Latest news with #SaulLoeb
The Citizen
2 days ago
- Business
- The Citizen
White House lays down terms for SA relations amid Afrikaner visit
US officials told Afrikaner representatives that condemning hate speech and exempting US firms from B-BBEE are key to restoring diplomatic relations. The first group of Afrikaners from South Africa to arrive in the US for resettlement on May 12, 2025. Picture: Saul Loeb / AFP Three Afrikaner representatives visited the White House in Washington to call for the normalisation of relations between South Africa and the US. Freedom Front Plus leader Corné Mulder, SA Agri Initiative (Saai) chair Theo de Jager and National Employers Association of South Africa (Neasa) chief executive Gerhard Papenfus said they held a constructive and high-level meeting with senior US officials, including representatives from the office of the vice-president, the National Security Council and the Homeland Security Council. Pre-conditions According to the trio, the officials communicated the pre-conditions for the normalisation of bilateral relations between the two countries. The conditions include the classification of farm attacks as a priority crime; a clear and unequivocal public condemnation by the ANC of Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer, whether used in song or any other context; and the exclusion of US entities from all broad-based black economic empowerment (B-BBEE) requirements. Any race-based legislation that may constitute a non-tariff trade barrier should not apply to US entities, they said. 'The delegation now has a clear understanding of the US administration's expectations.' A call to convey conditions clearly White House officials expressed concern that these conditions, despite being communicated multiple times to the South African government, have not been adequately addressed. ALSO READ: Amerikaners founder denies claims of 'struggling' South African 'refugees' in US They called on the Afrikaner delegation to convey these conditions clearly. Political analyst Rene Oosthuizen said the trio's statement concerningly highlights a new layer of complexity in SA-US relations. 'These pre-conditions for normalising bilateral trade, particularly the call for US entities to be exempted from B-BBEE and to limit land reform, directly challenge the core of our country's apartheid transformation agenda,' she said. Oosthuizen was concerned the statement underscores the real diplomatic economic risks facing the country if relations with the US deteriorate further. Not a good impression? Senior political lecturer at North-West University Benjamin Rapanyane said this does not at all create a good impression of the Afrikaner community in South Africa. 'First of all, who delegated them to the White House? No one delegated them to go them. Also, why would the White House officials agree to meet this group outside the normal diplomatic channels,' he asked. South Africa needed to be careful when addressing such matters with big economies like the US, otherwise the country will suffer terrible consequences unnecessarily, Rapanyane said. ALSO READ: Afrikaner 'refugees' continue to arrive in US on commercial flights – reports Political analyst Piet Croucamp said it was a common practice for cultural and language groups of interest to visit the United States and speak to individuals. The visit 'has no impact' 'Speaking to senior White House officials creates the impression that it does have an impact; a significant impact. I am hesitant to accept the statement because we haven't seen it covered in the foreign media, American media or Washington media,' he said. Croucamp said the trio must be careful not to create expectations of what can be achieved with the statements that they themselves have issued and the clever use of senior White House officials. 'However, it doesn't mean the visit was meaningless and shouldn't be done and that there was reason to criticise it, but it is important to see it for what it is. In the long run, it has no impact. 'Ramaphosa visited Washington and he spoke to US President Donald Trump. They really spoke to senior officials; you could see it – but even that had minimal impact,' Croucamp said. 'The same things were said and there is no indication that there has been influence specifically to a significant extent,' he said. NOW READ: WATCH: SA should know what leverage it has on the US and act on it, Rasool says
Newsweek
4 days ago
- Climate
- Newsweek
Temperatures in 8 States Will Feel Hotter Than Hottest Place on Earth
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. At least eight states were expected to see temperatures that would feel hotter than those in Death Valley—often referred to as the hottest place on Earth—on Wednesday, according to the National Weather Service (NWS). Why It Matters These forecasts come as the U.S. has been facing a widespread heat wave this week, which saw multiple temperature records surpassed. The heat index—also called apparent temperature—reflects how hot it actually feels to the human body when humidity is factored in with the air temperature, the NWS says. A person drinks from a canister near the U.S. Capitol on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., on June 23, 2025, as a significant heat wave hits the region. A person drinks from a canister near the U.S. Capitol on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., on June 23, 2025, as a significant heat wave hits the region. Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images What To Know According to an NWS forecast for Furnace Creek—a community within Death Valley National Park—a peak heat index value of 103 degrees Fahrenheit is expected on Wednesday afternoon. Meanwhile, extreme heat warnings, issued when "a period of very hot temperatures, even by local standards, will occur," warned of "dangerously hot conditions" across parts of the Eastern U.S. Central and eastern parts of North Carolina were forecast to face heat index values climbing to 115 F. Across Virginia, areas in the central, southern, and eastern regions were projected to experience index levels of 110 or higher. According to the NWS, sections of east and southeast Pennsylvania were likely to reach heat index readings as high as 105. Areas in Delaware and Maryland were preparing for heat index values peaking at 108, while neighboring New Jersey faced projected highs near 107. Elsewhere, northeastern Kentucky, southeastern Ohio, and much of West Virginia's lowlands were all expected to see heat indexes nearing 104. The heat wave has seen multiple record temperatures broken, according to the NWS. The service's New York forecast office reported on Tuesday a "record setting day across the area." On Tuesday afternoon, temperatures at Newark International Airport hit 103 degrees, surpassing the previous June 24 record of 97 degrees set in 1966, it said. This also tied the monthly record for the warmest temperature recorded for the month of June. What People Are Saying The National Weather Service, Eastern Region, said on X on Tuesday: "There's no doubt about it many were feeling hot, hot, hot today in the Eastern United States! Many daily records were set. By the way, if you want to cool off you had better luck in Las Vegas, NV today which only reached 94 for a high!" NWS Mount Holly/Philadelphia said on X, Tuesday: "While the peak of the heat and humidity from the ongoing heat wave are past us, it will still be very hot on Wednesday with highs in the mid to upper 90s and heat indexes around 100-105°. We'll get a more noticeable break in the heat by Thursday." What Happens Next At the time of writing, the latest of the extreme heat warnings was in effect until 8 p.m. EDT on Thursday.
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
How the Steel and Aluminum Tariff Hike Will Hit Consumers
A US Steel logo is seen on a vehicle loaded with rolls of steel during a visit by the U.S. President to U.S. Steel - Irvin Works in West Mifflin, Pennsylvania, May 30, 2025 Credit - Saul Loeb—AFP via Getty Images Canned foods, cars, houses, and a range of other goods could soon get more expensive as businesses face a newly doubled tariff rate of 50% for steel and aluminum imports. President Donald Trump described the increase, which raised the levies from the 25% rate announced in February beginning on Wednesday, as an effort to 'further secure the steel industry in the United States' during a Friday rally at a steel mill in Pittsburgh, Penn.—once the heart of the domestic steel industry. But while American steel industry groups have hailed the tariff hike, economic experts have sounded alarms, saying it could further disrupt the already-volatile global supply chain and put more strain on businesses—and Americans' wallets. 'Consumers will have to pay the price,' says Virginia Tech economics professor David Beiri. 'The continued uncertainty that is created by the government is poisoning business plans.' The United States is highly reliant on steel imports, bringing in more of the material from abroad than any other country in the world, according to the International Trade Administration. More than 26 million metric tons of steel were imported last year, most of which came from Brazil, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and China. 'We are equally dependent on aluminum,' says Jonathan Colehower, managing director at consulting company UST. The domestic steel industry has voiced support for the increased tariffs, saying they will help it weather increased competition from foreign steel manufacturers. 'Chinese steel exports to the world have more than doubled since 2020, surging to 118 million MT in 2024—more than total North American steel production,' the American Iron and Steel Institute, one of several trade associations representing the American steel industry, said in a statement after Trump announced the higher rate. 'This tariff action will help prevent new surges in imports that would injure American steel producers and their workers.' But experts worry about the industry's ability to meet increased demand as businesses, facing the additional import costs, seek cheaper alternatives for their products. While the U.S. once dominated the steel industry, the boom has died down in the last century. 'With domestic capacity not necessarily being able to produce what we might need…there is going to be a transitory effect,' says Beiri, referring to the adjustment period the steel industry will have to navigate as the supply chain changes. Colehower says the domestic steel supply may tighten as a result of the increased tariffs, which could cause domestic prices to rise amid high demand. 'There's absolutely no way it's going to be able to make up the difference immediately,' he says of the domestic steel industry. The Aluminum Association, a trade group that represents both U.S.-based and foreign companies, said it supports tariff-free Canadian aluminum, pointing to the American aluminum industry's reliance on the country's northern neighbor. 'Aluminum is a critical material for our economy and national defense – used in everything from cars to beverage cans to fighter jets. Today, the United States is investing significantly and will need both smelted and recycled aluminum to meet growing demand,' the association said. 'In the years if not decades it will take to build new U.S. smelter capacity, our metal needs must be met by importing.' Steel and aluminum are used in various products, from beer cans and office supplies to automobiles—the prices for all of which are likely to rise as a result of the doubled import taxes. The Can Manufacturers Institute, the trade association of the metal can manufacturing industry, opposed the tariff increase in a statement after Trump announced the coming change in the rate, saying it would 'further increase the cost of canned goods at the grocery store.' The can manufacturing industry imports nearly 80% of its tin-mill steel from foreign countries. 'Doubling steel tariffs will inflate domestic canned food prices, and it plays into the hands of China and other foreign canned food producers, which are more than happy to undercut American farmers and food producers,' the trade association said. Beer companies and other beverage businesses are also set to be impacted. The real estate and construction industries, both of which use steel to build homes, warehouses, and other structures will be footing a bigger bill, as well, Colehower says. He predicts businesses such as Lowe's and Home Depot, the latter of which vowed before the tariff hike that it would not be increasing the cost of its goods, will be severely affected. Farm equipment and transportation vehicles, including cars, bicycles, and others, will also likely cost more as a result of the new tariff rate, Colehower says. Some companies could seek to adjust their business models in the face of increased costs. Coca-Cola CEO James Quincey, for instance, said in February that the company would consider making more beverages in plastic bottles to offset aluminum price hikes under the tariffs announced that month. Negotiations over the tariffs are ongoing between the U.S. and its trading partners, several of which have expressed ire at the increased import taxes. Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labour Congress, called the steel tariffs a 'direct attack on Canadian workers.' A European Commission official on Friday said the decision 'adds further uncertainty to the global economy and increases costs for consumers and businesses on both sides of the Atlantic.' The U.K. has been spared from the tariff hike; Mexico announced Wednesday that it plans to ask for a similar exemption. Canada, Mexico, and the European Union were previously exempt from steel and aluminum tariffs Trump imposed during his first term in 2016, but are subject to the current levies. Contact us at letters@
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
What Trump Revoking Emergency Abortion Guidance Means for Care
Abortion-rights activists rally for reproductive rights and emergency abortion care outside the U.S. Supreme Court as it hears arguments in a case that deals with whether Idaho's near-total abortion ban conflicts with the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, in Washington, D.C., on April 24, 2024. Credit - Saul Loeb—AFP/Getty Images The Trump Administration has added to the confusion surrounding the U.S.'s shifting patchwork of abortion laws by rescinding Biden-era guidance that directed hospitals to provide abortions in emergency situations, even in states where abortion is restricted. The decision, announced on Tuesday, does not change the federal law that was at the heart of the Biden Administration's guidance: the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which requires hospitals that receive Medicare funding—which is most of them—to provide stabilizing treatment to patients experiencing medical emergencies or transfer them to a hospital that can. The Trump Administration's Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) said in a press release that it 'will continue to enforce EMTALA, which protects all individuals who present to a hospital emergency department seeking examination or treatment, including for identified emergency medical conditions that place the health of a pregnant woman or her unborn child in serious jeopardy.' But the agency also said that it 'will work to rectify any perceived legal confusion and instability created by the former administration's actions.' Doctors and abortion-rights advocates, however, said they feared that the Administration's move will amplify confusion over whether doctors can provide critical care, thereby putting lives at risk. Dr. Jamila Perritt—an ob-gyn in Washington, D.C., and the president and CEO of Physicians for Reproductive Health—said in a press release that rescinding the Biden-era guidance would force "providers like me to choose between caring for someone in their time of need and turning my back on them to comply with cruel and dangerous laws.' 'This action sends a clear message: the lives and health of pregnant people are not worth protecting,' Perritt said. The Biden Administration issued the guidance after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, reminding hospitals of their 'obligations' under EMTALA, as state laws restricting or banning abortion began going into effect. 'Any state actions against a physician who provides an abortion in order to stabilize an emergency medical condition in a pregnant individual presenting to the hospital would be preempted by the federal EMTALA statute due to the direct conflict with the 'stabilized' provision of the statute,' the guidance stressed. 'Moreover, EMTALA contains a whistleblower provision that prevents retaliation by the hospital against any hospital employee or physician who refuses to transfer a patient with an emergency medical condition that has not been stabilized by the initial hospital, such as a patient with an emergent ectopic pregnancy, or a patient with an incomplete medical abortion.' The guidance also said that physicians' fear of violating state laws prohibiting abortion could not be used as the basis for transferring a patient. 'When a direct conflict occurs between EMTALA and a state law, EMTALA must be followed,' the guidance stated. EMTALA remains in place despite the change in the guidance. The Trump Administration did not explicitly advise hospitals that they could deny patients abortions in emergency situations. CMS did specify in the memo announcing the revocation that the Department of Health and Human Services may not enforce the interpretation in the Biden Administration's guidance that EMTALA preempts Texas' near-total abortion ban, pointing to court rulings that have temporarily blocked the guidance in the state. But abortion-rights advocates sharply criticized the Trump Administration's move, saying it endangers the lives of pregnant people. 'The Trump Administration would rather women die in emergency rooms than receive life-saving abortions,' Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a press release. 'In pulling back guidance, this administration is feeding the fear and confusion that already exists at hospitals in every state where abortion is banned. Hospitals need more guidance right now, not less.' 'We're making our health care professionals have to operate in a gray area when their work really needs to be clear,' says Monica Simpson, executive director of SisterSong, a reproductive justice collective. 'They're in the business of providing life-saving care to people on a daily basis, and they don't need to be put in a position where their decision making is compromised.' When that confusion happens, she says, 'people die.' Simpson says that, for states that have banned or restricted abortion, like her home state of Georgia, rescinding the Biden-era guidance is 'just going to make things worse.' 'It's making it incredibly scary for the American people and pregnant folks who would need access to emergency services,' Simpson says. 'People's lives are at stake.' Anti-abortion groups, meanwhile, celebrated the move. 'The Trump administration has delivered another win for life and truth – stopping Biden's attack on emergency care for both pregnant moms and their unborn children,' Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a press release. She accused Democrats of creating confusion about people's access to care in medical emergencies, including miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies. 'In situations where every minute counts, their lies lead to delayed care and put women in needless, unacceptable danger,' she said. More than a dozen states have banned abortion in almost all cases or after six weeks of pregnancy, before many people even know they're pregnant. There have been many reports of pregnant people experiencing complications being turned away from hospitals in states that have banned abortion. Previously, the Biden Administration had sued Idaho over its near-total abortion ban, saying that the state's restrictions conflicted with EMTALA. In March, the Trump Administration dropped the lawsuit. Contact us at letters@
The Citizen
19-05-2025
- Politics
- The Citizen
Second chance for Amerikaner ‘refugees'
Amerikaner refugees are bit players who have strayed into the spotlight in a piece of political theatre between the ANC and Trump. The first group of Afrikaners from South Africa to arrive for resettlement in the US. Picture: Saul Loeb / AFP The granting of refugee status to a small group of white Afrikaners by the US – an offer that has been extended to include members of other racial minorities who can credibly demonstrate that they are being discriminated against – will have profoundly negative implications for SA. It puts the ANC-led government in a quandary about a slew of controversial legislation regarding hot-button issues such as race quotas, black economic empowerment, property and language rights and hate speech. Trump placed marker on SA Beyond the silly hyperbole about genocide and rampant land seizures, the important fact is the world's most powerful nation has laid down a marker that there are indeed 'bad things happening in South Africa', to quote US President Donald Trump, and that these amount to racial discrimination. While the local media childishly insists on putting the word refugee in quotation marks whenever they refer to those going to the US under Trump's executive order, that word is now a juristic definition of their status. It's a hugely important legal distinction with far-reaching implications. It not only opens the door to many thousands of minority-group citizens – not just farmers, not just Afrikaners, not just whites – fleeing to the US, but will undoubtedly influence other immigration authorities. WATCH: SA 'refugees' leave for US 'Amerikaner refugees' vs South Africans For the moment, however, the matter is playing on a much pettier level. Who would have thought that the departure of fewer than five dozen Afrikaners could cause such an outpouring of undeserved media vitriol and government anger? It's especially odd given that an estimated 1-2 million people have emigrated unremarked upon since the ANC took power. The national ego has been badly dented and it transpires that hell hath no fury like South Africans scorned. Even our normally imperturbable president has given public vent. Cyril Ramaphosa last week lambasted the group as 'cowards' who would 'very soon' be scuttling back to South Africa with their tails between their legs. ALSO READ: Trump administration slams church for refusing to resettle white South Africans in America Will the Amerikaners get caught in the Trump vs ANC crossfire? Meanwhile, everyone is hard at work seeking scapegoats. Afrikaner civic action group AfriForum, for one, is firmly in the crosshairs. The Amerikaners, as they've derisively been dubbed, hopefully realise things will be hard. They are bit players who have strayed into the spotlight in a piece of political theatre between the ANC and Trump. They should know, too, that back home their every failure will be magnified and gloated over, their every success minimised. It's a misguided response by the government and its cheerleaders. The reality is that SA, if it continues on the ANC's present course, will experience a massive exodus of human capital it can ill afford to lose and those leaving in future will mainly, but by no means only, be minorities. However, all the quibbling about whether the Amerikaners are just wallowing in victimhood or genuinely seeking refuge mean less than the smug commentators assume and the dishonest politicians pretend. Yes, there are gradations of agency, of volition, across the spectrum of emigrant, exile and refugee. But contradictions abound. There are penniless, footsore emigrants and plump, wellshod refugees. Perhaps the thing that they most have in common is heartache. ALSO READ: Afrikaner claims of persecution are a fat lie What lies ahead for Amerikaner refugees While some may leave the land of their forefathers with a sense of relief – a smile on their lips and a song in their hearts – in my experience, they're relatively few. To depart this South Africa, the ancient land that magically weaves through our present hopes, fears, triumphs and defeats, is not easy. To leave behind permanently the land that has forged one's identity and in doing so become part of one's soul, is heartrending. It's a death of sorts. But also, if one is fortunate, it can be a do-over, a second chance, or even a rebirth. NOW READ: Victory for asylum seekers: High Court declares parts of Refugees Act unconstitutional
