tag:theconversation.com,2011:/id/topics/michael-flynn-36165/articlesMichael Flynn – The Conversation2019-04-22T10:46:53Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1157512019-04-22T10:46:53Z2019-04-22T10:46:53ZDid Trump obstruct justice? 5 questions Congress must answer<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/270155/original/file-20190419-28113-ql6bg6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Pages from Robert Mueller's final report on the special counsel investigation into Donald Trump, which show heavy redaction by the Department of Justice.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Trump-Russia-Probe/c3fab27e4a864872b0262e5e3677e9e6/1/0">AP Photo/Jon Elswick</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>“If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President of the United States did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. … However, we are unable to reach that judgment.”</p>
<p>That was <a href="https://www.docdroid.net/STViT5K/mueller-report-volume-2.pdf#page=7">special counsel Robert Mueller’s blunt conclusion</a> about whether President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice. It’s found early in Mueller’s report of his <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/russia-probe-timeline-moscow-mueller/story?id=57427441">22-month investigation</a> into potentially criminal aspects of Donald Trump’s campaign and presidency.</p>
<p>Mueller’s <a href="https://graphics.axios.com/docs/mueller-report.pdf">full report</a> – <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/22/us/politics/mueller-report.html">submitted to the Department of Justice</a> on March 22 and published online with redactions on April 19 – highlights 10 areas in which the president may have committed obstruction of justice. I’ve read this 400-page document closely, and judging as a <a href="https://law.unlv.edu/faculty/david-orentlicher">law professor and former elected official</a>, I find multiple episodes that describe possible crimes. </p>
<p>These include: firing FBI Director James Comey, who was overseeing an investigation into possible collusion between Trump’s 2016 campaign and the Russian government; attempting to curtail the special counsel’s investigation and fire Mueller; and making statements that could have discouraged former campaign aides from testifying truthfully.</p>
<p>After reviewing all Mueller’s evidence, Attorney General William Barr determined that the president did not obstruct justice. But Mueller concluded that he could <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/03/24/us/politics/barr-letter-mueller-report.html#g-page-3">neither charge nor exonerate Trump</a>, and indicated that Congress should consider the evidence.</p>
<p>Here’s how lawmakers will determine whether Trump committed a crime.</p>
<h2>1. Did Trump act ‘corruptly’?</h2>
<p>According to <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1505">federal law</a>, obstruction occurs when a person tries to impede or influence a trial, investigation or other official proceeding with threats or corrupt intent. Bribing a judge and destroying evidence are classic examples of obstruction.</p>
<p>Other actions may constitute obstruction, depending on the context. The law requires that there be both an intent to obstruct and that the subject acted, as Mueller writes, “in a manner that is <em>likely</em> to obstruct justice.”</p>
<p>For example, when national security adviser Michael Flynn became a target in the FBI’s investigation of Russian election interference, Trump on Feb. 14, 2017 held a <a href="https://www.docdroid.net/STViT5K/mueller-report-volume-2.pdf#page=45">private meeting with Comey</a> in the Oval Office. </p>
<p>There, according to Comey, he said, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” </p>
<p>Soon after, Trump <a href="https://www.cnn.com/specials/politics/james-comey-firing">fired Comey</a>. Flynn ultimately <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/01/politics/michael-flynn-charged/index.html">pleaded guilty</a> of lying to the FBI about his conversation with Russia’s ambassador and is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/us/politics/michael-flynn-sentencing.html">awaiting sentencing</a>.</p>
<p>These episodes would <a href="https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/26/mueller-trump-obstruction-of-justice-russia-216532">constitute obstruction of justice</a> if Trump pressured and then fired Comey for “<a href="https://www.lawfareblog.com/was-firing-james-comey-obstruction-justice">corrupt</a>” – meaning willfully improper – reasons, and if these actions were likely to impede the FBI’s investigation.</p>
<h2>2. Did Trump have criminal intent?</h2>
<p>Determining intent is tricky for prosecutors. It requires them to make a subjective judgment about the suspect’s state of mind. </p>
<p>If Trump fired Comey in an effort to prevent the FBI from discovering incriminating information about him or his campaign, that would be “corrupt.”</p>
<p>Other reasons would not rise to the level of corrupt intent.</p>
<p>Mueller found that a key factor for Trump’s dismissal of Comey appears to have been concern that the FBI’s investigation was casting a cloud over his presidency and hurting his ability to govern. As president, Trump has the executive power to choose the FBI director he thinks is best suited to the job.</p>
<p>Congress will apply this “corrupt intent” standard to all the incidents of possible obstruction outlined in Mueller’s report.</p>
<h2>3. Was interference likely?</h2>
<p>Assessing whether a given action is “likely” to interfere in an investigation is a more objective determination.</p>
<p>The Mueller report is unambiguous about the negative implications of Trump’s discussion with Comey about “letting [Flynn] go.” </p>
<p>“The circumstances of the conversation show that the President was asking Comey to close the FBI’s investigation into Flynn,” it <a href="https://www.docdroid.net/STViT5K/mueller-report-volume-2.pdf#page=50">reads</a>, citing Trump’s insistence on meeting alone with Comey as evidence that the president “did not want anyone else to hear” him requesting that a federal inquiry be terminated.</p>
<p>Mueller also concludes that Trump’s expressions of “hope” would reasonably be understood as a directive when issued by a president to his subordinate. </p>
<h2>4. Is the sum greater than its parts?</h2>
<p>Sometimes a single action or statement that alone does not constitute an illegal act may demonstrate obstruction of justice when viewed alongside other incidents, because it creates a pattern of “corrupt” behavior.</p>
<p>Trump’s behavior toward Comey, for example, looks most damning when viewed alongside his many efforts to block the special counsel’s work. </p>
<p>Those include Trump’s <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mueller-report-white-house-counsel-don-mcgahn-refused-trump-order-to-fire-mueller-wary-of-saturday-night-massacre/">request to White House counsel Don McGahn</a> to have Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein <a href="https://www.docdroid.net/STViT5K/mueller-report-volume-2.pdf#page=85">fire Mueller</a>. That happened in May 2017, once it became <a href="https://www.docdroid.net/STViT5K/mueller-report-volume-2.pdf#page=94">clear</a> that the special counsel would be investigating Trump for obstruction of justice. </p>
<p>Trump also pushed former Attorney General Jeff Sessions to <a href="https://www.docdroid.net/STViT5K/mueller-report-volume-2.pdf#page=98">take charge of the Mueller investigation</a>, from which he had previously <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/02/us/politics/jeff-sessions-russia-trump-investigation-democrats.html">recused himself</a> citing conflict of interest, and asking Sessions to narrow its scope.</p>
<p>These episodes are just a few of the the dozen or so incidents that, together, indicate Donald Trump may have conspired to obstruct justice in 2017 and 2018.</p>
<h2>5. Can obstruction occur if collusion didn’t?</h2>
<p>In defending the president, Attorney General Barr has pointed to one important factor: Mueller found <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/03/24/us/politics/barr-letter-mueller-report.html">insufficient evidence</a> to conclude that Trump ever colluded with Russia, which would have been illegal.</p>
<p>Legally, however, obstruction can occur even in the absence of an underlying crime. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/270153/original/file-20190419-28103-9y35g8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/270153/original/file-20190419-28103-9y35g8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/270153/original/file-20190419-28103-9y35g8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/270153/original/file-20190419-28103-9y35g8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/270153/original/file-20190419-28103-9y35g8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/270153/original/file-20190419-28103-9y35g8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/270153/original/file-20190419-28103-9y35g8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/270153/original/file-20190419-28103-9y35g8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Trump has repeatedly insisted, ‘No collusion. No obstruction.’ But the law says otherwise.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Trump/04a0546062d84ce098dbdf40468a5c87/16/0">AP Photo/Andrew Harnik</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Trump could have interfered in the FBI and special counsel investigations not to protect himself from collusion charges but to avoid scrutiny of his financial relationships with Russia or to protect members of his family or inner circle. </p>
<p>Six Trump staffers were <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/21/us/mueller-trump-charges.html">indicted during Mueller’s investigation</a>.</p>
<h2>Trump’s verdict will come in 2020</h2>
<p>The president has celebrated the Mueller report’s release as the <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/04/18/before-mueller-report-donald-trump-again-denounces-russia-hoax/3505336002/">end</a> of federal investigations into his administration.</p>
<p>But congressional inquiries into the president <a href="https://theconversation.com/mueller-report-how-congress-can-and-will-follow-up-on-an-incomplete-and-redacted-document-115686">are just beginning</a>. And further investigation might find evidence of other kinds of presidential misconduct.</p>
<p>In his report, Mueller wrote that Congress may decide to apply obstruction statutes to the president “in accordance with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.”</p>
<p>Committing obstruction of justice or other misconduct may constitute the kind of “high crime or misdemeanor” necessary to <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-happens-next-with-the-mueller-report-3-essential-reads-115765">start impeachment proceedings</a>. Several Democratic lawmakers have now called for impeachment. So far, however, House leadership shows <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/18/democrats-impeachment-mueller-trump-1282488">little appetite</a> for impeachment, which would need bipartisan support in the Republican-led Senate to succeed in removing Trump from office. </p>
<p>Absent irrefutable new evidence of criminality that changes the minds of Republican lawmakers and voters, the American public will render its verdict on Trump’s presidency in November 2020.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/115751/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Orentlicher is a former state representative and is active in Democratic politics. </span></em></p>Mueller’s report describes more than a dozen times Trump may have broken the law. Here’s how Congress will decide whether the president obstructed justice during federal probes into his presidency.David Orentlicher, Professor of Law and Co-Director, Health Law Program, University of Nevada, Las VegasLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1156862019-04-18T23:12:45Z2019-04-18T23:12:45ZMueller report: How Congress can and will follow up on an incomplete and redacted document<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/270077/original/file-20190418-28084-1jkig0m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Morning clouds cover Capitol Hill in Washington, April 12, 2019</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Washington-Daily-Life-Congress/2c211910907843349a17e76c9f7ba756/29/0">AP/J. Scott Applewhite</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="http://time.com/5567077/mueller-report-release/">release on April 18 of a redacted version of the Mueller report</a> came after two years of allegations, speculation and insinuation – but not a lot of official information about what really happened between the Trump campaign and Russia. </p>
<p>Nor had there been much light shed on whether the president tried to obstruct the investigation into his campaign.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20190418155122/https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf">report</a> prepared by <a href="https://www.justice.gov/sco">special counsel Robert Mueller</a> and issued by the Justice Department provided greater detail about those questions. And it offered more information about Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. </p>
<p>The Trump administration will want to argue that <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/18/trump-allies-dismiss-mueller-report-details-claim-total-vindication.html">the release of the Mueller report is the end of investigating</a> the Russia scandal. </p>
<p>On the contrary, the version of the report released is only the start of wide-ranging and intensive House investigations. </p>
<p>I served as <a href="http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=about.viewContributors&bioid=75">special deputy chief counsel of the House Iran-contra investigation</a> of the Reagan administration. We did <a href="https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.31210016413021;view=1up;seq=3">months of hearings</a> on the type of material that is either incomplete or redacted, as today’s Congress will find, in the Mueller report.</p>
<p>Here are some of the ways the House will likely follow up with more investigation. </p>
<h2>1. Bring in witnesses to testify</h2>
<p>The House will call some of the witnesses mentioned in the report for their full story, not just their cameo appearance in this incomplete report. </p>
<p>For example, <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/4/18/18411170/mueller-report-release-doj-trump-mcgahn-flynn">the report has the public’s first account</a> from Michael T. Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser. So, there are a number of contacts mentioned for the first time on the public record between Flynn and Russia that in my reading consistently demonstrate Trump’s partiality to Putin and Russia. </p>
<p>But, until we get a House public hearing with Flynn as a witness, we will not know the full story. </p>
<p>Why did Trump have such a strong bond with Putin? Did Trump have a personal reason, not some foreign policy reason, to favor Russia? Why did Trump push Flynn to be favorable to Russia? </p>
<p>The report does not say. </p>
<p>With Flynn, as with many others, the report is the start, not the finish, of getting the full story.</p>
<h2>2. Intelligence committee investigation</h2>
<p>Attorney General Barr has announced that a <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/17/politics/redacted-mueller-report-congress/index.html">“less redacted” version</a> is, or will be, prepared for a few congressional figures. Presumably he means that the classified parts of the report that describe secret intelligence, which have been redacted, will be shown to the congressional leadership. </p>
<p>But, the leadership cannot itself undertake an investigation. </p>
<p>This is the kind of material that normally goes to the entire <a href="https://intelligence.house.gov/">House Intelligence Committee</a>. That committee can follow up with demands for documents and closed hearings. And that committee has the trusted expertise to determine that the conclusions of their inquiry can be made public, either via open hearings or by report to the House and the public. </p>
<p>The committee could determine what is actually known by investigators about how Russia viewed Trump and what Russia may have done that secured Trump’s favor.</p>
<h2>3. Release grand jury information</h2>
<p>Furthermore, the report redacts not just classified information, but grand jury information as well. And Barr may well have omitted, rather than redacted, invaluable grand jury evidence, especially documents. </p>
<p>These could be released by the attorney general to Congress with a court order under what is called <a href="https://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/frcrimp/rule6/">Federal Criminal Rule 6(e)</a>. </p>
<p>Barr <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/william-barr-house-appropriations-hearing_n_5ca7a84be4b0a00f6d3f77e8">refused at congressional hearings</a> to seek such an order. But, under sufficient pressure from Congress – against the background of a public that wants the full report and the full story – he could reconsider. </p>
<p>In the Watergate scandal, the prosecutors got <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1974/01/23/archives/the-nixon-inquiry-exceptions-to-grand-jury-secrecy-prosecution.html">exactly such a court order</a> so they could make invaluable evidence available to the House Judiciary Committee.</p>
<h2>4. Limit what’s limited by ‘HOM’</h2>
<p>There is a great deal of key material redacted in the report with Barr’s label, “HOM” or “<a href="http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04/the-most-redacted-sections-of-the-mueller-report.html">Harm to Ongoing Matter</a>.” That means the redacted material likely relates to an ongoing investigation by law enforcement.</p>
<p>This appears to have been done with a very broad brush. Under pressure from the House, backed by the public, this could be treated by Barr with a fine scalpel instead.</p>
<p>For example, one of the most promising avenues to investigate is the potential overlap between Russia’s attempts to help Trump, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/27/us/politics/assange-timed-wikileaks-release-of-democratic-emails-to-harm-hillary-clinton.html">WikiLeaks’ dissemination of material embarrassing to Hillary Clinton</a>, and <a href="https://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-democratic-convention-2016-live-donald-trump-invites-russia-to-hack-1469636224-htmlstory.html">Trump’s requests for help</a> in making material damaging to Clinton public. Who can forget Trump shouting, “<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-wikileaks-campaign-speeches-julian-assange-2017-11">I love WikiLeaks</a>”? </p>
<p>Yet, Barr’s broad-brush redactions wipe out a whole section on WikiLeaks. Presumably Barr is saying, by this redaction, that the case against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is an <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/17/politics/assange-justice-department/index.html">ongoing matter</a>. </p>
<p>As the recent arrest of Assange makes clear, there is currently an investigation into his actions by the U.S., which has <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-assange/u-s-charges-assange-after-london-arrest-ends-seven-years-in-ecuador-embassy-idUSKCN1RN10R">charged him with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion</a>. That means that WikiLeaks’ interaction with the Trump campaign is not the heart of that judicial matter. Rather, the heart is about Assange working with hackers who stole the damaging material. </p>
<p>So the House should be allowed to pursue the part – WikiLeaks and its interactions with the Trump campaign – which is central to the House’s concerns but peripheral to prosecutors of Assange.</p>
<h2>5. Documents, documents, documents</h2>
<p>Finally, this is just Mueller’s report. Behind it is much more that would be of vital interest to congressional investigators and the public. </p>
<p>This 400-plus page report is not the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-trump-and-barr-could-stretch-claims-of-executive-privilege-and-grand-jury-secrecy-114166">underlying information alluded to in the report</a>, like copies of emails or other documents, that provides broader information about so many matters. </p>
<p>The House has every reason to seek and to receive the underlying information.</p>
<p>These various examples are just the beginning of what the House can seek to find as it takes off from the incomplete and redacted Mueller report. </p>
<p>When I was an attorney for the <a href="https://www.brown.edu/Research/Understanding_the_Iran_Contra_Affair/thehearings.php">House Iran-contra Committee</a>, we received far more encouragement and cooperation from independent counsel <a href="https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/">Lawrence Walsh</a> than is promised by Barr. And we went on to dig up striking material during months of hearings. </p>
<p>I believe the House will now pick up where the Department of Justice has left off.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/115686/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charles Tiefer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Mueller report is out, heavily redacted and the investigative materials it’s based on aren’t public. That’s where Congress comes in, writes a former House counsel. Now they can investigate.Charles Tiefer, Professor of law, University of BaltimoreLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1122762019-02-22T23:12:26Z2019-02-22T23:12:26ZWhy proposals to sell nuclear reactors to Saudi Arabia raise red flags<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/260460/original/file-20190222-195861-1fyoxnd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Saudi Arabia has many possible motives for pursuing nuclear power.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/nuclear-power-plant-by-night-190788197?src=nq1h28czRqWpBfF9AMU-GQ-1-76">TTstudio/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>According to a congressional report, a <a href="http://ip3international.com/">group that includes former senior U.S. government officials</a> is lobbying to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/top-trump-appointees-promoted-selling-nuclear-power-plants-to-saudi-arabia-over-objections-from-national-security-officials-house-democratic-report-says/2019/02/19/6a719762-3456-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html?utm_term=.d3c35345c906">sell nuclear power plants to Saudi Arabia</a>. As an expert focusing on the Middle East and the <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=UaJkFIoAAAAJ&hl=en">spread of nuclear weapons</a>, I believe these efforts raise important legal, economic and strategic concerns.</p>
<p>It is understandable that the Trump administration might want to support the U.S. nuclear industry, which is <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-demise-of-us-nuclear-power-in-4-charts-98817">shrinking at home</a>. However, the <a href="https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5743865/House-Oversight-Whistleblowers-Saudi-Nuclear.pdf">congressional report</a> raised concerns that the group seeking to make the sale may have have sought to carry it out without going through the process required under U.S. law. Doing so could give Saudi Arabia U.S. nuclear technology without appropriate guarantees that it would not be used for nuclear weapons in the future.</p>
<h2>A competitive global market</h2>
<p>Exporting nuclear technology is lucrative, and many U.S. policymakers have long <a href="https://www.thirdway.org/report/getting-back-in-the-game-a-strategy-to-boost-american-nuclear-exports">believed</a> that it promotes U.S. foreign policy interests. However, the international market is <a href="https://www.worldfinance.com/markets/nuclear-power-continues-its-decline-as-renewable-alternatives-steam-ahead">shrinking</a>, and competition between suppliers is stiff. </p>
<p>Private U.S. nuclear companies have trouble competing against state-supported international suppliers in Russia and China. These companies offer complete construction and operation packages with attractive financing options. Russia, for example, is willing to accept spent fuel from the reactor it supplies, relieving host countries of the need to manage nuclear waste. And China can offer lower construction costs. </p>
<p>Saudi Arabia declared in 2011 that it planned to spend over US$80 billion to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/saudi-nuclear-idAFLDE75004Q20110601">construct 16 reactors</a>, and U.S. companies want to provide them. Many U.S. officials see the decadeslong relationships involved in a nuclear sale as an opportunity to influence Riyadh’s nuclear future and preserve U.S. influence in the Saudi kingdom.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/260463/original/file-20190222-195876-ilvh5l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/260463/original/file-20190222-195876-ilvh5l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/260463/original/file-20190222-195876-ilvh5l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260463/original/file-20190222-195876-ilvh5l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260463/original/file-20190222-195876-ilvh5l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260463/original/file-20190222-195876-ilvh5l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260463/original/file-20190222-195876-ilvh5l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260463/original/file-20190222-195876-ilvh5l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Of the 56 new reactors under construction worldwide, 39 are in Asia.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/iaea-releases-country-nuclear-power-profiles-2017">IAEA</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why does Saudi Arabia want nuclear power?</h2>
<p>With the world’s second-largest known petroleum reserves, abundant untapped supplies of natural gas and high potential for solar energy, why is Saudi Arabia shopping for nuclear power? Some of its motives are benign, but others are worrisome. </p>
<p>First, nuclear energy would allow the Saudis to increase their fossil fuel exports. About one-third of the kingdom’s daily oil production is consumed domestically at subsidized prices; substituting nuclear energy domestically would free up this petroleum for export at market prices. </p>
<p>Saudi Arabia is also the <a href="https://www.albawaba.com/business/saudi-arabia-desalination-plants-red-sea-coast-1077706">largest producer of desalinated water</a> in the world. Ninety percent of its drinking water is desalinated, a process that burns approximately 15 percent of the 9.8 million barrels of oil it produces daily. Nuclear power could meet some of this demand.</p>
<p>Saudi leaders have also expressed clear interest in establishing parity with Iran’s nuclear program. In a March 2018 interview, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/saudi-crown-prince-talks-to-60-minutes/">warned</a>, “Without a doubt, if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible.” </p>
<p>As a member in good standing of the <a href="https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/npt/text">Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons</a>, Saudi Arabia has pledged not to develop or acquire nuclear weapons, and is entitled to engage in peaceful nuclear trade. Such commerce could include acquiring technology to <a href="https://tutorials.nti.org/nuclear-101/uranium-enrichment/">enrich uranium</a> or separate plutonium from spent nuclear fuel. These systems can be used both to produce fuel for civilian nuclear reactors and to make key materials for nuclear weapons.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7F545WlUO9Y?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Adel Al-Jubeir, Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the U.S., discusses his government’s concern about Iran’s nuclear program.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>US nuclear trade regulations</h2>
<p>Under the <a href="https://legcounsel.house.gov/Comps/Atomic%20Energy%20Act%20Of%201954.pdf">U.S. Atomic Energy Act</a>, before American companies can compete to export nuclear reactors to Saudi Arabia, Washington and Riyadh must conclude a nuclear cooperation agreement, and the U.S. government must submit it to Congress. Unless Congress adopts a joint resolution within 90 days disapproving the agreement, it is approved. The United States currently has <a href="https://www.state.gov/t/isn/rls/fs/2017/266975.htm">23 nuclear cooperation agreements</a> in force, including Middle Eastern countries such as Egypt (approved in 1981), Turkey (2008) and the United Arab Emirates (2009). </p>
<p>The Atomic Energy Act requires countries seeking to purchase U.S. nuclear technology to make legally binding commitments that they will not use those materials and equipment for nuclear weapons, and to place them under International Atomic Energy Agency <a href="https://www.iaea.org/topics/basics-of-iaea-safeguards">safeguards</a>. It also mandates that the United States must approve any uranium enrichment or plutonium separation activities involving U.S. technologies and materials, in order to prevent countries from diverting them to weapons use. </p>
<p>American nuclear suppliers claim that these strict conditions and time-consuming legal requirements <a href="https://www.pillsburylaw.com/images/content/3/3/v2/332/NuclearExportControls.pdf">put them at a competitive disadvantage</a>. But those conditions exist to prevent countries from misusing U.S. technology for nuclear weapons. I find it alarming that according to the House report, White House officials may have attempted to bypass or sidestep these conditions – potentially enriching themselves in the process.</p>
<p>According to the congressional report, within days of President Trump’s inauguration, senior U.S. officials were promoting an initiative to transfer nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia, without either concluding a nuclear cooperation agreement and submitting it to Congress or involving key government agencies, such as the Department of Energy or the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. One key advocate for this so-called “<a href="http://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/rngs/TEST-TEST/010051ZP4H5/pdf-redacted.pdf">Marshall Plan” for nuclear reactors in the Middle East</a> was then-national security adviser Michael Flynn, who reportedly <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/flynn-backed-plan-transfer-nuclear-tech-saudis-may-have-broken-n973021">served as an adviser</a> to a subsidiary of IP3, the firm that devised this plan, while he was advising Trump’s presidential campaign.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/260461/original/file-20190222-195876-7vowa1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/260461/original/file-20190222-195876-7vowa1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/260461/original/file-20190222-195876-7vowa1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260461/original/file-20190222-195876-7vowa1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260461/original/file-20190222-195876-7vowa1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260461/original/file-20190222-195876-7vowa1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260461/original/file-20190222-195876-7vowa1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260461/original/file-20190222-195876-7vowa1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">President Donald Trump, accompanied by national security adviser Michael Flynn and senior adviser Jared Kushner, speaks on the phone with King of Saudi Arabia Salman bin Abd al-Aziz Al Saud shortly after taking office, Jan. 29, 2017.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Trump-Saudi-Arabia/03aa15ac350c4078a87c62dffd753cbf/4/0">AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The promoters of the plan also reportedly proposed to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-flynn-nuclear-exclusive/exclusive-mideast-nuclear-plan-backers-bragged-of-support-of-top-trump-aide-flynn-idUSKBN1DV5Z6">sidestep U.S. sanctions against Russia</a> by partnering with Russian companies – which impose less stringent restrictions on nuclear exports – to sell reactors to Saudi Arabia. </p>
<p>Flynn resigned soon afterward and now is cooperating with the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 campaign. But IP3 access to the White House persists: According to press reports, President Trump met with representatives of U.S. industry, a meeting organized by IP3 to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/top-trump-appointees-promoted-selling-nuclear-power-plants-to-saudi-arabia-over-objections-from-national-security-officials-house-democratic-report-says/2019/02/19/6a719762-3456-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html?utm_term=.b90ee7dfbc6d">discuss nuclear exports to Saudi Arabia</a> as recently as mid-February 2019. </p>
<h2>Rules for a Saudi nuclear deal</h2>
<p>Saudi leaders have <a href="http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-o-s/saudi-arabia.aspx">scaled back</a> their planned purchases and now only expect to build two reactors. If the Trump administration continues to pursue nuclear exports to Riyadh, I believe it should negotiate a nuclear cooperation agreement with the Kingdom as required by U.S. law, and also take extra steps to reduce nuclear proliferation risks. </p>
<p>This should include requiring the Saudis to adopt the International Atomic Energy Agency’s <a href="https://www.iaea.org/topics/additional-protocol">Additional Protocol</a>, a safeguards agreement that give the agency additional tools to verify that all nuclear materials in the kingdom are being used peacefully. The agreement should also require Saudi Arabia to acquire nuclear fuel from foreign suppliers, and export the reactor spent fuel for storage abroad. These conditions would diminish justification for uranium enrichment or opportunities for plutonium reprocessing for weapons. </p>
<p>The United States has played a leadership role in preventing nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, one of the world’s most volatile regions. There is much more at stake here than profit, and legal tools exist to ensure that nuclear exports do not add fuel to the Middle East fire.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/112276/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chen Kane receives funding from the US Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration.</span></em></p>Exporting nuclear technology is lucrative, but without strict safeguards, buyers could divert it into bomb programs. Why is Saudi Arabia shopping for nuclear power, and should the US provide it?Chen Kane, Director, Middle East Nonproliferation Program, Middlebury Institute, MiddleburyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1076882019-01-31T11:42:59Z2019-01-31T11:42:59ZThe new Congress likely won’t impeach Trump and remove him from office – here’s why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250083/original/file-20181211-76971-1em45kb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The line of succession works like this: If Trump is removed from office, Pence takes over. If both Trump and Pence go, Pelosi would take over. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Evan Vucci</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Removing a president from office is a two-step process. The first step is impeachment. That’s when members of the House indict, or charge, the president with an impeachable offense. Impeachment does not remove the president from office. That happens only if a second step is taken and the president is convicted of the alleged crimes.</em></p>
<p><em>Jacob Neiheisel, an associate professor at the University at Buffalo, SUNY, answers five questions about how impeachment works – and why we’re unlikely to see President Donald Trump removed from office.</em></p>
<p><strong>1. What sort of crime can lead to impeachment?</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript">The U.S. Constitution</a> states that the president can be removed from office after being both impeached and convicted for “Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Let’s consider each of these offenses.</p>
<p>Treason is notoriously difficult to prove, and is narrowly construed. For example, Aaron Burr – a former vice president – was allegedly involved in a plot to gather a force to create a separate nation on some of the lands that would eventually be obtained through the Louisiana Purchase. Part of the alleged plot involved encouraging western states to join him in this endeavor, and he planned to ask Spain and Britain for help. As president, Thomas Jefferson was convinced that Burr himself constituted a threat to the republic and used the incident to go after him. Yet absent witness testimony to the effect that Burr had committed an act of war against the United States, <a href="https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-great-trial-that-tested-the-constitutions-treason-clause">the jury in his treason trial quickly acquitted him of any wrongdoing</a>.</p>
<p>So what about bribery? To date, no president has been charged with this crime. Could Trump be the first? Some have suggested that Trump’s apparent offer to pardon Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn could be <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-robert-mueller-could-be-considering-bribery-charges/2018/03/29/2e4a60cc-336a-11e8-94fa-32d48460b955_story.html?utm_term=.b773ebfec603">construed as bribery</a>. However, it seems a stretch considering <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/the-supreme-courts-bribery-blessing-mcdonnell-decision">the Supreme Court has tightened the federal definition of bribery in recent years</a>. That said, impeachment is, at heart, a political process, not a legal one – so I wouldn’t entirely rule it out.</p>
<p>What exactly constitutes a “high crime” or “misdemeanor” has always been open to interpretation, but one thing is clear – partisan politics plays a role.</p>
<p>Scholars argue that Andrew Johnson, the first American president to be impeached, was targeted because of his “soft” approach to states of the former <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/title/high-crimes-and-misdemeanors-the-impeachment-and-trial-of-andrew-johnson/oclc/891416341&referer=brief_results">Confederacy during Reconstruction</a>. The <a href="https://www.nps.gov/articles/why-was-andrew-johnson-impeached.htm">official reason</a> was his violation of the <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tenure-of-Office-Act">Tenure of Office Act</a>, a law that was later declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. </p>
<p>Articles of impeachment were brought against Bill Clinton for perjury, or lying under oath, and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/politics/obstruction-of-justice-explained-russia-investigation.html">obstruction of justice</a>, but there is little doubt that <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/title/impeaching-clinton-partisan-strife-on-capitol-hill/oclc/607068161">a Republican desire to weaken Clinton’s presidency was behind the charges</a>. </p>
<p>Even <a href="http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed65.asp">Alexander Hamilton</a> expected the process of impeachment to be overtly political. And President Gerald Ford put the matter bluntly when he described an impeachable offense as “whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.”</p>
<p><strong>2. How does the process work?</strong></p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/98-806.pdf">process usually begins</a> when a member of the House brings forth articles of impeachment. Last year, five Democrats in the House <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-democrats-introduce-impeachment-articles-against-trump-n821156">did just that</a>, and U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman, a Democrat from California, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/impeachment-pretense-11546805677">reintroduced articles of impeachment</a> against Trump in January 2019. </p>
<p>Next comes a vote on the articles of impeachment by the House Judiciary Committee. The Judiciary Committee can choose to investigate the matter – or opt out, as they did in the case of the Clinton impeachment. </p>
<p>With or without an investigation, the committee can recommend for or against impeachment. Either way, their recommendation isn’t binding – meaning the House can vote to impeach over their recommendation. The current chair of the judiciary committee, New York Democrat Jerry Nadler, is taking a <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jerry-nadler-vows-strong-oversight-of-the-trump-administration-reiterates-caution-on-impeachment/">“wait and see”</a> approach to the idea of impeachment.</p>
<p>Next comes a vote in the full House, with only a simple majority required.</p>
<p>If the House votes to impeach, the case is referred to the Senate for trial. The trial runs much like a criminal case, and witnesses can be called on either side. A supermajority, or two-thirds, of the Senate then has to vote to convict and remove the president from office. </p>
<p>Although two presidents, Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, have been impeached by the House, both avoided a conviction in the Senate and removal from office. </p>
<p>A common misconception is that the Supreme Court plays a major role in the proceedings. The chief justice does preside over impeachment trials in the Senate, but that is the court’s only role.</p>
<p><strong>3. When the Republicans held the majority in the House and Senate, Trump was essentially bulletproof. How will that change now that the Democrats have a majority in the House after the 2018 midterms?</strong></p>
<p>A Democratic-led House could certainly move to impeach the president, but any efforts to remove Trump from office would have to contend with the fact that the Senate is still in Republican hands. Democratic leaders in the House know this, of course, which likely explains their reluctance to take a firm stance on the matter. Reticence on the part of party leaders, however, has not prevented some members from pushing in that direction.</p>
<p>For example, U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib said of the newly elected 116th Congress, “We’re gonna go in there and we’re gonna impeach the mother—.” </p>
<p>The articles of impeachment against Trump might look remarkably similar to those levied against Nixon and Clinton. The <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/15/politics/cohen-articles-of-impeachment/index.html">articles of impeachment drawn up by Democrats in November 2017</a> – articles that were recently reintroduced in the House – accuse the president of obstruction of justice related to the firing of FBI director James Comey, undermining the independence of the federal judiciary, accepting emoluments from a foreign government and other charges. </p>
<p>Although it is possible that Republican members of the Senate could join with Democrats in calling for Trump’s removal, as we saw happen in the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/watergate/articles/072874-1.htm">run-up to Nixon’s resignation</a> over the Watergate scandal, today’s polarized political environment makes such an occurrence unlikely absent clear and convincing evidence of major wrongdoing. </p>
<p>While Nixon’s impeachment was likely inevitable, with Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress in 1974, today substantial Republican defections from Trump would be essential to any movement toward impeachment. </p>
<p>Currently, there are 53 Republicans in the Senate. That means that 20 Republicans would have to join with all of the Democrats and Independents in the Senate in order to remove the president from office. </p>
<p><strong>4. If the president is removed, who takes over? What would happen if the vice president was also implicated in the president’s crime?</strong></p>
<p>If President Trump was removed from office, Vice President Mike Pence would be immediately sworn in. In the unlikely event that both the president and the vice president are impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi would become president – but its hard to imagine Republicans in the House allowing this to happen.</p>
<p><strong>5. Can officers other than the president be impeached?</strong></p>
<p>Absolutely. In fact, 15 federal judges have been impeached, although only eight have been removed from the bench. The most recent example was in 2010 when federal <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/us/politics/09judge.html">Judge G. Thomas Porteous was found guilty</a> on multiple articles of impeachment by the U.S. Senate. Porteous was found to have accepted bribes from lawyers with dealings before his court.</p>
<p><em>This article updates <a href="https://theconversation.com/impeachment-its-political-77528">a version published</a> on May 17, 2017.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/107688/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jacob Neiheisel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Democrats control the House and could impeach Trump if they wanted. But removing the president from office is in the hands of the Senate – which is still dominated by Republicans.Jacob Neiheisel, Assistant Professor in Political Science, University at BuffaloLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1090252018-12-20T11:36:40Z2018-12-20T11:36:40ZIt started with Nazis: Concerns over foreign agents not just a Trump-era phenomenon<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/251573/original/file-20181219-45406-17pgr77.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The government's website for FARA.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Campaign-2016-Trump-Aides-Ukraine-Lobbying/52aa64eb7a4a41aca4f7191c42fa4d62/2/0">AP/Jon Elswick</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A U.S. law used to fight Nazi propaganda that many experts saw as a historical relic has come back to life.</p>
<p>Businessmen Bijan Kian and Ekim Alptekin, once associates of former national security adviser Michael Flynn, were indicted on several counts of violating the <a href="https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara">Foreign Agents Registration Act</a>, commonly called FARA, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/17/us/politics/flynn-turkey-bijan-kian.html">in mid-December</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara">The act</a> requires “agents of foreign principals in a political or quasi-political capacity to make periodic public disclosure” of that relationship. Activities taken as a result of it must also be disclosed.</p>
<p>Kian and Alptekin are only the latest targets in a series of indictments and guilty pleas related to FARA. Their case is part of a return to the headlines for a law that had fallen into disuse.</p>
<p>From 1966 to 2015, the Department of Justice pursued <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/us/politics/fara-foreign-agents-mueller.html?login=email&auth=login-email">just seven FARA cases in court</a>. </p>
<p>FARA spent the second half of the 20th century ignored and unused, and its initial purpose long forgotten: the prosecution of Nazis for interfering with American democracy.</p>
<p>Using the media tools of the time, the Nazis were able to integrate their messages into America’s politics. The law aimed at fighting that disinformation has <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/12/17/677390345/new-reports-detail-expansive-russia-disinformation-scheme-targeting-u-s">startling relevance</a> to our lives today.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/251577/original/file-20181219-45397-1ru120.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/251577/original/file-20181219-45397-1ru120.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/251577/original/file-20181219-45397-1ru120.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251577/original/file-20181219-45397-1ru120.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251577/original/file-20181219-45397-1ru120.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251577/original/file-20181219-45397-1ru120.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251577/original/file-20181219-45397-1ru120.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251577/original/file-20181219-45397-1ru120.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bijan Kian, a one-time business partner of former national security adviser Michael Flynn, was recently indicted on charges including failing to register as a foreign agent.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Trump-Russia-Probe-Flynn/88eb7954d6904dd19f2d2bb865a24d1b/2/0">AP/Jacquelyn Martin</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Old law, new targets</h2>
<p>FARA’s diminished status changed with the recent indictments related to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/us/politics/fara-foreign-agents-mueller.html">Robert Mueller’s investigations</a>, and with good reason. </p>
<p>The law was designed precisely to combat the type of election interference and lobbying activities <a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/the-russia-investigations-explained/">the special prosecutor’s team is currently examining</a>. </p>
<p>As my recent book, “<a href="https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250148957">Hitler’s American Friends: The Third Reich’s Supporters in the United States</a>,” points out, the Foreign Agents Registration Act was introduced in Congress in summer 1937 with a specific threat in mind: Nazi subversion of the American democratic system. </p>
<p>From 1933 to the 1941 bombing of Pearl Harbor, Nazi agents across the United States had operated with virtual impunity. They spread anti-Semitic propaganda, attacked President Franklin D. Roosevelt and tried to convince Americans that they should pressure the Roosevelt administration to stay out of any future European war. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/251585/original/file-20181219-45403-wq7w6x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/251585/original/file-20181219-45403-wq7w6x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/251585/original/file-20181219-45403-wq7w6x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=758&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251585/original/file-20181219-45403-wq7w6x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=758&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251585/original/file-20181219-45403-wq7w6x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=758&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251585/original/file-20181219-45403-wq7w6x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=953&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251585/original/file-20181219-45403-wq7w6x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=953&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251585/original/file-20181219-45403-wq7w6x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=953&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">George Sylvester Viereck, Nazi propagandist in the U.S.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:George_Sylvester_Viereck_cph.3b27115.jpg">Library of Congress via Wikimedia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>More dangerously, George Sylvester Viereck was a Nazi agent, paid by the German Embassy and ensconced on Capitol Hill itself. </p>
<p>Viereck nominally worked as a journalist and publicist for the Reich. In reality, Viereck was running a bold campaign to insert Nazi propaganda into the Congressional Record with the help of sympathetic senators and representatives. They included Minnesota Sen. <a href="http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=L000514">Ernest Lundeen</a> of the Farmer-Labor Party, West Virginia Sen. <a href="http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=H000749">Rush D. Holt</a>, a Democrat, and New York Republican Rep. <a href="http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=F000142">Hamilton Fish III</a>. </p>
<p>Viereck had a great distribution plan: He convinced his congressional allies to deliver speeches he had written for them, or simply insert them by unanimous consent into the legislative record. </p>
<p>He would then use money provided by the German embassy to order large numbers of reprints of those speeches. He mailed those copies to Americans on the mailing lists of isolationist pressure groups using legislators’ franked, pre-stamped envelopes. Postage was paid by the taxpayers.</p>
<p>From 1936 to 1940, Viereck’s pro-German, anti-British and anti-Roosevelt propaganda reached millions of Americans thanks to a combination of Nazi cash and the cooperation of American politicians. </p>
<p>Viereck was so successful that he even purchased a small publishing company called Flanders Hall and used German money to begin pumping out cheap monographs for mass distribution. </p>
<p>This plan was brazen, and, before FARA, probably legal. Though the extent of Viereck’s operation was not known when FARA was passed, he had already been investigated during World War I for <a href="https://www.jta.org/1933/12/17/archive/viereck-called-chief-nazi-propagandist-in-u-s">similar pro-German propaganda activities</a>. </p>
<p>His later appearance on Capitol Hill aroused suspicion, and in 1938 he became one of the first witnesses subpoenaed to testify before the <a href="https://www2.gwu.edu/%7Eerpapers/teachinger/glossary/huac.cfm">House Un-American Activities Committee</a>, chaired by Representative Martin Dies Jr. of Texas. </p>
<p>Yet, even if Viereck could be shown to have been taking German money, there was effectively no statute he could easily be prosecuted under since his activities fell far short of espionage.</p>
<h2>Fighting foreign influence</h2>
<p>This Nazi agent was precisely the type of foreign agent FARA was designed to unmask and prosecute. The statements of its creators make this clear. </p>
<p>In 1937, Rep. John W. McCormack of Massachusetts – who was later elected speaker – <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2009-title22/pdf/USCODE-2009-title22-chap11-subchapII.pdf">introduced FARA</a> in the House of
Representatives. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/251582/original/file-20181219-45408-17n3tco.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/251582/original/file-20181219-45408-17n3tco.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/251582/original/file-20181219-45408-17n3tco.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=787&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251582/original/file-20181219-45408-17n3tco.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=787&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251582/original/file-20181219-45408-17n3tco.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=787&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251582/original/file-20181219-45408-17n3tco.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=989&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251582/original/file-20181219-45408-17n3tco.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=989&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/251582/original/file-20181219-45408-17n3tco.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=989&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Massachusetts Rep. John W. McCormack authored the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which passed in 1937.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://ddr.densho.org/ddr-njpa-1-961/">The Hawaii Times Photo Archives Foundation, Nippu Jiji Photograph Archive</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>McCormack told his colleagues that the bill was needed because the German government had undertaken a concerted effort to disseminate propaganda in the U.S. </p>
<p>Nazi agents, he said, were trying to convince American young people to “disbelieve in our form of Government.” The Nazis wanted to convert them to “political doctrines and philosophy which are utterly contrary to the doctrines and principles upon which our American Government is based.” </p>
<p>McCormack’s solution was to expose “their nefarious ideas,” he said.
FARA, he added, “will expose them (the propagandists) to the pitiless light of publicity. The passage of this bill will label such propaganda just as the law requires us to label poison.”</p>
<p>In its original form, FARA required agents working for a “foreign principal” including governments, political parties and foreign-based corporations to reveal their activities and the details of their contracts to the government. Journalists and accredited diplomats were specifically exempted from registration. </p>
<p>Agents who failed to register their activities or made knowingly false statements could face fines or even imprisonment. </p>
<h2>Law catches the agents</h2>
<p>President Roosevelt signed FARA into law in 1938. More than a dozen suspected Nazi agents, including Viereck, were subsequently investigated and indicted, though Viereck’s conviction eventually was <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/318/236/">overturned on a technicality</a>.</p>
<p>Some Nazi agents spent the entire war in prison as a result, limiting the damage they might have been able to inflict on the U.S. military effort. </p>
<p>Over subsequent decades, FARA made an occasional return to the headlines.</p>
<p>Despite these successes, subsequent amendments changed FARA’s scope. A 1995 provision allows some who would have fallen under its remit to register under the less stringent <a href="https://lobbyingdisclosure.house.gov/amended_lda_guide.html">Lobbying Disclosure Act</a>. </p>
<p>As a result, <a href="https://jenner.com/system/assets/publications/17773/original/The%20Revival%20of%20the%20Foreign%20Agents%20Registration%20Act_%20What%20You%20Should%20Know,%20and%20What%20to%20do%20Next.pdf?1519768945">FARA fell into virtual obscurity</a> by the early 21st century. </p>
<p>Foreign agents were still required to register their activities and the Department of Justice nominally pursued those who failed to do so. But by the department’s <a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/07-26-17%20Hickey%20Testimony.pdf">own admission</a>, enforcement was mostly limited to sending suspected violators a threatening letter.</p>
<p>All this has changed with special prosecutor Mueller’s recent actions. Most prominently, former Donald J. Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort pleaded guilty to charges that <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/14/trump-campaign-chief-paul-manafort-pleads-guilty-to-conspiracy-charges.html">included deliberate violations of FARA</a>. </p>
<p>Even in cases where Mueller has not directly used FARA to bring an indictment, it has still provided legal grounds on which to open an investigation and pursue more serious charges, or <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/8/31/17805310/sam-patten-mueller-plea-manafort">secure witness cooperation</a>.</p>
<h2>Reform ahead?</h2>
<p>The original intent of FARA was to inform the American people about the sources of the information they were receiving about the critical issues of the day. It was designed to carefully protect the First Amendment rights of those producing messages, while requiring that the source of the money used to distribute them be revealed. </p>
<p>Congress could consider revisions to FARA that will make it more relevant to the 21st century. </p>
<p>For example, the term “lobbyist” was not in widespread use in 1937 and does not appear in the original statue.</p>
<p>Instead, the original version of FARA lists those required to register as those working as “public-relations counsel, publicity agent, or as agent, servant, representative, or attorney for a foreign principal.” </p>
<p>The most antiquated of these terms, “publicity agent,” <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2009-title22/pdf/USCODE-2009-title22-chap11-subchapII.pdf">was defined as</a> “any person who engages directly or indirectly in the publication or dissemination of oral, visual, graphic, written, or pictorial information … including publication by means of advertising, books, periodicals, newspapers, lectures, broadcasts, motion pictures, or otherwise.”</p>
<p>Congress might well consider this definition’s relevance to the technology-saturated world of the 21st century, and the intent behind its original inclusion.</p>
<p>As Rep. McCormack put it in 1937, the United States is now undertaking an effort to label propaganda just as it labels poison. FARA may well provide a perfect tool to do so.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/109025/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bradley W. Hart does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The initial aim of the 1937 Foreign Agents Registration Act was long forgotten: the prosecution of Nazis for interfering with American democracy. But that law is startlingly relevant to the US now.Bradley W. Hart, Assistant Professor of Media, Communications and Journalism, California State University, FresnoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/885412017-12-04T03:05:12Z2017-12-04T03:05:12ZShould lying to the FBI be a crime?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197476/original/file-20171204-5378-j6s6zl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, center.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Andrew Harnik</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>On Dec. 1, Michael Flynn, former national security adviser to President Donald Trump, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/us/politics/michael-flynn-guilty-russia-investigation.html?_r=0">pleaded guilty</a> to the charge of lying to the FBI about his contacts and conversations with Russians. </p>
<p>Flynn admitted to violating the federal statute <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001">18 USC Section 1001</a>, which prohibits making “false statements” to government officials. </p>
<p>As someone who teaches a course called Secrets and Lies and has <a href="https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/11382916">written about</a> how common it is for people to lie in their dealings with the government, I was not surprised to learn either of Flynn’s lies or the government’s response to them. However, I was surprised to read President Trump’s tweet on Saturday apparently acknowledging that he knew Flynn had lied to the FBI and fired him because of it.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"937007006526959618"}"></div></p>
<p>Despite the personal moral objections that most people have to lying, the law under which Flynn was charged by Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller is a <a href="https://repository.jmls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1069&context=lawreview">controversial one</a>. It applies in a <a href="https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/98-808.pdf">sweeping manner</a> to “any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch.”</p>
<p>Moreover, unlike the crime of perjury, the false statements statute means that a person can be punished for lying even if he was not under oath in <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001">an official proceeding</a>, and even if he was not warned that lying would be punished. </p>
<p>So, why is it against the law to lie to government officials?</p>
<h2>False statements and the right to remain silent</h2>
<p>American law generally is aggressive in criminalizing lying, in part because it offers citizens an alternative if they fear the consequences of telling the truth to a government official.</p>
<p>That alternative is found in the Fifth Amendment’s protection against compulsory self-incrimination. It affords individuals a right to remain silent and allows them to avoid speaking damaging truths. When it was added to the U.S. Constitution, the Fifth Amendment was partly a <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/Origins_of_the_Fifth_Amendment.html?id=XLIVAQAAIAAJ">reaction to abuses</a> perpetrated by England’s Courts of Star Chamber, which operated from 1487 to 1681. Those courts were used to suppress opposition to royal policies, and they used torture to exact confessions from the King’s enemies.</p>
<p>It was also a recognition of the natural law principle that no person should be forced to become an instrument of his own demise.</p>
<p>However, as the late Justice Antonin Scalia <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/522/398/case.html">once explained</a>, “Neither the text nor the spirit of the Fifth Amendment confers a privilege to lie. ‘[P]roper invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination allows a witness to remain silent, but not to swear falsely.’” </p>
<p>Flynn did not invoke his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. He chose to answer the questions posed by the FBI. </p>
<p>While we can never know exactly why he did so, we do know that silence is very <a href="http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/T/bo3627888.html">hard to maintain</a>. This is especially true in the face of a question that might expose one to legal jeopardy. In such a situation, many people feel compelled to speak when they are asked to do so. They want to seem cooperative, or to try to exonerate themselves.</p>
<p>Silence <a href="https://cases.justia.com/california/supreme-court/2014-s202107.pdf?ts=1408035715">accomplishes neither</a> of those goals. Nonetheless, the law requires that if people choose to speak to government officials they must do so truthfully.</p>
<h2>Making lying to the state against the law</h2>
<p>The prohibition of false statements traces its origins to the Civil War, when Congress <a href="https://repository.jmls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1069&context=lawreview">reacted to</a> a “‘spate of frauds’ submitted by military con artists scamming the United States War Department.” It forbade people in the military from making fraudulent requests for payments from the government. Soon, however, the <a href="http://www.law.msu.edu/king/2008/Avsharian.pdf">law was broadened</a> to include similar requests when made by any person or corporation.</p>
<p>To successfully <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/270/339/case.html">prosecute someone</a> for making a false claim, the government had to show that that the accused cheated the government out of money or property. In the 1930s, Congress <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/312/86/">removed the requirement</a> that there had to be a resultant financial harm. This constituted a substantial departure from what the legal commentator Giles Burch calls the <a href="http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4688&context=uclrev">traditional view</a> that “police authority does not… include the power to punish suspects who lie.”</p>
<p>Since the 1930s, the statute used against Flynn <a href="https://www.lawfareblog.com/law-lying-perjury-false-statements-and-obstruction">has experienced</a> a “creeping expansion.” As a result, it has become a powerful tool that criminalizes what someone says even in cases, like that of <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/06/AR2007030600648.html">Scooter Libby</a>, longtime aide to former Vice President Dick Cheney, when the government cannot prove any other wrongdoing. </p>
<p>Critics argue that 18 USC Section 1001 now has <a href="http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4688&context=uclrev">too broad</a> a reach. They worry that it gives prosecutors what United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/522/398/case.html">once called</a> “extraordinary authority…to manufacture crimes.” Yet despite the expansive use of the false claims statute, American law sometimes has looked the other way when lies are told. Thus prosecutions for perjury have been <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/1142605?mag=why-is-perjury-so-rarely-prosecuted&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">quite rare</a> and courts have generally <a href="http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4615&context=flr">been reluctant</a> to enforce section 1001.</p>
<p>Moreover, they sometimes <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/il-court-of-appeals/1410085.html">invoked a doctrine</a> called the “exculpatory no” to excuse individuals who falsely denied guilt in response to an investigator’s question. In 1998, the Supreme Court put an end to this practice. As <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/522/398/case.html">Justice Scalia explained</a> at the time, “Certainly the investigation of wrongdoing is a proper governmental function; and since it is the very purpose of an investigation to uncover the truth, any falsehood relating to the subject of the investigation perverts that function.”</p>
<h2>The harm of Flynn’s lies</h2>
<p>I’d argue that in Flynn’s case, 18 USC Section 1001 was used correctly and to good effect. What Justice Scalia said in his 1998 opinion helps us identify the harm Flynn did. His lies indeed “perverted the function” of the FBI and impeded it from doing what it must do in a nation governed by the rule of law – prevent government officials and those seeking power from subverting our system of government.</p>
<p>The philosopher Immanuel Kant long ago <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Kant-Critique-Practical-Reason-Immanuel/dp/1452801347">noted that</a> lies like Flynn’s threaten the foundations of organized society and “vitiate the source of law itself.” Never has Kant’s insight been more pertinent than it is in the United States today.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/88541/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Austin Sarat does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It hasn’t always been, writes legal expert.Austin Sarat, Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science, Amherst CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/760762017-04-12T00:38:34Z2017-04-12T00:38:34ZDo Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner have too much power?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/164917/original/image-20170411-26736-6d26s0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Donald and Ivanka Trump walk to board Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House, Feb. 1, 2017. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Evan Vucci</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Much attention has been focused recently on President Trump’s “new” foreign policy.</p>
<p>This policy change is symbolized by the U.S. <a href="https://theconversation.com/trumps-attack-on-syria-four-takeaways-75970">missile attack on Syria’s Shayrat airfield</a>, which followed Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s alleged chemical weapon attack on rebels in that country’s Idlib province.</p>
<p>The National Security Council has also been restructured. Former Director Michael Flynn <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/13/politics/michael-flynn-white-house-national-security-adviser/">resigned after lying</a> about his meetings with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. Deputy K.T. McFarland was <a href="http://www.dictionary.com/browse/cashiered">cashiered</a> and <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-04-09/mcfarland-to-exit-white-house-as-mcmaster-consolidates-power">became</a><a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-04-09/mcfarland-to-exit-white-house-as-mcmaster-consolidates-power">U.S. ambassador-designate to Singapore</a>. They have been replaced by retired <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/20/us/politics/mcmaster-national-security-adviser-trump.html?_r=0">General H. R. McMaster</a> as director, and his deputy for strategy, Dina Powell. The removal of Trump adviser Steve Bannon from the principals committee of the council also represents an apparent move to follow more traditional foreign policy-making.</p>
<p>What is driving this apparently positive change? The movement toward an apparently more traditional approach suggests the greater influence of Trump’s daughter Ivanka, <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/24/ivanka-trump-a-white-house-force-just-not-an-emplo/">who was recently named a regular employee of the White House</a>, and her husband Jared Kushner, a senior adviser to the president over Bannon. Both may be trying to repair what “The Gatekeepers” author <a href="http://www.chriswhipple.net">Chris Whipple</a> has called “the most dysfunctional White House chief of staff and presidency in U.S. history.” </p>
<p>The two family members have strengthened a White House faction Bannon describes, not admiringly, as the “New Yorkers” or simply “Goldman Sachs.” Bannon himself leads an opposing <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/inside-battle-trumps-ear-can-bannon-beat-kushner-581572">faction</a> that is more nationalist, isolationist and populist.</p>
<p>However this rivalry plays out, what has been clear during the “honeymoon phase” of the Trump presidency is that influential individuals have created an incoherent, impulsive style of governance, dominated by personal decision-making processes, such as the overnight decision to bomb Syria. This spasmodic style, ignoring interagency reviews, is new in the modern presidency, even among presidents like Kennedy and Clinton, who involved family members in their administrations. Trump relies on personal relationships, rather than the institutions of democracy.</p>
<p>As a comparative political scientist who studies different types of governments, I’m interested in how personal rule linked to family can erode democratic institutions in favor of authoritarianism. Academics call this “sultanism.”</p>
<p>Let me explain.</p>
<h2>What sultanism means</h2>
<p>It was over a century ago that the famous political sociologist Max Weber developed the concept of sultanism, which, he wrote, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Economy-Society-Set-Max-Weber/dp/0520280024">“operates primarily on the basis of discretion.”</a></p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/153328/original/image-20170118-26555-l5ezbt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/153328/original/image-20170118-26555-l5ezbt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=728&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153328/original/image-20170118-26555-l5ezbt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=728&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153328/original/image-20170118-26555-l5ezbt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=728&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153328/original/image-20170118-26555-l5ezbt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=915&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153328/original/image-20170118-26555-l5ezbt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=915&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153328/original/image-20170118-26555-l5ezbt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=915&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">35th sultan of the Ottoman Empire and 114th caliph of Islam, Mehmed V.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sultan_Mehmed_V_of_the_Ottoman_Empire_cropped.jpg">Library of Congress</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>“Sultans,” or kings, of the Ottoman Empire were absolute rulers, their power made legitimate by theology. They used arbitrary and despotic powers. Their lifestyles were <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=cTnMY_D63FMC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Ottoman+Empire+decline&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjqtYXQ54DRAhWDRCYKHZxtB44Q6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=Ottoman%20Empire%20decline&f=false">lavish and decadent.</a> And over time they lost their power. While rival European empires such as the Hapsburgs’ Austro-Hungary and Weber’s native Germany <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=jGboBAAAQBAJ&pg=PT233&dq=Hapsburg+Kaiser+Wilhelm+Bureaucracy&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwig04Pc6IDRAhUESSYKHdM3D1kQ6AEIUzAI#v=onepage&q=Hapsburg%20Kaiser%20Wilhelm%20Bureaucracy&f=false">were rising</a> in the 19th century as they developed impressive civil and military bureaucracies and procedures, the Ottoman Empire was declining. </p>
<p>Alfred Stepan and the late Juan J. Linz of Columbia University <a href="https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/content/problems-democratic-transition-and-consolidation">argued</a> that sultanism is both a regime type (like democracy and authoritarianism) and an adjective describing a style of personal rule that is possible under all regime types, including democracy. They wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“The essence of sultanism is unrestrained personal rulership … unconstrained by ideology, rational-legal norms, or any balance of power.”<br>
Sultanism, in other words, is most common under authoritarian and autocratic rule, but it can also be present in democracies, when leaders personalize decision-making instead of following established institutional or legal processes.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/153324/original/image-20170118-26582-2ax3mn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/153324/original/image-20170118-26582-2ax3mn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=801&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153324/original/image-20170118-26582-2ax3mn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=801&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153324/original/image-20170118-26582-2ax3mn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=801&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153324/original/image-20170118-26582-2ax3mn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1007&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153324/original/image-20170118-26582-2ax3mn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1007&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153324/original/image-20170118-26582-2ax3mn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1007&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">‘Papa Doc’ Duvalier of Haiti in 1968.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Some might assume it irrelevant to compare any U.S. leader to <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=rPNSnRYzIdgC&printsec=frontcover&dq=sultanistic+regimes+juan+Linz&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiT7tC_74DRAhVCwiYKHRanCr8Q6AEIJTAA#v=onepage&q=sultanistic%20regimes%20juan%20Linz&f=false">classic sultanistic rulers</a> such as the <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=0ezGBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT202&dq=Francois+Jean+Claude+Duvalier&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjagv3Z7oDRAhWM24MKHSaBD9EQ6AEINzAF#v=onepage&q=Francois%20Jean%20Claude%20Duvalier&f=false">Duvaliers</a> of Haiti, Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines or Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union. These regimes were nondemocratic and dominated by a single personality with family members intensely involved. </p>
<p>However, like the U.S., South Korea is a democracy and its president, Park Geun-hye, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/12/12/south-koreas-president-was-just-impeached-this-is-what-it-means-and-what-comes-next/?utm_term=.0c810fad4782">was impeached Dec. 9</a> for corrupt activities, many connected to a close family adviser. The adviser, allegedly a <a href="http://www.dictionary.com/browse/shaman">shaman</a>, is herself the daughter of another Rasputin-type religious figure <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/840b203a-b177-11e6-a37c-f4a01f1b0fa1">who had also secretly advised</a> the president’s father during his 18 years in office. </p>
<p>Another example can be found in Nicaragua. President Daniel Ortega – who packed his Supreme Court to allow him a third consecutive term – has as his vice president his wife, Rosario Murillo. She is one of the few leaders he trusts, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/31/world/americas/nicaragua-daniel-ortega-rosario-murillo-house-of-cards.html">having alienated much of his party.</a> </p>
<h2>American precedents</h2>
<p>For its part, the U.S. has had sultanistic tendencies of its own in the past. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/153325/original/image-20170118-26582-1f1rmpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/153325/original/image-20170118-26582-1f1rmpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=475&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153325/original/image-20170118-26582-1f1rmpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=475&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153325/original/image-20170118-26582-1f1rmpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=475&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153325/original/image-20170118-26582-1f1rmpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=597&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153325/original/image-20170118-26582-1f1rmpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=597&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/153325/original/image-20170118-26582-1f1rmpb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=597&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">President John F. Kennedy and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy with FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/pingnews/274988824">National Archives</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>President John F. Kennedy’s closest adviser and his attorney general was his younger brother, Robert, indispensable during the perilous time of the Cuba Missile Crisis. And JFK, while in office and sometimes with his brother Robert involved, took enormous risks in having flings with women with dubious political connections - from a <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/1999/sep/26/news/mn-14342">socialite with links to the mob</a> to a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/11/30/reviews/971130.30powerst.html">possible East German spy</a>. This is not mere indiscretion.</p>
<p>The reaction of Congress to all this was to pass, in 1967, the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/3110">Anti-Nepotism Statute</a> – nicknamed the <a href="http://time.com/4574971/donald-trump-transition-jared-kushner-legal-anti-nepotism-law/">“Bobby Kennedy Law”</a> – to make sure close relatives no longer assume official positions. <a href="https://concurringopinions.com/archives/2012/06/nepotism-and-the-cabinet.html">Some suggest</a>, however, that the law does not exclude unofficial advisers.</p>
<p>Another example of sultanistic practices is Hillary Clinton, who was her president-husband’s lead and unpaid adviser on health care reform. </p>
<p>And then, in George W. Bush’s Cabinet, the two most powerful foreign policy advisers – Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney – were both alumni of George H. W. Bush’s administration. After the terrorist attacks of 9/11, Rumsfeld and Cheney, with Bush’s approval, established <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/05/books/review/spies-and-spymasters.html">arbitrary policy</a> that permitted <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Official-Senate-Report-Torture-Interrogation/dp/1634506022/ref=pd_sbs_14_t_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=X8SN4WTC04VSQQA6MC6J">torture</a>, warrantless surveillance and targeted assassinations. </p>
<p>These Bush-era “law-free” zones in national security matters, which some have called <a href="http://illinoislawreview.org/wp-content/ilr-content/articles/2013/2/Alexander.pdf">dictatorial</a>, were based on the legal concept of the “unitary executive.” The idea is that the judicial and legislative branches cannot check or regulate the president on “executive” matters, especially those involving national security.</p>
<p><a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Imperial_Presidency.html?id=zbLO9aNL6ncC">The unitary executive</a> facilitated sultanism by asserting that the president monopolizes all executive power, however exercised. As <a href="http://loc.gov/law/help/usconlaw/pdf/senate%20judiciary%20sept_16_%202008.pdf">some noted constitutional scholars</a> have said, this theory basically places the president above the law. </p>
<h2>What makes Trump different</h2>
<p>Most modern American presidents have risen through the institutions of U.S. democracy – state political parties, Capitol Hill, the military. They have been vetted and embedded in institutional rules, attitudes and relationships. Someone like Trump, coming in “from the cold,” in contrast, brings his family and close associates and makes decisions outside of those formal and informal institutions. </p>
<p>Having masterminded his unexpected victory based on an unconventional campaign, Trump has already shown a tendency to trust his instincts on major decisions of governance, creating impulsive, unpredictable decisions. His past record as CEO and his outsider status make Trump self-reliant and assured that most of the world is misguided and only he and his few trusted advisers, including his family, have the answers. </p>
<p>When questioned, for example, on <a href="https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-on-preventing-muslim-immigration">his pledge</a> to ban Muslims from entering the country “until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on,” Trump said: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“What I’m doing is no different than FDR. If you look at what he was doing, it was far worse … and he’s one of the most highly respected presidents — they name highways after him.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Here Trump was evoking the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korematsu_v._United_States">1944 Korematsu decision</a>, which upheld almost unlimited executive powers over immigration to permit the detention of Japanese-Americans without any evidence (and none existed) of subversion. This decision is considered by many <a href="http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2015/12/trumps-muslim-comments-start-a-debate-with-constitutional-scholars/">constitutional scholars</a> as the most ignominious in Supreme Court history, a “tragic mistake that we should not repeat.” Even the late Justice <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/08/justice-scalia-on-kelo-and-korematsu/?utm_term=.dce59aacb4ae">Antonin Scalia disavowed it as an “error.”</a> </p>
<p>The U.S. presidency has always been prone to sultantistic tendencies, but under a Trump presidency what were once isolated incidents have predictably become a way of governing. When the closest advisers, both institutional (like Ivanka and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/01/09/tumps-son-in-law-jared-kushner-expected-to-join-white-house-as-a-senior-adviser/?utm_term=.1e5a5de2104b">Kushner</a>) and informal (in the case of his two adult sons), are dominated by family members, the decision-making process will not only be erratic and possibly influenced by private family interests but also tend to ignore legal procedures that have also met the test of time. </p>
<p>Instead of <a href="https://hbr.org/2009/04/leadership-lessons-from-abraham-lincoln">a “team of rivals”</a> under the rule of law, the Trump presidency may be akin to medieval monarchy, with decisions made by court politics, not legal procedures.</p>
<p><em>Editor’s note: This piece updates <a href="https://theconversation.com/sultan-donald-trump-68921">Sultan Donald Trump?</a>, which originally ran on Jan. 20, 2017.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/76076/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Henry F. (Chip) Carey does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Does Trump’s family have too much sway in the White House? We consider parallels ranging from the Ottoman empire to the Clinton administration.Henry F. (Chip) Carey, Associate Professor, Political Science , Georgia State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/730982017-02-23T02:02:09Z2017-02-23T02:02:09ZWho exactly are ‘radical’ Muslims?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/157752/original/image-20170221-18633-1v598vs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Indian Muslim woman Shagufta Sayyd prays in Mumbai, India.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Rafiq Maqbool</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Trump administration has been using the phrase “radical Islam” when discussing the “war on terror.” From his inauguration address to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/02/06/trump-warns-anew-against-attacks-by-radical-islamic-terrorists-as-he-visits-centcom/?utm_term=.a07b8e15e91e">remarks to military leaders</a>, President Trump <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/04/us/politics/black-site-prisons-cia-terrorist.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=1">has been warning</a> against “Islamic terrorists.” </p>
<p>Many different kinds of individuals and movements get collapsed into this category of radical Islam. A common one that is increasingly being used by <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2017/02/elections-france-security-170215090123247.html">politicians</a> and <a href="http://www.theweek.co.uk/world-news/6073/what-is-salafism-and-should-we-be-worried-by-it">journalists</a> both in Europe and the U.S. to equate with “radical Islam” is the Salafist tradition. </p>
<p>For example, <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/headtohead/2016/01/transcript-michael-flynn-160104174144334.html">Michael Flynn</a>, who recently resigned as national security advisor, was clear that what unites terrorists is their belief in the “ideology” of Salafism. Sebastian Gorka, deputy assistant to the president, <a href="http://www.securityaffairs.org/issues/number-26/why-al-qaeda-just-wont-die">also describes Salafism as a “fundamental understanding of Islam”</a> that <a href="http://www.npr.org/2017/02/03/513213042/trump-assistant-on-presidents-foreign-policy">justifies terrorism</a>. </p>
<p>France and Germany are targeting this movement, vowing to “clean up” or <a href="http://www.dw.com/en/german-vice-chancellor-sigmar-gabriel-calls-for-ban-on-islamist-mosques/a-37036379">shut down Salafist mosques</a>, since several <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-security-idUSKBN15G3OY">arrested and suspected terrorists</a> had spent time in these communities.</p>
<p>As a scholar of religion and politics, I have done <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/politicizing-islam-9780190225247?cc=us&lang=en&">research in Salafi communities</a>, specifically in France and India, two countries where Muslims are the largest religious minorities. </p>
<p>Salafists constitute a minority of the Muslim population. For example, in France, estimates range from <a href="http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2012/03/30/01016-20120330ARTFIG00624-entre-5000et-10000-salafistes-en-france.php">5,000</a> to <a href="http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/31911/MWP_2014_13.pdf">20,000</a> – out of a Muslim population of over 4 million. Security experts estimate a worldwide number of <a href="http://www.defence.gov.au/ADC/Publications/IndoPac/Wimhurst_IPSP.pdf">50 million</a> out of 1.6 billion Muslims. </p>
<p>But there’s not much understanding of Salafism, its history and its diversity. In fact, Muslims themselves often have different definitions of what it means to be a Salafist. </p>
<p>So, who are Salafists?</p>
<h2>Origins of Salafism</h2>
<p>The Arabic term salaf means “ancestors.” It refers technically to the first three generations of Muslims who surrounded the Prophet Muhammad. Because they had direct experience with the original Islamic teachings and practices, they are generally respected across the Muslim world. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/157753/original/image-20170221-18624-16m3tdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/157753/original/image-20170221-18624-16m3tdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=448&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157753/original/image-20170221-18624-16m3tdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=448&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157753/original/image-20170221-18624-16m3tdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=448&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157753/original/image-20170221-18624-16m3tdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=563&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157753/original/image-20170221-18624-16m3tdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=563&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157753/original/image-20170221-18624-16m3tdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=563&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Reaching Kaaba, a building at the center of Islam’s most sacred mosque, Al-Masjid al-Haram, in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/blankqo/26512561856/in/photolist-GoPNXs-pW14oD-6ZaDHV-hvKbx-jRt5E-jRt6y-PG1uV-jRt4L-D4ZTvs-CyBaKL-533wx1-3dqdFx-PwSSo-9eaf3Z-9edjsA-9edj9A-9eaeLH-9ediY1-jCMXT-sg9Yh-pGJeXv-darE1-8q13id-fSnrrR-fSnqSp-fSkXJM-ToF8-2fD7F-yxzVTe-cArVN-8Z4vzm-4rdmfY-y7fr1-qHU3e-qJ4FT-7k9fo8-fSkZYr-fSnpzK-fSnoHK-52ucDd-52q41K-52udpS-52uic1-52pXhD-52q1dc-52uguh-52pYE6-52ufLf-52pYvn-52ucYf">Farid Iqbal Ibrahim</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Self-identified Salafists tend to believe they are simply trying to emulate the path of the Prophet Muhammad and his companions. This might include an array of practices from dress to culinary habits as well as ethical teachings and commitment to faith.</p>
<p>Salafism as a movement is believed to have originated in the 19th and 20th centuries. Some historians claim it started as a <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/global-salafism-9780199326280?cc=us&lang=en&">theological reform movement</a> within <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6572670">Sunni Islam</a>. The impetus was to return to the original teachings and practices of the Prophet Muhammad and the Quran – a consequence, in part, of social changes and Western colonialism.</p>
<p>They specifically cite the works of Egyptian, Persian and Syrian intellectuals from the 19th century as shaping Salafist movements. One recent study, however, argues that these intellectuals from the past <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-making-of-salafism/9780231175500">never even used the term Salafism</a>. In other words, there is no authoritative account of how or when exactly this movement originated.</p>
<p>Finally, it is also open to debate as to which Islamic groups, schools of thought and practices may be considered Salafist. This is because groups and individuals who are labeled Salafist do not always view themselves this way. And they <a href="http://religion.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-255">disagree amongst each other</a> over what defines authentic Salafist practice. </p>
<h2>Here’s what my research shows</h2>
<p>The vast majority of people who loosely affiliate with Salafism, however, are either <a href="http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/31911/MWP_2014_13.pdf">simply nonpolitical or actively reject politics</a> as morally corrupt. From 2005-2014, I spent a total of two years as an ethnographic researcher in the cities of Lyon, in southeastern France, and in Hyderabad, in south India. I clearly observed this among these two communities. </p>
<p>Every week I participated in mosque lessons and Islamic study circles among dozens of Salafist women. These communities maintain strict separation between men and women, but I was able to interact with and interview a few men as well. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/157754/original/image-20170221-18657-1tk11do.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/157754/original/image-20170221-18657-1tk11do.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157754/original/image-20170221-18657-1tk11do.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157754/original/image-20170221-18657-1tk11do.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157754/original/image-20170221-18657-1tk11do.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157754/original/image-20170221-18657-1tk11do.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157754/original/image-20170221-18657-1tk11do.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Who are Salafist women?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/pdenker/10094075635/in/photolist-gnYM1P-icVS6P-4DJqG-8NEWEG-4DWzqi-ptkhwn-9osD3P-ouBR41-49iQxS-qP81pM-3k8kR-6w8PRz-7i3G4x-cbeUJq-raGDVa-6KufRr-bbPwBc-dNubS-B1k938-2EE5tK-Avq4J-85xzWZ-wSA1AE-7rPQxu-axYJRS-6fDoNG-znfxhw-85HC1e-5pKoFm-7xQeWx-odkfuL-fPxGqz-ahr3KF-bRpiQ6-64qbTH-58nCDE-9dAToy-qHghDF-rnFBuJ-92gu5k-kKA5EN-5xfHJT-6fDoNC-5qBSwv-qdG7RJ-8kQRRf-84WVsy-aZnQgD-a9ny1x-quQp7">Patrick Denker</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Based on conversations and observation, I learned that they actually avoided politics. They did not attend protests or do advocacy, and in Lyon many did not vote in elections. </p>
<p>It is the case that there are Muslim women, including many converts, who actively embrace Salafism. They take up strict forms of veiling and work hard to practice their religion every day. </p>
<p>Let’s take Amal, a 22-year-old woman who grew up in a working-class neighborhood in southeastern France. I met her during my time as an ethnographic researcher on Muslim minorities in France. Amal identifies with the Salafist tradition in Islam. And if we go by the definitions being floated around, she would be considered a “radical Muslim”: She prayed five times daily, fasted all 30 days of Ramadan, and wore the “jilbab,” a loose, full-body garment that covers everything but the face. Steadfast in her religiosity, she also studied the Quran regularly and attended local mosques in the area. </p>
<p>She worked hard to live her life in accordance with the ethical teachings of Islam. This included spending part of her week tutoring Muslim girls in the neighborhood who homeschooled. Amal worried a great deal about their futures in France, since <a href="https://www.dukeupress.edu/The-Republic-Unsettled/">anti-veiling legislation</a> had constrained their opportunities. She also quietly worried about the future of Islam, believing it is under siege both by governments and by the ungodly and destructive work of the Islamic State.</p>
<h2>Religious does not mean radical</h2>
<p>As anthropologists of religion have shown, Salafi women <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-making-of-a-salafi-muslim-woman-9780190611675?cc=us&lang=en&">are not passive adherents</a>. Nor are they forced into strict practices by their husbands. Still, this doesn’t mean they’re all the same.</p>
<p>Among the French Salafist women I knew, most were the daughters and granddaughters of immigrants from the former French North African colonies. Almost a third were converts to Islam that chose specifically the Salafist tradition as opposed to mainstream currents of Islam. They were drawn to the clear expectations, rigorous routines and <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11133-011-9192-2">teachings about trusting God</a>. </p>
<p>While some of the women were raised in religious families, many broke away from their Muslim families or earned the wrath of their parents for turning to Salafism. Because the parents practiced a cultural form of Islam, or did not practice at all, they did not want their daughters to wear the jilbab. Despite this disapproval, the women focused a great deal on what it meant to have faith in God, and they emphasized that they had to continually struggle to strengthen that faith. </p>
<p>These struggles included various ethical behaviors including not talking too much, suppressing one’s ego and respecting people’s privacy. Along the way, some committed “sins,” like smoking or lying, and deviated from the teachings by not praying or fasting. Some even <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/20566093.2016.1085245">doubted their faith</a>, which they considered normal and acceptable.</p>
<p>In my research, non-Muslims as well as other Muslims claimed Salafists were judgmental of those who did not believe or practice like them. In my observation, the contrary was the case: Salafis emphasized that one’s faith and piety were deeply private matters that no one but God had the right to judge.</p>
<h2>Diverse views</h2>
<p>However, like any movement or tradition, Salafism is profoundly diverse and encompasses a number of debates and struggles for legitimacy.</p>
<p>So, there are those self-identified Salafists around the world who join political organizations or participate in political debates. These include, for example, <a href="http://carnegieendowment.org/2011/12/20/salafis-and-sufis-in-egypt/8fj4">several political parties in Egypt</a> and the <a href="http://ahlehadees.org/">Ahl-i-Hadees</a> in India.</p>
<p>A small minority, <a href="http://www.defence.gov.au/ADC/Publications/IndoPac/Wimhurst_IPSP.pdf">estimated to be 250,000 in number by security experts</a>, <a href="http://fathomjournal.org/fathom-forum-shiraz-maher-mapping-contemporary-salafi-jihadism/">rejects nation-states and embraces political violence</a>. They span continents but are centered in Iraq and Syria. </p>
<h2>Different from Wahhabism</h2>
<p>In today’s climate, however, it has become a political term. This is partly because of its connection to Saudi Arabia. </p>
<p>Salafism is sometimes referred to as Wahhabism, the Saudi Arabian variant of the movement that is intimately tied to the Saudi regime. They share some intellectual roots and theological emphases, but they also differ, <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/global-salafism-9780199326280?cc=us&lang=en&">especially in how they approach Islamic jurisprudence</a>. While Wahhabis follow one of the main Sunni orthodox schools of law, Salafis tend to think through legal questions independently. So equating the two is a mistake. </p>
<p>For some Salafists, labeling them as Wahhabi is a way to dismiss their faith or even insult them. Identifying with Salafism does not mean one supports the politics of the Saudi state. In my research, in both India and France, people sometimes noted concerns about the Saudi government’s political corruption or human rights record. </p>
<p>Yet outwardly, practices might overlap. For example, many Salafist women wear the niqab (that covers the face). <a href="https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/13326/review_21.pdf?sequence=1">Saudi intellectual centers and sheikhs</a> provide literature and training in numerous countries. They circulate lectures as well as money for building mosques and schools. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/157896/original/image-20170222-6426-1g5e1w9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/157896/original/image-20170222-6426-1g5e1w9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157896/original/image-20170222-6426-1g5e1w9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157896/original/image-20170222-6426-1g5e1w9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157896/original/image-20170222-6426-1g5e1w9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157896/original/image-20170222-6426-1g5e1w9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157896/original/image-20170222-6426-1g5e1w9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Mecca, Saudi Arabia.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/71925103@N00/279803013/in/photolist-qJ4FT-7k9fo8-fSkZYr-fSnpzK-fSnrrR-fSnoHK-fSnqSp-fSkXJM-52ucDd-52q41K-52udpS-52pXhD-52q1dc-52uic1-52uguh-52pYE6-52ufLf-52pYvn-52ucYf-52ueiL-52pZtM-52pZ98-52q3Kn-52q3k6-52ufUs-52ud77-52ugKG-52ugkL-52uiy1-52q4gZ-52ug3q-52ugDm-52uePN-52ugSm-52q3sK-52q3zM-52pYYH-52uhVW-52ueEJ-52q4o8-52q2ee-52pYPM-52q3d2-52q1uV-52q4BB-52pZXi-52q17K-52pYdB-52ucvG-52q2XM">Camera Eye</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And of course, Mecca and Medina are the spiritual centers for Muslims more broadly. In this way there is a transfer of intellectual and spiritual resources from Saudi Arabia that supports Salafist communities around the globe.</p>
<h2>Avoiding stereotypes, assumptions</h2>
<p>Why is it important to recognize the complexity and diversity of the Salafist movement? </p>
<p>It is true that as one part of the global Islamic revival, <a href="http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21656189-islams-most-conservative-adherents-are-finding-politics-hard-it-beats">it appears to be growing</a>. And it likely will remain part of the social landscape in a number of cities for the foreseeable future. </p>
<p>But, it is important not to assume that people’s religious faith and practices are the same as terrorist violence. It fuels fear and hatred – like the kind that inspired the recent <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-mosque-shooting-toll-idUSKBN15E0F6">shootings at the mosque in Quebec</a> or the arson attack that <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-texas-mosque-idUSKBN15N2P6">burned down a mosque in Texas</a>. </p>
<p>So, from my perspective, when we hear politicians warn us of the “global Salafi threat,” or if we see a woman like Amal walking down the street in her jilbab, it’s vital to remember the dangers of simplistic (and mistaken) stereotypes of “radical Muslims.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/73098/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Z. Fareen Parvez received funding from the New Directions in the Study of Prayer at the Social Science Research Council; the National Science Foundation; the University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation; and the University of California at Berkeley’s Center for Race and Gender, Center
for Middle Eastern Studies, and Institute of International Studies.</span></em></p>Muslims from the Salafist tradition can often be seen as ‘radical.’ There is not much understanding of Salafism, its history and its diversity. Here’s what it means to be a Salafist.Z. Fareen Parvez, Assistant Professor of Sociology, UMass AmherstLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.