the Minneapolis Police Department. Schleicher said Chauvin should have known how to handle someone in crisis, reminding jurors Floyd told police about his anxiety and claustrophobia. But just because he couldnt comply doesnt mean he was resisting, he said.

Schleicher told jurors Floyd did not die of a heart attack, drug overdose, "excited delirium" or carbon monoxide poisoning, as the defense has suggested. He told jurors that they must decide: "Would but for the defendant's actions, pushing him down, would George Floyd have died that day?"

He urged jurors to "use your common sense. Believe your eyes. What you saw, you saw."

In this image from video, prosecutor Steve Schleicher gives closing arguments as Hennepin County Judge PeterCahill presides Monday, April 19, 2021, in the trial of former Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin at the Hennepin County Courthouse in Minneapolis.(Photo: AP)

Using a chart and checklist, Schleicher walked jurors through the definitions and elements of second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. He reminded jurors of testimony and replayed video and provided still images to substantiate each element. As Schleicher spoke, Chauvin appeared to take notes on a yellow legal pad, as he has been doing for weeks. As did the jurors, who watched Schleicher attentively.

Schleicher wrapped up his argument with an emotional appear to jurors. "Random members of the community all converged by fate at one singe moment in time to witness something, to witness 9 minutes and 29 seconds of shocking abuse of authority, to watch a man die, and there was nothing they could do about it because they were powerless," Schleicher said."

"All they could do was watch and gather what they could, gather their memories, gather their thoughts and impressions, gather those precious recordings. And they gathered those up and they brought them here. ... They gave it to you, randomly selected people from the community."

In closing, Schleicher told jurors: "This isnt policing this is murder. The defendant is guilty of all three counts, all of them, and theres no excuse."

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Heres a breakdown of the Minnesota criminal charges against Derek Chauvin.

Second-degree murder is causing the death of a human being, without intent to cause that death, while committing or attempting to commit another felony. In the Chauvin case, the alleged felony was third-degree assault. Chauvin is charged with committing or intentionally aiding in commission of this crime.

To convict Chauvin on this count, Judge Peter Cahill told jurors Monday that they only must find that the former officer intended to commit an assault that could cause bodily harm, or intentionally aided in committing such an assault. "It is not necessary for the state to prove the defendant had an intent to kill George Floyd. But it must prove that the defendant committed, or attempted to commit, the underlying felony,"the judge said.

Cahill added that the state must prove that the assault either inflicted bodily harm on Floyd, or was intended to commit bodily harm.

Third-degree murder is unintentionally causing someones death by committing an act that is eminently dangerous to other persons while exhibiting a depraved mind, with reckless disregard for human life. Chauvin is accused of committing or intentionally aiding in the commission of this crime.

Under Minnesota law, an act that is eminently dangerous is one that "is highly likely to cause death,"Cahill told jurors. "The defendants act may not have been specifically intended to cause death,"and "it may not have been specifically directed at the person whose death occurred, but it must have been committed with a conscious indifference to the loss of life," the judge said.

Second-degree manslaughter is culpable negligence where a person creates an unreasonable riskand consciously takes the chance of causing death or great bodily harm to someone else. Chauvin is charged with committing or intentionally aiding in commission of this crime.

Culpable negligence means that Chauvin allegedly "created an unreasonable risk and consciously took a chance of causing death or great bodily harm,"Cahilltold jurors. "Culpable negligence is intentional conduct that the defendant may not have intended to be harmful, but that an ordinary and reasonably prudent person would recognize as having a strong probability of causing injury to others,"said the judge.

If convicted of the most serious charge, Chauvin faces 12 1/2 years or 150 months in prison under sentencing guidelines for a first-time offender. But, the prosecution argues there are aggravating factors that require a longer prison term. That means Chauvin may face longer than that sentence.

Over about two weeks last month, lawyers for the prosecution and defense quizzed potential jurors about their knowledge of Floyds death, their opinions of Chauvin, and their attitudes about police, racial injustice, and the protests and rioting that followed Floyds death.

Some of them questioned how much force was used against Floyd, who lay on the ground for more than nine minutes as Chauvin pressed his knee into Floyd's neck. Several believe the criminal justice system needs to be reformed. More than one questioned the movement to defund police departments. Discussing her opinion about Black Lives Matter, one woman responded, I am Black, and my life matters."

Before being selected, the jurors pledged to set their opinions aside. But their answers provide a glimpse into how they might respond to the evidence they heard over the past few weeks. Read more about the jurors here.

Agroup of people vandalized the former Northern California home of anexpert witness who testified for the defense, police said, throwinga pig's head on the front porch and blood splatter on the house.

The incident occurred in Santa Rosa, California, where retired police officer Barry Brodd once lived and worked. Brodd last week testified in Chauvin's trial, saying the former Minneapolis police officer was "justified" in his use of force against Floyd.

The Santa Rosa Police Department said Brodd no longer lives at the residence nor in California, but that, "It appears the suspects in this vandalism were targeting Mr. Brodd for his testimony."

Brodd was the first witness to say he believed that Chauvin was following proper police practice when he knelt on Floyd's neck. However, several Minneapolis police officers,including the police chief, along with local police trainers and national use-of-force experts, testified that Chauvin's actions were not justified. Read more here.

Ryan W. Miller

More than a hundred people gathered in George Floyd Square onSunday afternoon for a rally to show solidarity between the Black and Asian communities ahead of closing arguments.

Organizers advertised the event as "a safe space for sharing grief and also creating joy" during tense times in the city and dedicated it to Daunte Wright, the 20-year-old Black man who was fatally shot by a police officer during a traffic stop in nearby Brooklyn Center last week.

Tri Vo, 25, said he usually visits George Floyd Square when there are no crowds so he can reflect and because he feels that space is reserved for Black and indigenous people. Vo, a digital organizer with Southeast Asian Diaspora Project, said he came Sunday to help educate southeast Asians about "what their stake is in this." Read more.

Jurors must decide whether or not the government proved all of the elements of a given charge beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense bears no burden of proof, and Chauvin is deemed innocent unless convicted at trial.

The jurors will be sequestered during deliberations.The court will provide meals for the jurors and put them up for the night in a hotel, where security will be provided by marshals. The jurors are not allowed to discuss the case with anyone else, or even with each other when they're outside the deliberation room.

They are allowed to review any of the exhibits that were entered into evidence. They also are allowed to re-hear specific testimony from any of the witnesses. The jurors may send written messages out to the judge with any questions that arise.

"If I were you, I would plan for long (deliberations) and hope for short,"Cahill told jurors Thursday. More on how jury deliberations will work here.

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/04/19/derek-chauvin-trial-live-george-floyd-jury-closing-arguments/7123640002/

Read more from the original source:

Derek Chauvin trial closing statements: Prosecutors tell jurors to 'believe their eyes'; defense emphasizes 'totality of the circumstances' - USA...

Roger Asmar opened a Mexican seafood restaurant in Brooklyn in February last year only to shut down a month later when COVID-19 made indoor dining risky business.

The King of Fish known as El Rey de Pescado in Spanish reopened two months later at its Fifth Avenue location in Sunset Park but struggled to survive on take-out orders alone.

Then something unprecedented happened.

Last May, the citys Open Streets program began. That allowed eateries like Asmars to serve diners in the roadway each Friday, Saturday and Sunday through October, as barriers cordoned off three blocks of Fifth Avenue from vehicular traffic. Car-free zones emerged between 40th and 41st Streets, as well as 45th and 47th and the King flourished.

The Open Streets saved my business, my friend, Asmar told THE CITY.

Now, small businesses are hoping to repeat the success of last years program, said David Estrada, executive director of the Sunset Park Business Improvement District. And for the first time, new citywide rules will allow retail shopping in the roadway along with dining and drinking.

But the group faces a major hurdle: a lack of money.

Last year, and this year, not one penny of city funding has been dedicated to this time-consuming, intense task, Estrada said.

To turn roads into open spaces, Estrada explained, his group needs to raise enough money to pay staff to monitor the closures a feat not easily accomplished in the working-class, largely immigrant and Latino community slammed by the pandemic.

The Sunset Park BID started a GoFundMe campaign last week, aiming to reach a goal of $38,000 to fund 27 closures on Fridays and weekends, up from 17 last year.

As of Wednesday, more than $4,700 had been raised.

The BID is looking to open up more blocks for pedestrians, cyclists and diners this year, Estrada noted, enough to cover the north, south and central parts of Fifth Avenue within the groups geographic region.

Weve proposed to close 39th to 42nd, 45th to 47th, and 55th to 59th, he said.

Estrada noted that the job of street monitoring isnt just about safety. Theres all sorts of little things where you just need someone there to keep an eye on it, he said.

Councilmember Carlos Menchaca (D-Brooklyn), who represents Sunset Park, said he backs the Open Streets program but shares local concerns about its implementation, including the lack of financial support.

Especially for immigrant communities like Sunset Park, where language barriers already make it hard to understand city initiatives and policies, the city needs to be intentional about making sure every business can participate if it wants, Menchaca said.

Mayor Bill de Blasio announced last month that the Open Streets program would become permanent citywide. His Department of Transportation is accepting applications from community and business leaders to manage their Open Streets zones.

A slide accompanying the relaunch indicated that the 2021 program would provide better signage, new barriers and more support for community partners. But de Blasio has not detailed what form that support would take.

This years program also allows retail stores to sell products in Open Streets zones an expansion from last year when only restaurants were permitted to sell outdoors.

In his State of the City address in late January, de Blasio promised that equity and inclusion will be at the heart of the Open Streets expansion, with underserved neighborhoods getting new opportunities to participate.

A spokesperson for the mayor told THE CITY that the de Blasio administration is taking steps to ensure the program is feasible for the long haul and encouraged anyone interested in running an Open Streets program to fill out an application.

When open space mattered more than ever last year, New York City created the biggest Open Streets program in America, said the spokesperson, Mitch Schwartz. It was a success, and its here to stay. Were working hard to build a permanent program thats equitable, accessible and inclusive to give every New Yorker the space they deserve to enjoy the outdoors safely.

This years relaunch has not been smooth in some areas that have already reopened streets.

Last week, video footage captured a man stealing barricades in Brooklyns Greenpoint neighborhood before loading them in a delivery van, prompting a local volunteer group to suspend the areas Open Streets. Locals eventually uncovered five barricades on the shoreline of Newtown Creek, as well as two in the water, Gothamist reported.

For want of funding, the Sunset Park BID is going to start out scaled back.

The BID initially plans to open streets on Saturdays only, slated to begin on May 1 until enough money is raised to pay staff to add Fridays, followed by Sundays, Estrada said.

This year, Open Streets blocks will run between 39th and 42nd Street, 45th and 47th Street and 55th and 59th Street.

Asmar said only one day of open streets per week isnt going to cut it.

You have to take into consideration that a lot of times during the summer, it rains, he said. If it happens to be on a Saturday that it rains, and thats the day that we have the open street, then were screwed. No ones gonna sit outside.

Sam Goetz, owner of nearby caf and bar Judys, told THE CITY that Open Streets, along with the state authorizing the sale of take-out alcohol and de Blasio greenlighting outdoor seating, saved our bacon.

Goetz said he immediately changed his business model when the pandemic hit last year, launching a new website within two days of the states shutdown orders to become a to-go wine and craft beer bottle shop.

He hopes Open Streets continues as it did last year, but the insufficient funding is presenting a problem for the local business community, he said.

Unfortunately, when the city doesnt contribute anything at all, what youre going to do is youre going to give advantages to the richer BIDs throughout the city, Goetz said.

That puts Sunset Park businesses at a competitive disadvantage, he said, when neighborhoods nearby like Park Slope already have full-blown open streets.

I know the city is low on money, Goetz said. But I dont think they realize by setting the system up that theyre also going to put different neighborhoods on different footings against each other, which is kind of a bummer.

For now, he said hes trying to spread the word so people donate to the fundraiser.

De Blasio and the City Council Speaker Corey Johnson committed to setting aside 100 miles of streets for pedestrians and cyclists last year, but fell short with just 83.

The popular program has become the nations largest street-closure initiative of its kind, significantly altering the way New Yorkers imagined streets in the five boroughs while offering a much-needed reprieve from life indoors in the time of coronavirus.

But it has also exposed inequities, says the Open Streets Coalition, a bloc of 63 groups citywide that helped facilitate the program for the last 10 months.

While New York City is home to the biggest Open Street program in the nation, there are still neighborhoods that do not have access to this valuable program, the coalition wrote to the mayor days before his relaunch announcement last month. Communities such as the South Bronx and the North Shore of Staten Island still lack corridor-wide Open Streets.

The coalition which includes Transportation Alternatives, a nonprofit advocating for cyclists, pedestrians and public-transit users followed up with a critique of Open Streets earlier this month, noting that de Blasio doubled-down on the community group model, rather than relying upon the NYC DOT, to select and operate areas for Open Streets.

In the long run, we believe that this model is unsustainable and inequitable, the coalition wrote, noting the numerous burdens placed on volunteer organizers.

Open Streets groups need a dedicated stream of city funding to hire staff that can be fairly compensated, the coalition continued.

Sign up and get the latest stories from THE CITY delivered to you each morning

Read this article:

De Blasios Open Streets Closed to Ailing Businesses Scraping to Raise Cash - THE CITY

The $4.75 trillion wellness industry is all around us, Deepak Chopra would argue.

Its in the air you breathe, the trees in your backyard, the spa with a garden, even right in your pocket. And if you dont see it all those places just yet, you will soon.

Thats because the health guruspiritual adviser to Oprah Winfrey, founder of the humanitarian- and wellness-oriented Chopra Foundation, integrative medicine physician, and author of 90-plus bookssees wellness as an interconnected web of digital tools, individual soul-searching, and interpersonal experiences.

A relaxing massage at Chopra retreat

Source: Chopra

His work has him engaging in all of those fronts. During the pandemic hes organizedtwice-monthly group retreats at luxury resort Civana, where participants convene in the town of Carefree, Ariz.,for six days to rid their bodies of toxins and learn to tap into primordial sound meditation. (Sometimes he makes a personal appearance; other times he leaves the program in the hands of resort physicians.)

In Januaryhe releasedDigital Deepak, which uses artificial intelligence to offer spiritual guidance that feels like its coming straight from the master himself. For $70 a year,his Chopra app is putting meditation and self-care onto small screens everywhere; it came out in August on the Apple Store with Android still to come.

All this makes Chopra the leading authority on what wellness travel looks like amid the pandemicwhen we all need itbut may not be traveling muchand how it is poised to evolve in the near future.

Traveling in nature is one way to help build mental resiliency, Chopra says.

Photographer: massimo colombo/Moment RF

Some travelers will flock to the usual spotsthe Miravals and Canyon Ranchesto lose the weight theyve gained during the pandemic, but Chopra believes that more will seek out experiences that relate to spirituality instead. Of course people want to reinvent their bodies and resurrect their souls, Chopra says. But theyre looking for a reconnection to existence.

In the future well see travel combine wellness with exploring nature in all its amazing diversity: birdwatching, walking through rainforests, connecting with the life in the savannah, spiritual sites like Bali, he says. Youre going to see an influx of wellness travel for more than one reason.

All this relates to holistic mental health and building mental resiliency, Chopra says. In the last year, he says, the people whove found acceptance and opportunityrather than feelings of grief and losswere divided by their awareness and interest in fundamental reality or spirituality.

Experiences that connect us to nature, that assert our place in the world, and link us to others, he adds, are what make us mentally fit, helping us become accepting of challenges and able to grow in our personal and professional lives.

Attendees at one of Chopras retreats.

Source: Chopra

More from

Group travel amid a pandemic? Choprassold-out retreats, at Civana and elsewhere,illustrate that theres an appetite for itone thatwill likely grow in step with vaccinations and the rest of the travel industry.

Travelers are not just looking to shrink they're waistlines, either. Theyre looking to engage holistically with the world around them. That explains why some of the ideas that took shape in 2020greater awareness for climate change and the positive environmental impacts of staying home, an urgency around social and economic justice issues, the inequities of global health careare being incorporated into the way we think and talk about wellness. What we need now is collective conversation, Chopra says. This pandemic has given us an opportunity to create a more peaceful, healthy, and joyful world, but we have to rethink everything.

The best way for that to happen, he argues, is through the kind of intentional human connection that happens in intimate group settings, removed from the stresses and anxieties of our day-to-day. The retreats at Civana includeAyurvedic spa treatments as well as health consultations, meditation classes, and whole health education" classes;another, at the Fairmont Mayakoba in Mexico, helps participants find themselveswith the help ofPranayama breathwork and Chakra toning.

Trying to connect over Zoom is "like trying to eat a meal by eating the menu, Chopra says.

Photographer: LeoPatrizi/Getty Images

When people are in contact with each other, Chopra says, it influences and strengthens our limbic, or emotional, brain. Examples of that include real physical contact like that of a mother and baby, hugs, embraces, and even direct eye contact, he adds.

Exercising your limbic systema set of brain structures that includes your hypothalamus, frontal lobe, and hippocampus, all responsible for regulating memory, emotion, and behaviorcomes with many benefits.When your limbic system feels disconnected from others you feel depressed, he says. And if you feel connected with societies and communities, there is something that happens called limbic resonance, which decreases inflammation and anxiety.

None of this, he explains, can be accomplished over Zoom. Its like trying to eat a meal by eating the menu, he says. The menu gives you an idea what it tastes like, but you need to be given the actual meal.

Kyoto, Japan, is on Chopra's spiritual bucket list.

Photographer: Anton Petrus/Moment RF

Each trip you take doesntneedto be builtaround spa services and meditation classes, but Chopra encouragestravelers to prioritize places that reduce their existing anxieties rather than add to them. Every vacation needs to be a restoration of the spirit, he says.

That means a repudiation of overly commercial destinations, which lead people to end up even more burnt out than when they left. If he were to build a spiritual bucket list, the places on it would be Kyoto and the islands off of Japan, Indonesia, and the islands of the South Pacific. These are the types of places, he says, that dont steal your attention to a consumer product or service. They invite your attention because you fall in love with the experience itself.(Most of these remain closed to a majority of international travelers, so plan well ahead.)

Shiratani Unsui Gorge, Yakushima Island,Japan.

Photographer: Ippei Naoi/Moment RF

Its not just that these destinations are more focused on shrines than shopping. Theyre also places to slow down, intentionally focus your senses, and restore a practice of mindfulness. When is the last time you listened to a song and wondered when it would end, or read a poem and wondered when it would finish?Chopra asks.Thats our attention span now. We read emails and speak to people and gobble sandwiches at the same time. Were addicted to technology.

Luckily, its possible to find these types of restorative experiencesin your own backyard, whether you live inthe Pacific Northwest or in Queensland, Australia.

But these days, the anxieties around travel are greater and more complicated than ever before, as people navigate vaccination requirements, Covid caseloads, border policies, and frequently changing rules and guidance.

For that, Chopra turns to a tried-and-true mantraone that hes told his children daily throughout their lives. Find your moksha,he says, employing the Sanskrit word for freedom or liberation.

Make today more uncertain than yesterday, he continues. Once you live with uncertainty, nothing ever goes wrong.

Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal.

More here:

Deepak Chopra Predicts The Future of Wellness Travel After Covid - Bloomberg

Congratulations to all the 2021 College of Arts and Sciences teaching and research awards winners! These teaching recognitions honor faculty whose distinguished performance in classroom teaching is exemplified by their ability to educate and motivate students to develop the full range of their intellectual talents, while the research and creative activity awards recognize graduate faculty for preeminent achievement in research or creative activities that demonstrate originality and distinction.

Learn more about the award recipients:

In his teaching philosophy, Dr. Paul Davis writes, My courses are aimed to be mind-expanding, challenge assumptions, induce critical thinking, and yet be arming students for a successful future in a world that values productivity, outcomes, and competition. Students write that Davis teaching is infectious and inspiring and opens possibilities and instills purpose, inspiring confidence in them that they carry with them as the proceed with their education and careers. He takes genuine interest in students and the academic development and prepares his courses with thought-provoking material, integrative group work, and challenging exams that require high levels of critical thinking but also help students experience and internalize very difficult material.

As a mentor, Davis not only provides valuable advice on how students can succeed, he gets to know individual students abilities, strengths and characteristics. Harim Won writes that his mentorship goes far beyond just developing students skills in the laboratory, as they were encouraged to publicly present their work and prepared to submit competitive applications to scholarship competitions and leading professional programs in the country. Students who have worked in his lab have earned an amazing number of university and national awards including: 6 students selected as the outstanding major in biology, biotechnology, chemistry; 5 lab members placed at Harvard as the next place of training; 4 Nebraska Academy of Science awardees; 3 Goldwater scholars; 2 commencement speakers; 1 Fulbright recipient; and multiple student award recipients at UNOs Research and Creative activity Fair.

Dr. Claudia Garcia best sums up Davis abilities as a teacher: Not only is Dr. Davis one of the most dedicated teachers I have ever met, but also his commitment to students springs from a deep calling to serve others. Dr. Davis dedication to teaching goes beyond his role as a professor and is integrated into the ethical worldview that permeates his words, attitudes, and actions inside and outside of the classroom.

Dr. Samantha Ammons compares her teaching of sociology to teaching painting, whereby she provides students with the materials, different lenses or gazes a student can adopt, the challenges and advantages of each lens, and a demonstration of proper technique. The end result, she writes, is that everyone learns together, yet what emerges at the end of the semester is different for every student and she admits that she has changed as well. Nothing is as it was.

Ammons department chair, Dr. Daniel Hawkins, wrote that her teaching is characterized by seemingly oppositional values: intentional and passionate. She is intentional in how she designs her classes to optimize opportunities for her students to become passionate about the material, which is the source of her inspiration to students. Student letters support this observation. Students write how Ammons teaches them understand a problem they need to understand the problem. She challenges students to make connections between course content and everyday life, and that, in the end, how important it is that students learn more than just answers to questions by engaging with the questions to develop their own ideas. Ammons students observe that in her classes learning is enjoyable because she has a contagious enthusiasm that inspires excitement.

Ammons cares about her students, recognizes their needs, and helps them achieve their goals. Sometimes we dont acknowledge enough the teachers who quietly and reliably teach their students exactly what they need to know; who deal with student issues compassionately and effectively without drama; and who empower their students to discover and get to where they need to be in school and in life. Ammons is precisely this kind of teacher.

Dr. Bob Darcy is an outstanding teacher. He has written two teaching philosophiesone practical, one etherealin which his goal to help students both learn and discover. Teaching literature, he writes, is not about relating data or information per se, but about getting students acquainted with their own ability to ferret out a thought from the briar patches of their own minds, with his ultimate goal to use literature to prepare students for all the terrible complexities life will have in store for them.

He treats students with respect and his student testimonials reflect Darcys passion and professionalism...respect for students...his passion for Shakespeare. One student wrote that after receiving a C- on her first paper, Darcy worked with her to recognize and address the serious problems with her paper that she admits needed correcting. She explains this experience not only made her a better writer; it helped her understand the importance of visiting a professors office, noting that had he not been the understanding, compassionate, interested, dedicated and kind professor he is she probably would have withdrawn from the class in a move that would have changed her life (she ended up an English major). Students write that they consider it a privilege to take his class and observe that his classes are among the most memorable.

Perhaps one of Darcys colleagues explains the key to his success with students: Bob does an excellent job of responding to, validating, and evaluating students observations and orchestrating them (even if hes not in complete agreement) into an overarching understanding of the texts richness and complexity. Darcy has a remarkable ability to encourage, respect, and validate students, reflecting an exceptional level student-focused teaching.

Dr. Katie Shirazi joined the Biology Department as a full-time instructor in 2016 shortly after receiving her PhD in Medical Microbiology and Immunology from Creighton University. In her role, Shirazi teaches courses that support UNO's pre-health students, namely Biology I, Human Physiology and Anatomy I and II, and the Biology Department's 2000 level Microbiology class. Chair of UNO's Biology Department, Dr. LaReesa Wolfenbarger, says that Shirazi's teaching and mentoring impacts well over 500 students a year. Even before the current pandemic, Wolfenbarger called Shirazi's teaching "innovative in her use of dynamic, active exercises, including online polls, short skits, [and] supporting video content."

Of her own teaching philosophy, Shirazi states, "I do my best to stay up to date on the most cutting-edge technologies so that I may discuss them in my courses, and when appropriate I have my students utilize web-based and computer-based applications." Furthermore, she says, "I help my students understand the relationship between their coursework and society by including case studies with real life scenarios in my lectures. I also do my best to impress upon them that what they learn in my courses applies to many aspects of their lives such as their health and their impact on society and the environment."

Students agree. Former student Cristina Franco says, "Professor Shirazi wants absolutely nothing but to see her students succeed and will do anything to her fullest ability to achieve that."

This award is just the latest in a series of accolades Shirazi has accumulated here at UNO, including curricular grants and the 2019 Award in appreciation of leadership and collaboration for the UNO and UNMC Building Excellence in Academics through STEM (uBEATS) program.

Elisha Novak teaches both SOC 2800 Major Social Issues and sections of SOC 3300 Sociology of Gender and has since 2015. Novak is a long-time UNO Maverick, having first received her BA in Foreign Languages with a Spanish major and minors in Latino and Latin American Studies and Womens Studies (now Womens and Gender Studies). She received her MA in Sociology from UNO in 2012 and has taught at the community college, state college, and regional university levels.

Novak states in her teaching philosophy that I like to think of myself as an applied sociologist and strive to help my students apply sociology. After receiving her BA degree, Novak worked for several area non-profits including Justice for Our Neighbors and the Juan Diego Center as well as holding a position as Special Assistant to the Mayor, working with South Omaha Urban Affairs and Community Engagement. She brings these experiences as an applied sociologist into the classroom, and it has a profound effect on students.

One quality great college instructors share is the ability to develop a following, and Novak is no exception to this. One of her student nominators states that she enjoyed Novaks course on gender, immigration, and employment so much that she sought out Novak the following year to take another course with her. Another student nominator was moved by Novak's energy to pursue a minor in Sociology. Department chair Dr. Daniel Hawkins confirms this by stating in his letter, "I am inevitably contacted by at least one or two students at the end of each semester who are considering majoring or minoring in Sociology because of their experience in her class."

Hawkins continues by saying Novak is a wonderful departmental citizen, contributing to the departments assessment efforts and pedagogical improvementsall above and beyond the service expectations for a part-time instructor. Her teaching is also informed by her ongoing active research interests in immigration, human trafficking, and gender and social inequality.

Most importantly, Novaks passion for her subject matter is matched by her empathy for students. When one student faced a required work-related trip in the middle of a semester, she was not only willing to help me make sure I could complete my assignments, but she was also genuinely excited for my opportunity to go on such a trip. Another student faced with personal issues says, Ms. Novak made sure I was doing well, not only in the course, but in my personal life as well. And finally, one student nominator says, [a]ddled with anxiety during 2020s tumult, Professor Novak responded to my concerned emails with great rapidity, care, and empathy.

Dr. Ryan Wong conducts research at the frontier of biology and neuroscience and focuses on what remains elusive to researchers: how the genetic make-up of individuals interacts and causes the variation in individual traits. Wong studies stress and stress coping mechanisms in animals, with two broad themes: 1) identify the neural and molecular mechanisms underlying stress coping styles, and 2) identify the effects of stress coping and stimuli valence on cognitive biases [e.g. learning and memory] and associated neural and molecular mechanisms. The Zebra fish is his research organism.

To this end, his research lab has allowed him to collect behavioral data for research leading to multiple scientific peer-reviewed publications per year. He has multiple grant awards from the most competitive grant agencies, NIH and NSF (including a prestigious NSF Faculty Early Career Development Award) totaling over $1.5 million. Such funding indicates the valuable contributions his research has for society. Wongs research is internationally recognized and scholars from around the country write how they look forward to seeing the results Wongs future research.

Dr. LaReesa Wolfenbarger writes: Dr. Wong is an outstanding researcher who has a distinguished record of excellence. The quality of his work is exceptional and the value of his research significantly increases our fundamental knowledge of the challenging connections and interactions between genetics and observable traits in organisms. The results of his research translate to biomedical applications that will enhance human health and wellbeing.

Dr. Ramazan Kln, writes that the research questions he engages in are at the intersection of comparative politics and international relations, focusing on the role of religion in politics. Since receiving his Ph.D. in 2008, he has written or co-written two peer-reviewed published by Cambridge University Press, over 10 peer-reviewed articles (two of which earned awards at outstanding papers at the American Political Science Association), and composed over a dozen review essays and book reviews, among other aspects of scholarship and public engagement.

He is also editor of Siyasa, an on-line form for opinion and background pieces on Middle East politics. In addition, he has received over $450,000 in collaborative research grants and $18,000 in individual research grants. He has reviewed more than 100 article manuscripts and 10 book manuscripts and chaired more than 20 sessions at professional conferences.

His colleague from the University of Washington writes that Kln is a leading scholar of religion and politics, in particular on issues related to a states relations with minority and religious communities. Clearly Kln has accumulated an outstanding record of scholarship that is richly deserving of this award.

Go here to read the rest:

Celebrating CAS Faculty Award Winners 2021 | College of Arts and Sciences - University of Nebraska Omaha