 | Buy or sell tickets for concerts, sports, or theater. You'll find a huge and affordable selection at Ticket Liquidator! From our sponsors |
| CNN.com - Top Stories |
| CNN.com delivers up-to-the-minute news and information on the latest top stories, weather, entertainment, politics and more. |
The man who fixed football
8/29/2014 11:12:21 AM
- Convicted match-fixer Wilson Raj Perumal speaks to CNN in first television interview
- Singaporean says he fixed up to 100 matches all over the world
- Perumal boasts about having fixed World Cup qualifiers and making millions of dollars
- Former FIFA investigator says match-fixing threatens to destroy game's integrity
(CNN) -- He rose from humble beginnings, worked his way through the local leagues before graduating to become a major player on the international stage, netting him millions of dollars along the way.
But this isn't a tale about a footballing hero. This is a story about one of modern sport's greatest villains -- the man dubbed the most notorious match-fixer in the world.
You may not be familiar with the name Wilson Raj Perumal but given how prolific he was, you might have watched one of the games he's fixed.
"I never really counted, but I think it should be between 80-100 football matches," Perumal told CNN's Don Riddell in his first-ever television interview.
Few doors seemed to be closed to Perumal.
"I was on the bench at times, and telling players what to do, giving orders to the coach. It was that easy. There was no policing whatsoever."
Officials were just as easy to target, he boasts, with "no barriers" when approaching select referees, while certain football associations would "welcome you with open arms," he added.
It was only after his arrest and subsequent conviction in 2011 -- his fourth for football-related crimes - - that Perumal started coming clean on his former life, with the poacher-turned-gamekeeper now helping European police combat match-fixing.
In all, Perumal claims to have pocketed around $5 million himself from match-fixing.
However, he lost it all gambling, perhaps explaining why the 49-year-old recently published an autobiography, "Kelong Kings," recounting his journey from rural Singapore to football's globetrotting Mr Fix-it.
"I had my boyhood dreams. I wanted to be a soldier but during my school days I got a criminal record and couldn't really pursue what I wanted to. And then I got attracted to betting when I was about 19-20 years old," he said.
"I kind of got hooked and I didn't want to lose ... so I started fixing local matches," he says.
Perumal plied his trade in Singapore's local football leagues in the late 1980s before joining what international crime-fighting organization INTERPOL recently described as "the world's most notorious match-fixing syndicate" allegedly headed by Tan Seet Eng -- better known as "Dan Tan," who is now reportedly in detention in Singapore.
As the Internet age dawned in the mid-1990s, so Perumal's match-fixing horizons expanded.
"We could see all these matches around the world ... I had the opportunity to target vulnerable countries ... people who were prone to accept bribes," he said.
Wilson Raj Perumal
"So I registered a company and started e-mailing associations and building relationships."
'Like two hands prepared to clap'
The 49-year-old's first foray into international match-fixing -- a 1997 friendly match between Zimbabwe and Bosnia Herzegovina -- failed, he says.
Perumal alleges up to six players from the Zimbabwe team had agreed to lose the match 4-0 in return for a share of $100,000. But the game played in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia finished in a 2-2 draw.
"We gave them a result that was difficult to accomplish and what happened during the game was that one player accidentally kicked the ball into the net."
A decade later, Perumal targeted Zimbabwe again in what became known as the "Asiagate" scandal with both players and officials receiving bribes to fix a string of matches between 2007 and 2009.
"We were like two hands prepared to clap," Perumal says.
Former FIFA match-fixing investigator, Terry Steans was shocked when he was handed a FIFA case file on match-fixing in Zimbabwe in 2009.
"I read that file and thought: 'No. It can't be. It can't be this easy and it can't be this prevalent,'" Steans told CNN.
"Five years later, I know yes it was and yes it is. But that file opened our eyes and it was to set FIFA Security, at that time, on a path to try and discover as much as we could about the fixers and how prevalent and widespread they were."
Zimbabwe's game was destroyed by the fixing scandal, Steans says.
Dozens of players and officials were sanctioned, some receiving life bans while others were barred from playing for several years.
The Footballers Union of Zimbabwe has been critical of the Zimbabwe Football Association (ZIFA) investigation but Steans says ZIFA deserves credit for taking action.
"They appointed an investigation committee and they took the investigation as far as they possibly could do."
CNN invited ZIFA to comment on match-fixing in the country but they hadn't responded by the time of publication.
Hat trick of jail terms
Perumal says he achieved around a 70-80% success rate and claims to have rigged games at the Olympics, World Cup qualifiers, the women's World Cup, the CONCACAF Gold Cup and the African Cup of Nations.
But his attempts to corrupt didn't always go undetected by the authorities, notably in Singapore where he was imprisoned three times for football-related offences.
In 1995, he was jailed for 12 months for trying to bribe a football player. Four years later he was imprisoned for 26 months for introducing a referee to a match-fixer and in 2000 he attacked a footballer with a hockey stick prior to a game -- an offense he says he deeply regrets.
In 2011, the football authorities eventually caught up with Perumal again, this time in Finland where he was arrested and subsequently jailed for fixing matches in the Veikkausliiga, the country's premier football division.
Perumal served one year of a two-year sentence before being extradited to Hungary where he has been helping police there with match-fixing investigations in the Balkans.
Steans was shocked when police showed him Perumal's list of contacts.
Terry Steans, former FIFA investigator
"Perumal had 38 countries in one phone book contacts list -- he had officials and players from those 38 countries," Steans told CNN.
"If you then go to his laptop address book, there were over 50. FIFA has 209 associations ... so we are talking a quarter of FIFA associations for one fixer," he added.
"As we now know, he used most of these people and used them for his own ends and his syndicate's ends and made a lot of money out of it."
He might have lost all his ill-gotten gains but Perumal looks back fondly on that period of his life.
"I have no regrets. It was like, it was a phase of my life and I enjoyed it and I traveled around the world. I had a good time."
There are glimmers of remorse. Perumal says he feels sorry for fixing some matches but then says there are "no regrets" for others.
"Football is no longer a sport. It is more like a business now. So I think we're just trying to make money out of this business. People want to win and they will do anything just to get a result."
Pitch battle
FIFA says preserving the game's integrity is "a top priority" and in 2011 announced it was giving INTERPOL €20 million ($26.5 million) to fight match-fixing.
"We take any allegations of match manipulation very seriously and are looking into those," FIFA's media department told CNN via email.
"Obviously we are aware of publications such as 'Kelong Kings.' We do not further comment on our activities and we do not share investigative reports.
"FIFA continues to work closely with law enforcement agencies as well as the respective public authorities and other sports organizations on a national regional and global level to tackle the issue of match manipulation."
But Perumal thinks they could be doing more.
"FIFA has not come up with enough strategies or methods or publicity or marketing or whatever you can call it, to combat match-fixing," Perumal says.
"FIFA are doing a lot of things to combat racism but I think match-fixing is more of a problem than racism. I'm not saying FIFA shouldn't pump in so much money (to tackle racism) but what I'm saying is that match-fixing is a more pressing issue."
Terry Steans, former FIFA investigator
Steans says Perumal has been "value for money" for investigators helping them understand how match-fixers operate.
"Wilson is a bit of an enigma," he says. "But you know what, every piece of information that he gave out of Finland and Hungary that came our way was right."
The former FIFA man is still fighting match fixing, working as a consultant for a sports corruption company.
But given the recent past, he fears for football's future if match fixing continues to carry on virtually unchecked.
"We end up with a game that lacks integrity, with the game's reputation in tatters and with fans not really knowing what they're watching," Steans says.
"Will fans watch? We'd probably end up with something similar to Zimbabwe where fans walked away, sponsors walked away ... You will end up with a game that means nothing. Just means nothing.
"And when it means nothing, sponsors don't want it and fans don't want it either. So teams would be playing in empty stadiums. It'd be a desert."
Match-fixer denies story on Cameroon throwing World Cup game
Cricket hit by fresh match-fixing allegations over New Zealand players
How much of a fix is football in?
8/29/2014 11:12:31 AM
- Football match fixing is a global problem, according to former FIFA investigator
- Convicted match fixer Wilson Raj Perumal says he fixed a match with a single player
- Sports betting expert urges clubs to educate players about fixing from young age
- Investigative journalist Declan Hill, calls for independent anti-corruption agency
(CNN) -- Recent revelations in print and now on television by convicted match fixer Wilson Raj Perumal are once again throwing the spotlight onto match-fixing in football.
Coercing players, officials and administrators into rigging matches has netted fixers millions of dollars while football is left counting the cost to its integrity.
How big is the problem?
It's widespread, says Terry Steans, who has worked as an investigator for football's world governing body, FIFA.
"I never thought it would be across the globe but it is, and that's the most surprising thing to me (along with) the consummate ease with which fixers gained access to football," Steans told CNN.
In February last year, the European Union's law enforcement agency, Europol announced that 680 matches (380 of them in Europe) played between 2008 and 2011 were under suspicion of being rigged.
"This is the work of a suspected organized crime syndicate based in Asia and operated with criminal networks around Europe," Rob Wainwright, director of Europol said following an 18-month probe.
Specific matches under scrutiny were not named by Europol, but fixtures include World Cup qualifiers and Champions League ties, they said.
Europe's top domestic leagues have been no stranger to football corruption in recent times with notable match-fixing scandals erupting in Germany's Bundesliga in 2005 and Italy's Serie A and B the following season.
But match fixing extends far beyond Europe's borders with scandals uncovered in Asia, Africa and Latin America in recent years.
Investigators say that much of the problem stems from illegal gambling markets in Asia, which are said to turn over billions of dollars every single day.
"Football is by far the largest betting market in the world and by far the most liquid," says Joe Saumarez Smith, a sports betting consultant.
Fixers like to target football because there are a lot of matches played, he says. But there are other reasons.
"A lot of players are not very well paid and, particularly in the African leagues, they don't get paid ... so match-fixing becomes more attractive," Saumarez Smith says.
How do you go about fixing football matches?
With alarming ease, if you believe Perumal.
"I've fixed matches with just a single player," he says. "But, of course, you would like to have the goalkeeper, we would like to have the defenders, then the striker ..."
Perumal told CNN that a fix will often start with one player who is offered money to throw a game. If they are happy to play ball, the match fixer will then use the target to sound out other members of the team.
Using a group of players to fix a match is advantageous to the fixer because it improves the chances of getting the desired result.
It's also more difficult to spot says Declan Hill, author of "The Insider's Guide to Match-Fixing in Football."
"You have six players running around trying as hard as they can; and you have five players pretending to run around trying as hard as they can," Hill explained in a piece penned for CNN last year.
"This way, the outsider finds it extraordinarily difficult to figure out what is going on. All they see is 11 players who may or may not be making mistakes."
Referees are also prime targets for match fixers and Perumal would frequently attempt to bribe the man in black. Some referees were ripe for corruption, he claims.
"These are people who are supposed to uphold the laws of the game. But sad to say that, you know, FIFA doesn't really pay these referees that well," Perumal said.
"They get about $1,000 or maybe $1,500 (per game) which is very small money. In my opinion, FIFA should pay them a lot more or they should start to professionalize this officiating."
When asked about the payment of referees, FIFA told CNN: "Corruption does not depend on how much you are paid, but instead, and above all, honesty and values of the individual."
There is also evidence that some club owners are corrupting results.
"Europol investigators spoke about this during their conference (in 2013)," Hill says.
"There are dodgy club owners in Europe who will begin a season by looking at the 40 or so games in the league, and think, 'right, we will try to win these 30 matches, and we will lose these 10,'" Hill said.
"Knowing that they will lose those specific 10 matches, the club owners will bet against their team and make more money losing those matches, than in winning all the other games."
What are football's authorities doing?
A lot or not enough, depending on who you talk to.
FIFA points to the "vast range of measures and initiatives," they have implemented in response to match fixing. These include national and regional workshops and an E-learning program developed in partnership with INTERPOL.
"The integrity of the game is a top priority," FIFA told CNN. "We take any allegations of match manipulation very seriously."
But Saumarez Smith isn't convinced the footballing authorities are doing enough yet.
Terry Steans, former FIFA investigator
"(They are) slightly better than what they used to be, but they used to be absolutely dreadful," Saumarez Smith says.
"In fact, they just had their heads in the sand about it. I remember going to some meetings with leagues 15 years ago and me saying: 'we could do a match-monitoring service,' and they said: 'why would we want that?' They've got a bit more alerted, but they are a long way from where they could be."
Education is also crucial, he thinks.
"The clubs and the league need to have an education program to tell the young players if you are approached by a match-fixer you need to come and tell us," he said.
"That needs to be an education process from a very early stage, from 13 or 14 (years old) for players coming from the professional rank or joining clubs."
Improvements have been made at UEFA, he says, pointing to their use of betting monitoring -- European football's governing body annually track more than 30,000 matches across the continent for betting irregularities.
FIFA have their own monitoring system called "Early Warning System," but Saumarez Smith questions the organization's capability to deal with corruption.
"I think it's difficult for some people to take them seriously when their own house doesn't appear to be in order," he says, noting the continuing controversy surrounding the bidding process for World Cup finals.
But Steans, who worked for FIFA from 2010 to 2012, defends his former employer.
"FIFA were really concerned," he says. "For the two years I was there working under Chris Eaton, he was genuinely concerned and tasked us solely to match-fixing. Once you're inside it as a football fan and you're seeing (match-fixing) first hand, you can't help but be concerned for the game."
Will football ever be fix free?
Experts aren't sure.
"Fixing and corruption has always been in sport, it's really part of human nature," says Declan Hill.
"The trick now is battling this globalized phenomenon of corruption. Frankly, what we need is an independent, international anti-corruption agency for sport, the same way WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) has been set up."
Steans agrees.
"I'd like to think that we could make the majority of the game safe and I feel the only way that can be done is by an independent body being formed -- an international independent body with proper powers," Steans says.
"I think individual associations standing alone will always be vulnerable to clever criminals with money and the human condition makes people naturally vulnerable when lots of money is involved."
Read more: The man who fixed football
How to buy a referee
8/29/2014 11:13:54 AM
- Convicted match fixer, Wilson Raj Perumal says a referee from Niger was "the best"
- Ibrahim Chaibou officiated in a World Cup warm-up awarding dubious penalties
- Asia-based syndicate famously bribed referees for a mini-tournament in Turkey in 2011
- Former FIFA investigator says referees may need more protection against match fixers
(CNN) -- Who'd be a referee? When the crowd aren't getting on your back you've got the players acting up or giving you an earful.
So if someone described your refereeing as "the best," you could be forgiven for feeling a small surge of pride. But when the person praising you has been called the world's most notorious match fixer, then it's time to show yourself a red card.
Wilson Raj Perumal says he corrupted many football players and officials during a long criminal career, but there is one person who stands out from the crowd. His name was Ibrahim Chaibou, a referee from Niger.
"He was the best, he was the best, but not from FIFA's point of view," Perumal told CNN during a wide-ranging television interview about his match-fixing days.
Perfect partner
The Singaporean, who is now helping European police with match-fixing investigations, claims to have rigged the results of up to 100 matches over a 20-year period, boasting of a 70-80% success rate.
Chaibou, who he describes as "very bold," became one of his favourite match officials.
According to Perumal, the referee's first match fix was an international friendly between South Africa and Guatemala in May 2010 -- one of several warm-up matches played ahead of the 2010 World Cup which the Rainbow Nation hosted.
Watching highlights of the game on YouTube, Perumal gives a running commentary on the major incidents.
"It's crazy," Perumal says as Chaibou awards South Africa a penalty kick. The quality of the footage is poor, but the fixer knows what happened.
"This is not a penalty. The offence took place outside the box," he says.
The man from Niger is allegedly at it again in the second half, this time awarding Guatemala a penalty for a handball. Replays show the ball striking a South African player's chest.
Chaibou awarded three penalties in all during the match and, according to Perumal, fulfilled his task of overseeing a high-scoring fixture. The game finished 5-0 to South Africa.
"We paid him very good money," Perumal says.
Elaborate scheme
Perumal says getting Chaibou onto the pitch was the result of an elaborate scheme where the match-fixer used his now-defunct company 'Football 4 U International' to target the South African Football Association (SAFA).
"I had this idea to influence the warm-up games without the knowledge of the association concerned.
"So I remember writing a formal letter to the association requesting that my company 'Football 4 U' supply referees from Africa at our expense," Perumal explains.
Supplying referees in this way is a breach of FIFA rules, but Perumal's idea was accepted.
"It is clear that the convicted criminal and football match-fixer, Wilson Raj Perumal, was involved in convincing SAFA to agree to a company then managed by him [Football4U] to select, fund and appoint referees," said a FIFA statement in March 2012.
Wilson Raj Perumal
FIFA also had act over a mini tournament in Antalya, Turkey in February 2011.
Fixers at an Asian-based syndicate approached the Football Associations of Bolivia, Bulgaria, Latvia and Estonia inviting them to an all-expenses paid event. But they were all duped, because the referees had allegedly been paid to fix the results.
Terry Steans, a FIFA investigator between 2010 and 2012, recalls the set up.
"It involved four international teams and an empty stadium, no ticket sales and yet the game was (open) for betting," Steans explains.
"I sat and watched match fixers with a briefcase full of cash to pay the referees."
Seven goals were scored in the two matches played -- all of them from the penalty spot.
"I think that's the most shocking for me to see a fixing syndicate in total control of two international friendlies, played in the same stadium to no crowd at all. It's eerie, absolutely eerie," Steans said.
FIFA handed down life bans for the six match officials who Perumal says were targeted by his former associates in Singapore.
Paying the penalty
Perumal insists he wasn't involved in the Turkey scandal -- one of the most notorious and brazen match fixes of recent times -- but his fingerprints were clearly all over the warm-up matches in South Africa.
A FIFA report, seen by CNN, concluded that the match involving Chaibou was "manipulated for betting fraud purposes" and noted that "several SAFA members were either easily duped or extremely foolish" when organizing the games.
Chaibou continued officiating into 2011, notably taking charge of an international friendly match between Nigeria and Argentina in Abuja in June that year.
Nigeria played a match against a second-string Argentina side -- a surprising detail in itself, but what caught the eye was how the match ended.
When 90 minutes of regulation play was over, Nigeria was leading 4-0. Four or five minutes were due to be added for injury time, but the score remained the same. Chaibou kept the match going.
In the 98th minute he awarded a penalty to Argentina for a handball that replays show never happened. Argentina converted the penalty and the match ended 4-1.
Analysis of betting patterns by FIFA revealed a surge in bets for a fifth goal to be scored.
Chaibou, who retired from refereeing before FIFA could take disciplinary action, denies fixing matches, but isn't saying much more.
When contacted by CNN, the former referee said: "I have put an end to my career and everything is finished." He added: "What is past is past."
For what it's worth, Perumal thinks referees should be paid more.
"They get about $1,000 or maybe $1,500 (per game) which is very small money. In my opinion, FIFA should pay them a lot more or they should start to professionalize this officiating."
When asked about the payment of referees, FIFA told CNN: "Corruption does not depend on how much you are paid, but instead, and above all, honesty and values of the individual."
Steans says the time may have come to protect referees from the fixers.
"When you're on your own it's very difficult to turn down two or three guys that are pressuring you," he says.
"It's the easiest thing in the world to write a manual and say this is how you should react. In the real world, it's a difficult thing in isolation to do for a referee. So they're vulnerable and I feel they'd need more protection."
Read more: The man who fixed football matches
Read more: How much of a fix is football in?
Can Real Madrid end Liverpool jinx?
8/29/2014 11:16:38 AM
- Reigning champion Real Madrid drawn against newcomer Ludogorets
- Barcelona and Paris Saint-Germain paired in Group F
- No team has ever successfully defended Champions League title
- The final will be held in Berlin on June 6, 2015
Follow us at @WorldSportCNN and like us on Facebook
(CNN) -- Real Madrid, the kings of Europe, will take on a team living one of the greatest fairytale stories in Bulgarian football history.
Ludogorets Razgrad, which clinched its place in the group stage of the Champions League for the first time following a dramatic penalty shootout playoff victory, will travel to the Santiago Bernabeu stadium to face the defending champion.
Real, which defeated city rival Atletico 4-1 in Lisbon last year to win "La Decima" -- it's 10th title -- is attempting to become the first team to successfully defend the Champions League.
This will be our opponents in #UCL Group B. #UCLdraw #halamadrid pic.twitter.com/A9gHHXi3Lv
— Real Madrid C.F. (@realmadriden) August 28, 2014 Ludogorets will also face five-time champion Liverpool -- back in the Champions League after a five-year absence -- as well as Swiss side FC Basel in Group A.
Ludogorets defeated Romanian side Steaua Bucharest thanks to two penalty saves from stand-in goalkeeper Cosmin Moţi.
Moţi , a defender, went in goal for the shootout after goalkeeper Vladislav Stoyanov was sent off with one minute of extra time remaining and made himself a hero.
Surprisingly Liverpool have won all three of their European Cup matches against 10-time champion Real and have never even conceded a goal against them.
IMAGE: #LFC's group in the Champions League following the outcome of today's #UCLdraw pic.twitter.com/pKugjixLXP
— Liverpool FC (@LFC) August 28, 2014 Read: The ultimate football fairytale
Elsewhere, Bayern Munich will face Manchester City in a repeat of last season's group stage contests.
Munich produced a fine performance to win 3-1 in Manchester but was stunned by the English club at the Allianz Arena, losing 3-2 in the return fixture.
"We're coming up against familiar teams here," Bayern keeper Manuel Neuer told his club's website. "They're not easy opponents by any means, but we know from last year where we stand and can use that going in."
Bayern and City will also have to negotiate tricky ties against Roma and CSKA Moscow if they are to progress.
Sooo Bayern Munich again 😄
— Edin Džeko (@EdDzeko) August 28, 2014 In Group F, Zlatan Ibrahimovic will face two of his former clubs after Paris Saint-Germain was drawn alongside Barcelona and Ajax.
PSG, beaten in the round of 16 by Chelsea last season, will also have to take on Cypriot side Apoel Nicosia.
"These are games where every team has the right to dream," Barcelona's director of sport, former Spanish international keeper Andoni Zubizarreta, told the club website. "We have our dreams, and they all have their own."
It's a case of déjà vu for Arsenal and Borussia Dortmund after the two teams were drawn together for a third consecutive season.
Dortmund, which was narrowly beaten by Real Madrid in last year's quarterfinal, triumphed against Arsene Wenger's side in London but was topped at home by "the Gunners."
Turkish side Galatasaray, which reached the second round last time around, will also provide a stern test, with Belgian club Anderlecht completing the line-up.
Atletico Madrid, which lost last year's final in extra time, will face Italian champion Juventus, Olympiacos and Swedish side Malmo in Group A.
Juventus crashed out in the group stage last season.
Olympiacos was beaten by Manchester United in the last-16 during the previous edition while Malmo is making its first appearance in the group stage.
In Group C, Benfica, which has not won the competition since 1962, takes on Zenit Saint Petersburg, Bayer Leverkusen and Radamel Falcao's Monaco.
Chelsea, the 2012 champion, will be confident of making it through Group G after being drawn against Schalke, Sporting Lisbon and Slovenian champion Maribor.
Athletic Bilbao's reward for defeating Napoli in the playoff are games against Porto, Shakhtar Donetsk and BATE Borisov.
Champions League draw:
Group A: Atletico Madrid, Juventus, Olympiacos, Malmo
Group B: Real Madrid, Basel, Liverpool, Ludogorets
Group C: Benfica, Zenit, Bayer Leverkusen, Monaco
Group D: Arsenal, Borussia Dortmund, Galatasaray, Anderlecht
Group: E: Bayern Munich, Manchester City, CSKA Moscow, Roma
Group F: Barcelona, Paris Saint-Germain, Ajax, APOEL
Group G: Chelsea, Schalke, Sporting, Maribor
Group H: FC Porto, Shakhtar Donetsk, Athletic Bilbao, BATE Borisov
Why teens need to start school later
8/29/2014 7:28:56 AM
- Expert group recommends middle and high schools start no earlier than 8:30 a.m.
- Many adolescents suffer chronic sleep deprivation because their sleep patterns have changed
- Sleep deprivation can produce mood swings, difficulty concentrating, car accidents
- Snider: People resist later school start, but lives will adjust and kids will do better in school
Editor's note: Terra Ziporyn Snider is a medical writer, historian and former associate editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association. She is the executive director and co-founder of Start School Later, a nonprofit dedicated to increasing public awareness about the relationship between sleep and school hours. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer.
(CNN) -- The American Academy of Pediatrics' new recommendation to start middle and high schools no earlier than 8:30 a.m. is a turning point in the decades-old battle to start school later. Establishing adolescent sleep and school hours as public health issues -- and specifying an earliest acceptable bell time -- should energize communities to stop condemning another generation to chronic sleep deprivation.
The science supporting a return to later school start times is clear, and has been since the 1990s. As a science writer, I've read many compelling studies that show starting classes in the 7 a.m. hour -- not to mention sending sleep-deprived teenagers onto the streets as early as 5:30 a.m. -- is unhealthy, unsafe, and counterproductive. Raising three children who battled a 7:17 a.m. high school bell time erased any remaining doubts that they needed to start school later.
The root of the problem is that in puberty, a shift in circadian rhythms, or "body clocks," pushes optimal sleep time forward. Most teenagers simply can't fall asleep before 11 p.m. even if they're lying in bed for hours. When dawn rolls around, they haven't gotten close to the 8½ to 9½ hours of sleep their still-growing brains and bodies need.
The resulting sleep deprivation can produce mood swings, obesity, substance abuse, immune disorders, and depression. Teenagers suffering from chronic fatigue often can't pay attention in school and have difficulty concentrating and remembering. Their judgment can be impaired, and sleepy drivers can get in accidents.
"Almost all teenagers, as they reach puberty, become walking zombies because they are getting far too little sleep," says James B. Maas, a sleep expert at Cornell University.
Sleep deprivation in children is also what the Academy of Pediatrics calls "one of the most common -- and easily fixable -- public health issues in the U.S. today."
Turning science into policy that fixes it, however, is another matter. When my family first moved to Anne Arundel County, Maryland, in 2000, our school district had already approved a pilot to start one of its 12 high schools at 9 a.m. We were convinced that by the time my seventh-grader got into high school, the whole district would follow suit. That plan was axed at the last minute, and, since then, nothing has changed. That seventh-grader is now 26, and my baby, then in kindergarten, is a college sophomore.
Running schools from 7 a.m. until about 2 p.m. appears to be relatively new -- although record-keeping is poor -- despite common sentiment that "we've always done things this way." Schools seem to have shifted earlier primarily to save money on bus costs in the 1970s or 1980s, before sleep science had revealed much about adolescent sleep needs and patterns.
Reluctance to reverse a bad decision is understandable. Community life revolves around public school hours, and any change in schedule -- whether earlier or later -- inevitably stirs up powerful opposition.
Many people react to suggestions to change starting times with scorn, fear, or even vitriol. Adults have vested interests in the early-start, early-release school days, and those concerns often trump the best interests of kids. People are wary of how later hours will affect daycare, sports and other extracurricular activities, jobs, and even traffic patterns.
These fears help explain why most school systems resist starting the school day later, even when they want to do so. It doesn't help that sleep is an emotional and even a moral issue for many people, and, sadly, is often considered a luxury.
The good news is that we have solid evidence showing that fears about later bell times are groundless. Studies coming out of the University of Minnesota, Brown University, and the Children's National Medical Center provide evidence that running schools at developmentally appropriate hours not only improves health and academic performance but actually results in teenagers getting significantly more sleep. Community life adjusts to school schedules, not vice versa.
The true obstacles aren't sports or bus costs, but the fear of change and failure of imagination. We've found schools in 43 states that have worked out feasible, affordable ways to ensure later, healthier hours by putting health, safety, and learning first. Their solutions didn't require rocket science but, rather, a shift of priorities.
Read CNNOpinion's new Flipboard magazine.
Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.
Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.
UK PM: ISIS threat 'greater and deeper'
8/29/2014 11:51:36 AM
- U.K. raises terror threat warning to second-highest level
- The terror threat is linked to the events in Iraq and Syria
- British Prime Minister says the root cause is Islamic extremism
London (CNN) -- The UK government raised its terror threat level Friday from "substantial" to "severe," the fourth highest of five levels, in response to events in Iraq and Syria, where ISIS militants have seized a swath of territory.
"That means that a terrorist attack is highly likely, but there is no intelligence to suggest that an attack is imminent," Home Secretary Theresa May said.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, meanwhile, said it is not aware of any specific, credible threat to the United States.
British Prime Minister David Cameron said the "root cause" of the terrorist threat in the United Kingdom is "Islamist extremism." He said the recent killing of U.S. journalist James Foley is clear evidence that ISIS's fight in Iraq and Syria "is not some foreign conflict thousands of miles from home that we can hope to ignore."
The danger that ISIS poses now is a "greater and deeper" threat to the UK's security than the country has ever known, Cameron said.
This is in part because ISIS is not simply seeking refuge in a country but ruthlessly seeking its own terrorist state and expanding, he said.
Cameron said he will soon announce plans to stop would-be jihadists from traveling to Syria and Iraq and to make it easier to take their passports away.
Britain also needs to do more to stop current fighters from returning from the Middle East and to deal decisively with those who already have returned, he said.
UK authorities estimate that 500 Britons have gone to Syria and Iraq to fight with Islamist groups.
The Prime Minister warned against having a knee-jerk response to the threat and said a number of tools must be deployed, the military being just one of them.
An intelligent response will involve aid, diplomacy and political influence, too, he said.
A distinction must be made between the religion of Islam and the "poisonous" political ideology of Islamic extremists, he said.
The UK has five levels of terror threat. It had been at "substantial" since July 11, 2011. The level is set by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Center and the Security Service.
The United States had a color-coded terrorism threat advisory scale that was discontinued in 2011. The system that replaced it, the National Terrorism Advisory System, sends out alerts on its website and to the media when there is an elevated threat.
As the U.S. Labor Day holiday nears, Ross Feinstein, Transportation Security Administration press secretary, says that the terror threat level has not changed for the TSA and that it is customary to see increased security presence leading up to a holiday weekend.
Feinstein stressed that he is speaking for the TSA and not the overall terror threat level, which is not determined by his agency.
U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson said that although there is no specific threat against the United States, ISIS has proved to be a threat to Americans overseas.
His department "has taken a number of steps to enhance aviation security at overseas airports with direct flights to the United States, and the United Kingdom and other nations have followed with similar enhancements."
Britain's national policing lead for counterterrorism, Mark Rowley, said police activity relating to the jihadist threat has escalated for months.
"The ongoing commitment to fight this threat has seen a significant rise in the number of Syria-related arrests," he said in a statement. "The first half of this year has seen a total of 69 arrests made for a variety of offenses, including fundraising for terrorist activity through to the preparation and/or instigation of terrorism acts and traveling abroad for terrorist training."
Obama's no 'strategy yet' comment on ISIS in Syria sparks a political uproar
CNN's Jason Hanna, Richard Allen Greene and Mariano Castillo contributed to this report.
6 questions about Ukraine crisis
8/29/2014 10:18:22 AM
- The United States and allies blame Russia for the violence
- Moscow denies direct involvement in the fighting
- Diplomacy and sanctions must play a role, experts say
(CNN) -- It's been building for months. And now, according to some, Russia has launched a "full-scale invasion" of Ukraine.
U.S. officials say Russian troops were directly involved in the latest fighting, alongside pro-Russian rebels.
"Russia is responsible for the violence in eastern Ukraine. The violence is encouraged by Russia. The separatists are trained by Russia; they are armed by Russia; they are funded by Russia," President Barack Obama told reporters Thursday.
Moscow, meanwhile, has said it would do everything possible to protect ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, but denies direct involvement in the fighting. It says the United States must stop interfering.
A Russian senator and the deputy head of the Committee on Defense and Security in Russia's upper house of Parliament, Evgeny Serebrennikov, dismissed reports of a Russian incursion as patently untrue.
"We've heard many statements from the government of Ukraine, which turned out to be a lie. What we can see now is just another lie," he told the Russian state news agency RIA Novosti.
As the stakes seem higher than ever in Ukraine, what does this latest development -- a significant one, most believe -- mean?
CNN.com breaks down some basics:
How did we get here?
Last December, then-President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych backed out of a trade agreement long in the works with the European Union and chose to take a $15 billion loan from Russia for his economically hurting nation. That move angered many Ukrainians who wanted their country to move more in line with the EU, and who also saw their president as a corrupt politician who'd done little to help the nation's limping economy, experts say. Protests broke out in the streets of Ukraine's capital, Kiev.
Shortly afterwards Yanukovych lost power, and Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered military exercises in Russia, just across Ukraine's border. Before February was over, armed men had seized regional parliament and government buildings in Crimea, a peninsula in southern Ukraine Russian whose population is mostly ethnic Russian.
In March, Russian troops annexed Crimea. At one point, a security camera at Ukrainian military base captured a bizarre sight -- a Russian armored personnel carrier busting through a base gate. Since then, fighting between Ukraine's military and pro-Russia rebels has continued to rage in eastern Ukraine.
Read: Who are the rebels in Ukraine?
Why does Russia care so much what happens in Ukraine?
There are strong cultural and historical ties between Ukraine and Russia. More than 100 years ago, Ukraine was part of imperial Russia.
In March, Putin gave a speech at the Kremlin in which he said Russia planned to "welcome back" Crimea.
"Crimea has always been an inseparable part of Russia," he said.
A New Yorker piece by journalist George Packer argues that Russia will "risk almost anything" to keep Crimea while the United States and Europe have minimal interests there and won't expend the risk to reverse the annexation.
A former ambassador to Ukraine explained in June to Congress why the United States should care about the nation, ranging from the fact that it's been a solid international partner on nuclear issues and in the war in Iraq.
Steven Pifer said that the "illegal seizure of Crimea is the most blatant land-grab that Europe has seen since 1945."
If Europe and the United States don't adequately respond, "the danger is that Mr. Putin may pursue other actions that would further threaten European security and stability," he said.
What has the West done, what can it do?
The West can always do something. But what is realistic and practical?
Most experts believe that answers are diplomacy and sanctions.
Charles Kupchan, a professor of international affairs at Georgetown University, says the United States and allies can keep trying to isolate Russia diplomatically -- prohibit Russian leaders from attending major summits or temporarily halt trade talks, for example.
"The dialogue should continue," Kupchan said, on a conference call initiated by the Council on Foreign Relations. "We have to look at this crisis with a certain amount of sobriety, in the sense that we still need Russian cooperation, if we can get it, on a lot of issues."
Keeping communication open with Russia is important to help deal with situations that aren't directly related to Ukraine -- nuclear talks with Iran, the continuing crisis in Syria, energy supplies and prices in the region and the Afghanistan war.
What's going on with sanctions the United States previously imposed on Russia?
Back in March, interim Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk said that he was afraid diplomatic pressure isn't enough.
So far the United States and allies have relied largely on sanctions to punish and influence Russia. Sanctions have been imposed on major Russian banks making it hard for those institutions to provide new medium and long-term financing in the United States, senior administration officials have said.
Obama imposes new sanctions on Russia over Ukraine
There have also been sanctions that sought to freeze any U.S. assets in Russia and prohibit American business contacts for eight Russian arms companies that make weapons. Some of those arms are the type being used by the pro-Russians separatists in Ukraine. Specific Russian government officials have also been the targets of sanctions.
Russia sanctions: West's top 15 targets
But global economist Robert Kahn, of the Council on Foreign Relations, told CNN Thursday that sanctions can cut both ways.
When sanctions were stepped up after Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 was downed in Ukraine -- a tragedy the West blamed on Russia-backed separatists (a charge Russia has denied), Putin attempted to retaliate by banning food and agricultural imports from countries such as the United States, Norway, Canada and Australia. The ban was enacted to help ensure "the security of the Russian Federation."
Russia is Europe's largest importer in value of animals, meat, dairy products, fruits and vegetables, according to the European Union.
That forced the EU to pay for temporary storage of butter, skim milk powder and some cheese to help farmers who would be take an economic hit.
Kahn said sanctions can work but the ones currently imposed are engineered to produce long-term results.
Sanctions aren't moving, he said, at the pace that matches Putin's actions.
What about military options?
President Obama has reiterated that Russia's military moves in Crimea violated international law. It's a line the administration has often said -- that no nation can send troops into another country without provocation.
While the rhetoric has been hard, it definitely does not mean military might in the force of America's own troops will ever be on the table.
Using military force to undo Russia's military control in Crimea is "out of the question," Kupchan said. "I don't think anybody believes that it is of significant enough interest" to bring in NATO or U.S. forces.
Even Ukraine's leadership has said military might is a mistake.
In March, interim Prime Minister Yatsenyuk told CNN that military force "is the way to nowhere."
Retired U.S. Army Col. Peter Mansoor, who served as Gen. David Petraeus' executive officer in Iraq from February 2007 to May 2008, told CNN on Thursday the United States can "send a message to Russia that their conduct is unacceptable without sparking a war" with Russia.
What could happen next?
Col. Mansoor said he was surprised by recent incursions in Ukraine. "For a while this summer it seemed that Russia was backing off," he said.
It's possible that Putin recognized gains Ukrainian government security forces made in August against the pro-Russian militias.
Read: Ukraine says it's made advances against separatists
A U.S. official told CNN on Thursday that intelligence suggests that up to 1,000 Russian troops have moved into southern Ukraine with heavy weapons and are fighting.
Satellite imagery, both commercial and from NATO, purportedly support that.
Kahn said he thinks what's happening now could go on for some time -- a stalemate.
The United States could ramp up equipping Ukrainian armed forces to fight the pro-Russian separatists and the United States could also station troops in Baltic states and in Poland which borders Ukraine. The Poles would be receptive to that, he said, and doing that would "reassure our allies that we could defend them."
There could be more sanctions, too.
But any moves made must be strong, experts agreed.
Putin must be made to understand "his actions are not increasing Russia power," Mansoor said, "but actually bringing U.S. power closer to Russia."
Because, right now, what's happening in Ukraine Thursday "shows that Putin's desires in that region have not yet been satisfied," Mansoor said, "and he's willing to risk further sanctions and further war."
Venus exits after U.S. Open epic
8/30/2014 3:02:30 AM
- Two-time champion Venus Williams defeated in third round of U.S. Open
- Italian world No. 13 Sara Errani wins epic encounter 6-0 0-6 7-6
- Qualifier Mirjana Lucic-Baroni knocks out second seed Simona Halep
- The former Croatian teenage star describes her shock victory as "incredible"
(CNN) -- Venus Williams was the first former champion to fall on Friday at the U.S. Open.
The American lost an epic encounter with world No. 13 Sara Errani as the Italian came through 6-0 0-6 7-6.
Roger Federer and Maria Sharapova, also former winners at Flushing Meadows, hope to stay the course later on Friday.
Williams, who has rediscovered some of her best form in the build up to the final grand slam of the season, looked down and out as she lost an error-strewn opening set.
But there were cheers from the crowd on Arthur Ashe court when the 34-year-old home favorite won her first game of the match at the start of the second.
It looked like a phoenix from the flames comeback was on from Williams as she overpowered Errani to level at one set all.
The third set saw the pendulum of momentum swing between the two players.
Williams was serving for the match at 5-3 up only for Errani to break back and eventually force a deciding tiebreak.
The breaker was another see-sawing affair but it was the Italian who conjured some brilliant play to wrap up it 7-5 and book her place in the fourth round.
Williams came into Friday's single match on the back off a draining doubles match with her sister Serena.
The 34-year-old, who is dealing with the effects of Sjogren's Syndrome, will turn her attention to that side of the tournament now.
Fairytale in New York
There was a fairytale in New York for qualifier Mirjana Lucic-Baroni as she knocked out second seed Simona Halep 7-6 6-2.
The world No. 121 had once been one of the game's rising stars, reaching the Wimbledon semifinals in 1999.
But her career went into freefall after personal revelations about an abusive childhood.
Lucic-Baroni fled to the United States with her mother and siblings but her promising tennis career was all but over.
"After so many years, it's incredible," the 32-year-old told reporters. "I live for this. Every painful moment has been worth it."
Abuse scandal shocks nation to core
8/29/2014 10:33:37 PM
- Tim Stanley: Report about sex abuse of 1,400 children shocked Britain. How could it happen?
- He says some blame authorities' PC reluctance to intervene; offenders were Pakistani
- But he says blame, too, an institutional betrayal by police, social services and politicians
- Stanley: Britain must face hidden sex abuse, unpunished negligence. Inquiry must bring justice
Editor's note: Timothy Stanley is a historian and columnist for Britain's Daily Telegraph. He is the author of the new book "Citizen Hollywood: How the Collaboration Between L.A. and D.C. Revolutionized American Politics." The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
(CNN) -- The publication of a report into child abuse in the northern town of Rotherham, England has shocked Britain to the core.
The report, by Professor Alexis Jay, gives a "conservative estimate" of 1,400 children being sexually assaulted over a 16-year period. They were beaten, kidnapped, raped and trafficked. Some victims were as young as 11.
How could it happen here, in a modern country that professes to care for the vulnerable? The horrors in Rotherham first came to light in 2010, when five men were jailed for sexual offenses against underage girls. A journalist's investigation into the wider scale of abuse prompted the local council to conduct its own report -- and it's the staggering numbers revealed in Jay's findings that have caught the public's attention.
Many of the headlines have focused on the racial makeup of the culprits, who were overwhelmingly Asian males. The report concludes that elected council officials were reluctant to talk directly to the Pakistani community about the problem and that some staff were frightened of being labeled "racist" for doing so.
All of which confirms the assertion from the British right wing that a climate of "political correctness" permitted the abuse to go on. It's impossible not to infer that children could have been rescued had quaint notions of "racial sensitivity" been put aside. The inquiry heard that influential elected Pakistani councilors acted as "barriers of communication."
But a focus on political correctness should not distract from the wider, institutional betrayal of children by police, social services and local politicians. The scale of which was staggering and the neglect sometimes willful. Professor Jay states that "nobody could say 'we didn't know' "
The crimes were committed in the open. The report explained how the grooming of victims (from all racial backgrounds) occurred: "Schools raised the alert over the years about children as young as 11, 12 and 13 being picked up outside schools by cars and taxis, given presents and mobile phones and taken to meet large numbers of unknown males in Rotherham, other local towns and cities, and further afield." The girls often believed their rapists were boyfriends, men of relative wealth and sophistication, who gave them gifts and introduced them to others.
These crimes were often reported. Some police officers, according to Jay, treated the accusers with "contempt." This was likely because they were children being held in care by the local authority, meaning that they were separated from their parents and typically living in homes provided by the taxpayers. Their claims were either disbelieved or the encounters possibly dismissed as typical behavior for someone of their social status.
On one occasion, a police officer said that a 12-year-old having sex with five adults shouldn't be categorized as sexual abuse because it was "100% consensual in every incident" (this advice was overruled). I don't need to spell out that British law sees things very differently.
When crimes were reported, cases were gathered and reports filed to the council's staff and elected officials. The scale was such that they were often greeted with disbelief. Three summaries were written in total by justice officials. All three were largely ignored by the police and the council.
When the scandal first went public in 2010, the leader of Rotherham's children's services resigned. Just two years later, the opposition Labour Party endorsed him for its candidate to be elected Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire. The leader of the party, Ed Miliband, posed with him in an election photo. He won the election and there are now demands -- including from Labour -- for him to resign. Thus far, he has refused.
It's impossible to make sense of this story.
The barbarity is so enormous, so terrible. There is also the frightening possibility that those responsible for failing to defend the children will not see justice. The report does not name names and it's likely that the social workers and council staff who were so obviously negligent have moved on to jobs in other areas, spreading their incompetence across the country.
While some observers wish to pin the problem on political correctness and others on under-funding, a more simple truth emerges. Individuals did not do their jobs. In some cases they looked the other way. And it's just possible that they will get away with it. They are shielded by political self-delusion.
Rotherham council announced the report's findings with the following assertion: "Services to protect young people at risk from child sexual exploitation in Rotherham are stronger and better co-ordinated across agencies today than ever before, an independent review has found."
This is a stretch, to say the least. Professor Jay did indicate that services have improved at the council but added that it remains understaffed and the long-term victim support inadequate. Importantly, criminal convictions are still woefully low -- a continuing failure by the police.
Britain has a number of problems to face up to. One is a hidden history of child abuse, most dramatically brought to light by the revelations that the late children's entertainer and radio host Jimmy Savile (a friend to the rich and powerful) used his position to exploit the vulnerable.
Another problem is that our public services can operate poorly and by their own standards. Our welfare state is generous and -- including in Rotherham -- boasts excellent staffs doing fantastic work. But it also employs, even provides cover for, individuals who are negligent.
A full public inquiry must be held into what happened in Rotherham, a scandal that repeats much of what has also happened in Rochdale, Derby and Oxford and which is almost certainly taking place today. That is the only effective way to expose those responsible, and to shed light on the Dickensian nightmare playing out in modern Britain.
Read CNNOpinion's new Flipboard magazine
Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.
Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.
Russian forces in Ukraine 'a grave transgression'
8/30/2014 7:20:04 AM
- NEW: Ukrainian forces bolster defenses around southern port city of Mariupol
- Ukraine's President says thousands of foreign troops are on Ukrainian soil
- Jose Manuel Barroso: Use of Russian forces in Ukraine is not acceptable
- EU leaders meet in Brussels to consider possible new sanctions against Russia
Mariupol, Ukraine (CNN) -- As concern over Russia's actions in Ukraine grows, European leaders are meeting Saturday in Belgium to discuss possible new sanctions against Moscow.
The situation in Ukraine "has worsened considerably" European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said in a joint press conference with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in Brussels.
"The opening of new fronts and use of regular Russian forces is not acceptable and represents a grave transgression," Barroso said.
Poroshenko also said the situation had worsened since Wednesday and that thousands of foreign troops and hundreds of foreign tanks are now on Ukrainian territory.
"Ukraine now is a subject for foreign military aggression and terror," he said. But European leaders have shown their support for Ukraine, he said, and Russian aggression will not go unanswered.
Barroso said he had urged Russia's President Vladimir Putin to "change course" in a phone call Friday.
"No one's interest is served by new wars on our continent, no one's interest is served by confrontation," he said. "This is simply not the way that responsible, proud nations should behave in the 21st century."
Putin: Russia is powerful nuclear nation
However, Putin appeared defiant Friday in the face of a chorus of Western condemnation over what NATO says is clear evidence of Russian military aggression in Ukraine.
Moscow doesn't want or intend to wade into any "large-scale conflicts," Putin said at a youth forum, state-run Itar-Tass reported. A few breaths later, he made the point that Russia is "strengthening our nuclear deterrence forces and our armed forces," making them more efficient and modernized.
"I want to remind you that Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear nations," the President said. "This is a reality, not just words."
His comments came as a British government source claimed that Russian troops had significantly ratcheted up their military incursion into Ukraine.
The source told CNN on Friday that Russia has moved 4,000 to 5,000 military personnel into Ukraine -- a figure far higher than one U.S. official's earlier claim of 1,000 troops.
The soldiers are aligned in "formed units" and fighting around the eastern cities of Luhansk and Donetsk, said the UK source. Some 20,000 more troops are on the border and "more may be on the way," the source added.
'New Russian aggression'
The EU leaders meeting Saturday in Brussels may decide what action to take as soon as Saturday evening, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said, speaking after an informal meeting of foreign ministers in Milan, Italy.
Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, in Milan for the two-day talks, tweeted that they had been dominated by "new Russian aggression in Ukraine and consequences."
"Very little doubt now that Russia will use also its regular armed forces to try to carve out a Novorossyia semi-state from Ukraine," he said. "Novorossiya" is a Russian term meaning "New Russia" that has historical associations with the Russian Empire and has been embraced by the separatists.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel and U.S. President Barack Obama agreed in a phone call Thursday that they would have to consider tougher action against Russia.
The European Union and the United States have already slapped economic sanctions on targeted Russian individuals and businesses. The EU also has sanctioned certain sectors of the Russian economy, prompting Russia to retaliate with its own measures.
Russia is a major supplier of natural gas to European nations, complicating efforts to exert pressure on Moscow -- especially as colder weather approaches.
Russia has repeatedly denied either supporting the rebels, or sending its own troops over the border. But its assertions have been roundly rejected by the West.
Troops dig trenches by Mariupol
A new front in the conflict opened up Wednesday around the southern coastal town of Novoazovsk, about 12 miles (20 kilometers) from the Russian border, with Kiev accusing Russian troops of seizing the town.
Col. Andriy Lysenko, spokesman for the Ukrainian National Defense and Security Service, told reporters Saturday that the Ukrainian military is working to fortify the port city of Mariupol, after Russian intelligence groups were observed there.
Many fear the city, which lies between Novoazovsk and Crimea, may be next in the rebels' sights.
A CNN team in Mariupol saw Ukrainian forces strengthening defensive positions on the eastern outskirts of the city, reinforcing checkpoints and digging trenches along roads leading toward the Russian border.
Beyond these checkpoints, the team found a small advance detachment of Ukrainian troops on the main road about halfway between Mariupol and Novoazovsk. The soldiers said it had been quiet Saturday.
The CNN team encountered the first pro-Russian rebel roadblock a short distance outside Novoazovsk, with concrete blocks across the road and a heavy machine gun among the weaponry.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe has sent observers to Mariupol to monitor the situation.
Long queues formed at one Ukrainian checkpoint out of Mariupol on Saturday as people from rural areas tried to get in and out of the city.
Analysts suggest that Russia may have sent its forces into Novoazovsk to secure a land route from the border to the Crimean peninsula it annexed from Ukraine in March, and in order to throw Ukrainian forces making gains against besieged rebel forces in the cities of Donetsk and Luhansk off balance.
Fighting continued in the Luhansk area Saturday, Lysenko said.
The latest military escalation followed a meeting between Putin and Poroshenko in Belarus on Tuesday which had seemed to offer the prospect of diplomatic progress.
Denials 'without credibility'
Russia annexed Ukraine's Crimean peninsula in March, following the ouster of pro-Moscow President Viktor Yanukovych the previous month.
Violence broke out in the eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions in April, as separatist leaders declared independence from the government in Kiev. Since mid-April, the conflict between the pro-Russia rebels and the Ukrainian military has cost more than 2,500 lives, according to the United Nations.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Friday that -- whatever the Kremlin says -- the reality is Russian troops are inside Ukraine and have fired on Ukrainian military positions.
NATO, which on Thursday produced what it says are satellite images showing Russian troops engaged in military operations inside Ukraine, also gave short shrift to Russia's claims.
See the NATO satellite images
In response, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said NATO had previously used "images from computer games" to -- in his view -- falsely make the case that Russian troops are in Ukraine, and said the "latest accusations are pretty similar."
Russia accuses Ukraine of creating a humanitarian crisis in eastern Ukraine by launching a military operation to recapture the territory taken by the rebels. Russia has sent one aid convoy into the country without Ukraine's permission and has said it intends to send more such convoys.
Barroso said there was an urgent need for international assistance but that it must be provided "in coordination with Ukrainian authorities and but also with respect to Ukraine's sovereignty."
Europe has already mobilized hundreds of millions in loans and grants for Ukraine, Barroso said, and over 1 billion euros more in loans could follow in the coming months.
CNN's Tim Lister reported from Mariupol and Laura Smith-Spark wrote and reported in London. CNN's Lindsay Isaac, Max Foster, Alla Eshchenko, Barbara Starr and Greg Botelho contributed to this report, as did journalist Victoria Butenko in Kiev.
Putin issues "warning" to critics
8/30/2014 5:20:26 AM
- NEW: Putin: Russia doesn't want big conflicts, but it will be ready if they happen
- NEW: Russia is a "powerful nuclear nation," he says
- UK source: Up to 5,000 Russian troops are in Ukraine, 20,000 more on border
- NATO chief says Russia is trying to "destabilize Ukraine as a sovereign nation"
(CNN) -- Don't mess with Russia.
That was President Vladimir Putin's message on Friday, the same day a British government source claimed that Russian troops had significantly ratcheted up their military incursion into Ukraine.
Moscow doesn't want or intend to wade into any "large-scale conflicts," Putin insisted at a youth forum, state-run Itar-Tass reported. A few breaths later, he made the point that Russia is "strengthening our nuclear deterrence forces and our armed forces," making them more efficient and modernized.
"I want to remind you that Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear nations," the President said. "This is a reality, not just words."
He later warned, "We must always be ready to repel any aggression against Russia and (potential enemies) should be aware ... it is better not to come against Russia as regards a possible armed conflict."
The comments came the same day that Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused NATO of using "images from computer games" to -- in his view -- falsely make the case that Russian troops are in Ukraine. Lavrov said "hiding the evidence is an outstanding characteristic of the U.S. and many EU countries" with regard to Ukraine.
See the NATO satellite images
The thing is, many in the West don't believe much of anything coming out of Russia.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Friday that -- whatever the Kremlin says -- the reality is Russian troops are inside the Ukraine and have fired on Ukrainian military positions.
"Those denials are completely without credibility," Earnest said.
And Russia's military may be getting digging in deeper in Ukraine. The British government source told CNN on Friday that Russia has moved 4,000 to 5,000 military personnel -- a figure far higher than one U.S. official's earlier claim of 1,000 troops.
The soldiers are aligned in "formed units" and fighting around Luhansk and Donetsk, said the UK source. And they may soon have company: Some 20,000 troops are on border and "more may be on the way," the source adds.
So what's Russia's endgame? Does it simply want to protect civilians or ethnic Russians in Ukraine? Or does it endeavor to develop a land bridge between Crimea -- which split from Ukraine to become part of Russia months ago, amid the unrest following President Viktor Yanukovych's ouster -- and the Russian border? Or perhaps take over all of Ukraine now?
The UK source, giving his government's analysis of Russian troop movements, surmised that right now "the primary role of the current Russian deployments inside Ukraine is probably to assist, support and take the pressure off the separatist forces in order to maintain pressure on Kiev to decentralize.
"However, we are not ruling out more ambitious plans, including a land corridor from the Russian border to Crimea."
After 8 months of conflict, what's next for Ukraine?
NATO chief blasts Russia's 'hollow denials'
Ukraine has been in crisis since last fall, when political upheaval preceded widespread violence that threatened to tear the Eastern Europe nation apart.
If anything, that violence has worsened the past several months -- as pro-Russian rebels dug in and Ukraine's military stepped up its offensive to retake its territory. The U.N. human rights office reports at least 2,593 people killed between mid-April and August 27, and that many innocent civilians have been killed, hurt or trapped in urban areas.
Predictably, both sides have taken the high road while blaming each other for humanitarian crisis and for perpetrating violence rather than having fair, sincere negotiations toward a cease-fire.
"When Kiev said that negotiations would begin only after the surrender of those whom they call 'separatists,' the militia are left with no choice but to defend their homes, their families," Russia's foreign ministry said in a statement.
Western officials say that Moscow hasn't taken any responsibility, whether for its military's on-the-ground involvement or how it can influence rebels.
Speaking after a meeting of NATO ambassadors in Brussels, Belgium, Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said what he called "the serious escalation of Russia's military aggression against Ukraine" violates Ukraine's territorial integrity and "defies all diplomatic efforts for a peaceful solution."
"Despite Moscow's hollow denials, it is now clear that Russian troops and equipment have illegally crossed the border into eastern and southeastern Ukraine," Rasmussen said. "This is not an isolated action but part of a dangerous pattern over many months to destabilize Ukraine as a sovereign nation."
Fighting raging on multiple fronts
Whoever is to blame, whoever is involved, two things that are not in question is that the fighting is continuing and that there's no end in sight.
Ukrainian troops have been fighting on two fronts: southeast of rebel-held Donetsk, and along the nation's southern coast in the town of Novoazovsk, about 12 miles (20 kilometers) from the Russian border.
Mykhailo Lysenko, deputy commander of the Ukrainian Donbas battalion, on Thursday described the fighting in the south as "a full-scale invasion."
Analysts suggest that Russia may have sent its forces into Novoazovsk to secure a land route from the border to the Crimean peninsula it annexed from Ukraine in March, and in order to throw Ukrainian forces making gains against besieged rebel forces in the cities of Donetsk and Luhansk off balance.
In a statement issued by the Kremlin, Putin said the rebels had halted a Ukrainian military operation in eastern Ukraine that he said had endangered the civilian population and caused many casualties.
The UK government source said Russian forces are fighting alongside rebels around Luhansk and Donetsk. It's too early to gauge their impact, though even if propping up the pro-Russian separatists for months longer so that Ukraine's military doesn't next turn its attention to taking back Crimea could be considered a victory.
"At the very least, the Russian deployments are creating the conditions for a frozen conflict going into winter and .. ensure that Kiev is sufficiently distracted ... to prevent it from refocusing its attention on Crimea," the source said.
Retired Lt. Gen. Mark Mark Hertling, a 37-year veteran who once commanded U.S. soldiers in Europe, thinks that Russia may be aiming higher than that. If Ukraine folds easily to Russia's military might, neighboring nations might have good reason to worry. On the other side, Moscow could lose sway if its efforts fail.
"He is trying to influence the Europeans, and it won't stop just with Ukraine," the military analyst told CNN, predicting more Russian military intervention elsewhere. "This is something where he is trying to counter the influence of the West, and he can't afford to lose in Ukraine."
Map: Europe's thirst for Russian gas
6 questions -- an answers -- about the crisis in Ukraine
CNN's Max Foster, Alla Eshchenko, Elaine Ly and Barbara Starr as well as journalist Victoria Butenko contributed to this report.
Did ISIS waterboard captives?
8/29/2014 10:57:12 AM
- The Washington Post reports that ISIS waterboarded its hostages
- Those tortured included American journalist James Foley
- The CIA used waterboarding as an interrogation technique in the past
(CNN) -- Did ISIS use a notorious former CIA interrogation technique on Western hostages?
At least four ISIS hostages in Syria were waterboarded during their captivity, the Washington Post reported Thursday, citing unnamed sources familiar with the treatment of the abducted Westerners.
Among those waterboarded was James Foley, the American journalist who was beheaded by the terror group.
Waterboarding has a long history, but most recently the method is attached to the CIA, which used the technique during interrogations of terror suspects after 9-11.
Waterboarding is an interrogation technique in which water is poured over a cloth covering the subject's face, creating the sensation of drowning.
A senior U.S. official declined to confirm to CNN if the waterboarding claims are true, saying that such details would not be discussed out of sensitivity to the families of those still being held.
"As we have said, hostages held by ISIL are at risk every day they are in ISIL's custody, given what we know about the nature of this brutal group," the official said, using an alternate acronym for ISIS.
A 2005 Justice Department memo -- released by the Obama administration -- revealed that alleged September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed had been waterboarded 183 times in March 2003.
Lawyers during the George W. Bush administration justified the use of so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques," including waterboarding. His administration viewed the techniques as necessary to protect Americans from the terrorist threat.
President Barack Obama's position is that waterboarding amounts to torture and "violates our ideals and our values."
"That's why I put an end to these practices," he said in 2009. "I am absolutely convinced it was the right thing to do -- not because there might not have been information that was yielded by these various detainees who were subjected to this treatment, but because we could have gotten this information in other ways, in ways that were consistent with our values, in ways that were consistent with who we are."
READ: EXCLUSIVE: Boy, 13, witnesses ISIS' beheadings
READ: Sister of 'Lady al Qaeda': 'We want no violence in Aafia's name'
CNN's Jim Acosta contributed to this report.
Obama's ISIS comment sparks uproar
8/29/2014 6:00:23 PM
- President Obama takes heat for saying "we don't have a strategy" on ISIS in Syria
- Critics say it shows the President's lack of focus on a major threat
- The White House says Obama was referring to military options for airstrikes in Syria
- Retired Gen. George Joulwan: Obama has waffled, but airstrikes need lots of planning
Washington (CNN) -- When is a strategy not a strategy? When it's a political football.
President Barack Obama has ignited fresh conservative criticism by saying "we don't have a strategy yet" for airstrikes against ISIS targets in Syria.
Republicans immediately jumped on the President's comment during a news conference Thursday by saying it proved their longstanding complaint that his foreign policy failed to seriously respond to the terrorist threat from Sunni jihadists in the Syrian civil war.
"I'm not sure the severity of the problem has really sunk in to the administration just yet," said GOP Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan, who chairs the House intelligence committee.
Referring to the ISIS lightning sweep across northern Iraq this summer, Rogers said "we knew it was a problem before June" and noted that "even the President said he was talking about this to Iraqi officials over a year ago."
"When a terrorist organization acts like an army, they present military targets the way any other army would do," he said, arguing the United States should have been going after such ISIS targets earlier "to degrade and disrupt the momentum of this very dangerous organization."
Waffling allegation
Retired Army Gen. George Joulwan, the former NATO supreme allied commander, told CNN on Friday that while he believed Obama's approach amounted to a bit of "waffling," launching airstrikes in Syria requires lots of preparation.
ISIS is not a state but an organization fighting the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad, whom the United States also wants out of power, Joulwan noted. That creates complications, as does what he called Syria's "very sophisticated air defense system."
"I think we need to have clarity here of what that mission is, what it is before you start sending an airstrikes or troops," he said. "What is the clarity here of what the end state is that we want to achieve? We didn't do that in Iraq or Afghanistan or in Vietnam. We've got to do it if we're going to get involved again."
The White House made the same point, with spokesman Josh Earnest attributing any uproar over Obama's phrasing to spin rather than substance.
Former CIA chief: Matter of time before ISIS tries to attack West
Obama strategy
He told CNN that Obama "was asked a specific question about what approach he was going to pursue when it came to possible military action in Syria" against ISIS.
"That was the specific question he was asked, and the President was explicit, that he is still waiting for plans that are being developed by the Pentagon for military options that he has for going into Syria," Earnest said, adding that "the President has been very clear for months about what our comprehensive strategy is for confronting" the ISIS threat in Iraq.
He listed steps that have become a mantra of sorts in responding to persistent questioning by reporters in recent weeks about a strategy for confronting ISIS in Iraq and Syria:
• A unified Iraqi government "that can unite that country to meet the threat that's facing their country right now";
• Strengthening the U.S. relationship with Iraqi and Kurdish security forces "to make sure that they have the equipment and training that they need to take the fight to" ISIS on the ground;
• Getting regional governments to join in taking on ISIS;
• Forging an international coalition to join in taking on ISIS, something Obama failed to do when he contemplated but eventually decided against attacking Syria last year over its chemical weapons; and,
• The use of military force, such as the airstrikes launched in Iraq against ISIS to protect American personnel and minority groups under threat.
"The President is clear that the strategy is one that's not going to solve the problem overnight, but he's also clear about the fact that our strategy can't only be the American military," Earnest said. "If we've learned anything over the last 10 or 12 years ... it's that a strategy that only includes military force will not be an enduring solution to this problem."
Who is the ISIS?
Partners needed
Democratic Rep. Adam Smith of Washington concurred, telling CNN that Obama's "no strategy" comment specifically referred to airstrikes in Syria that awaited final planning.
"I think the real issue there is finding a partner to work with," he said, adding that "we need to find partners that we can work with in Syria to help us contain ISIS."
At the same time, "we certainly don't want to come in a way that is supportive of the brutal and illegitimate Assad regime in Syria," Smith said. "So it is a difficult problem to figure out the best strategy. I agree, they have safe haven there in parts of Syria and that will have to be part of the strategy for containing" ISIS.
5 key questions in the fight against ISIS
Past arguments
Republicans led by hawkish conservatives such as Sen. John McCain of Arizona have called for years for greater U.S. involvement in the Syrian conflict.
They complained when Obama rejected arming the Syrian opposition against al-Assad's government as far back as three years ago. Even the President's former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, advocated more help in 2011 and 2012 for rebel factions considered moderate.
However, opponents of such a move warned the Syrian opposition was too splintered and ideologically diverse to arm it.
The rise of ISIS from former al Qaeda affiliates gives fodder to the stances of both sides.
Obama critics say backing moderate Syrian factions could have prevented the extremists from gaining traction and helped the opposition topple al-Assad, as desired. Supporters say U.S. weapons would now be in the hands of ISIS if they had been sent to Syria when the war began.
Now the United States is sending weapons and other aid to some Syrian opposition groups.
Opinion: How U.S. can help Syria drive out ISIS
Leading from behind
The Syria issue touches on broader aspects of Obama's foreign policy and ideological differences with conservatives.
Obama campaigned on ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and he forged a foreign policy based on easing the global reliance on the United States to always lead the intervention charge.
His shift came as America emerged from recession and confronted budget austerity issues that brought spending cuts across the board, including to the military.
Obama and Democrats want reduced spending spread equally as part of recalibrating government priorities.
Republicans, especially conservatives, seek to maintain and wield U.S. military might and influence while cutting spending elsewhere to shrink the overall size of government.
The debate underpins much of the political strategy and maneuvering in Washington, especially with congressional elections looming in November.
What can the U.S. do against ISIS in Syria -- and could it work?
How to make Putin back down
8/29/2014 11:12:00 AM
- Leon Aron: Unable to win by proxy or to retreat in Ukraine, it appears Putin sent troops
- He says U.S., Europe mulling sanctions, but only ones left will also hurt own financial interests
- He says West can help Ukraine win by sending support like radar jamming technology
- Aron: If Russia sees casualties, Russian patriotic support for Putin, and war, will drop
Editor's note: Leon Aron is a resident scholar and the Director of Russian Studies at the American Enterprise Institute. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
(CNN) -- Unable either to win the war in Ukraine by proxy or to retreat from the conflict because of the enormous blow a defeat would deliver to his regime's legitimacy, Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to be sending in regular troops to attack Ukraine. The action is south of rebel-held Donetsk, which, until Russia's heightened involvement this week, was on the verge of being retaken by the Ukrainian army.
It is likely that in response to Russia's escalation, the United States and European Union will contemplate more sanctions. The problem is that all the relatively "painless" economic measures have already been taken. So both the U.S. and Europe are now left looking at actions that will hurt their own industries and financial institutions.
Take the previous round of sanctions, which targeted only select Russian banks. This time, it may well have to be the entire Russian financial system: That is, U.S. and EU banks will have to sever relations with any bank that does business with their Russian counterparts. Another example: Previously, only future investments in technology and transfers to the Russian energy sector were banned. Now, the West may have to block the hundreds of billions of dollars in investment and equipment already in the "pipeline" to Russia as a result of the pre-existing contracts between the Russian oil giant Rosneft and its Western counterparts.
Moscow will undoubtedly fight in international courts to overrule such bans and will also likely retaliate by curtailing gas deliveries to Europe, just in time for winter. Never mind that energy exports are the backbone of the Russian treasury. As Putin has shown with the food import embargo, the regime is ready to harm its own people if necessary.
Which brings us to the key problem with economic sanctions: They rarely work in the short, or even medium term. When a regime's popularity or even legitimacy depends on staying the course (as it certainly does in the case of Ukraine) and with the patriotic hysteria and paranoia whipped up by state-controlled television, Moscow is likely to persist for a significant amount of time before sanctions show any effect. Western leaders should therefore not oversell the sanctions' effectiveness.
There is, however, something the West can do to change Putin's mind much quicker, namely help Ukraine to win a just war against a foreign aggressor. Sending guns and bullets is not necessary -- Ukraine has enough. What Kiev needs is radar jamming and detection equipment to protect its planes from Russia's anti-aircraft systems (the same kind that shot down the Malaysian Airliner) as well as purely defensive weapons such as anti-tank missiles and some intelligence sharing by the West, including satellite data.
But perhaps just as important, as any weaker nation facing a much bigger aggressor can attest, the Ukrainians need moral support. And nothing will boost it more than effective gestures of battlefield solidarity.
Of course, as noted earlier, retreat is not an option for Putin. This is only true, however, as long as Russian troops do not begin to sustain significant casualties. The memory of the Soviet war in Afghanistan is still very much alive in the minds of the fathers and mothers of today's soldiers. And, unlike the 1980s, Moscow may not be able to engineer secret burials of zinc coffins welded shut, or force the relatives of the deceased to keep quiet. A video appeal by Russian mothers asking Putin to bring their sons back from the battlefield in Ukraine went viral just this week.
One hopes, of course, that Russian soldiers will not have to die en masse for their commander in chief to adjust his policy. Providing military-to-military assistance to Ukraine seems to be the only way the West can help stop this war relatively quickly. The alternative is the taking of ever more Ukrainian and Russian lives -- with no end in sight.
Read CNNOpinion's new Flipboard magazine
Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.
Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.
Reclining seats spark new skirmish
8/29/2014 12:54:50 PM
- Airline passengers who recline their seats are facing blowback in the air
- Two flights have allegedly been diverted in the past week over reclining disputes
- A third flight was diverted when two passengers allegedly got drunk and threatened the flight
(CNN) -- Inching into another passenger's knee space has some fliers itching for a fight.
In the second serious airline legroom argument reported this week, a reportedly irate passenger caused a flight from Miami to Paris to divert to Boston on Wednesday.
Paris resident Edmund Alexandre, 60, was charged in U.S. federal court Thursday with interfering with an airline flight crew. Interfering with flight crew members is a violation of federal law and carries a sentence of up to 20 years in prison. (The passenger's name has also been spelled "Edmond" Alexandre in court documents.)
About two hours after American Airlines Flight 62 had departed Miami on Wednesday, Alexandre allegedly "began arguing with another passenger and became disruptive," according to a press statement from Carmen Ortiz, U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts. Alexandre was also charged under state law.
After a crew member asked him to calm down and walked away, "Alexandre allegedly began raising his voice again, followed the crew member towards the back of the plane, and grabbed the crew member's arm," according to Ortiz's statement.
At that time federal air marshals on the flight broke cover and subdued and restrained Alexandre, according to an FBI agent's affidavit. The flight was diverted to Boston Logan International Airport, where he was arrested.
Alexandre complained of high blood pressure and issues with diabetes, according to the affidavit, and was transferred to Massachusetts General Hospital.
It's been a tense week for passengers on both sides of the right-to-recline debate.
A United Airlines flight from Newark to Denver was diverted on August 24 after two passengers argued over one passenger's use of a "Knee Defender," a device that blocks reclining.
Should the Knee Defender be banned?
Water was thrown and the passengers, both 48, were removed from the flight in Chicago, according to a federal law enforcement source, speaking on background. The passengers were not arrested.
It seems at least one of the passengers was not completely satisfied with the extra space in the Economy Plus section where they were seated, which provides United passengers up to 5 inches of extra legroom compared with standard coach seats.
Aviation blogger Benet Wilson is surprised there haven't been more incidents in the air as travelers face long security checkpoint lines at more crowded airports as well as less space and fewer amenities on planes.
"As airlines try and squeeze as many seats into economy as possible, that decreases seat pitch which can be uncomfortable for someone like me, who is 5'3"," wrote Wilson via email.
"But imagine being a foot taller squeezed into that same space. It doesn't help that the FAA doesn't have an official rule on using (seat blocking devices), instead deferring to passengers and airlines. So I feel the situation will get worse before it gets better."
The core problem is definitely the airlines packing too many seats too close together into a tight space, said veteran flight attendant Heather Poole, author of "Cruising Attitude: Tales of Crashpads, Crew Drama, and Crazy Passengers at 35,000 Feet."
"That said, this doesn't give anyone the right to act childish," Poole wrote via email. "To react in such a way that the crew feels the need to divert a flight to have a passenger removed is a really big deal."
In a disagreement where legroom tension does not appear to have been a factor, a couple of drunken women partied a little too hard on a Canadian flight bound for Cuba this week and found their plans of sunny, sandy beaches replaced with arrests and a court appearance.
The two women on Sunwing Airlines Flight 656 from Toronto to Varadero, Cuba, apparently broke out their duty-free booze on Wednesday, lit up a cigarette in a passenger jet bathroom and got "into a physical altercation with each other," the airline said.
They also allegedly threatened to do something to the plane, which triggered Canadian military jet escorts and an immediate return trip home. A judge granted the two women bail on Thursday after they were charged with disturbing a flight.
The crew didn't actually believe the women could do any damage, "given their condition," Sunwing said, but procedure called for the captain to make a U-turn and head back to Toronto Pearson International Airport.
Venus exits after U.S. Open epic
8/29/2014 4:17:24 PM
- Two-time champion Venus Williams defeated in third round of U.S. Open
- Italian world No. 13 Sara Errani wins epic encounter 6-0 0-6 7-6
- Qualifier Mirjana Lucic-Baroni knocks out second seed Simona Halep
- The former Croatian teenage star describes her shock victory as "incredible"
(CNN) -- Venus Williams was the first former champion to fall on Friday at the U.S. Open.
The American lost an epic encounter with world No. 13 Sara Errani as the Italian came through 6-0 0-6 7-6.
Roger Federer and Maria Sharapova, also former winners at Flushing Meadows, hope to stay the course later on Friday.
Williams, who has rediscovered some of her best form in the build up to the final grand slam of the season, looked down and out as she lost an error-strewn opening set.
But there were cheers from the crowd on Arthur Ashe court when the 34-year-old home favorite won her first game of the match at the start of the second.
It looked like a phoenix from the flames comeback was on from Williams as she overpowered Errani to level at one set all.
The third set saw the pendulum of momentum swing between the two players.
Williams was serving for the match at 5-3 up only for Errani to break back and eventually force a deciding tiebreak.
The breaker was another see-sawing affair but it was the Italian who conjured some brilliant play to wrap up it 7-5 and book her place in the fourth round.
Williams came into Friday's single match on the back off a draining doubles match with her sister Serena.
The 34-year-old, who is dealing with the effects of Sjogren's Syndrome, will turn her attention to that side of the tournament now.
Fairytale in New York
There was a fairytale in New York for qualifier Mirjana Lucic-Baroni as she knocked out second seed Simona Halep 7-6 6-2.
The world No. 121 had once been one of the game's rising stars, reaching the Wimbledon semifinals in 1999.
But her career went into freefall after personal revelations about an abusive childhood.
Lucic-Baroni fled to the United States with her mother and siblings but her promising tennis career was all but over.
"After so many years, it's incredible," the 32-year-old told reporters. "I live for this. Every painful moment has been worth it."
What could the U.S. do to fight ISIS?
8/29/2014 7:01:16 AM
- Obama: U.S. has no military strategy yet on what to do against ISIS in Syria
- There's been no hint of ground forces, but commandos did do a rescue mission
- Airstrikes are a possibility; a congressman says it's critical U.S. work with locals
- "There is no such thing as a no-risk strategy," Rep. Adam Smith adds
(CNN) -- If the United States is serious about thoroughly defeating ISIS, it must -- somehow, some way -- go through Syria.
But how? And in what way?
Those are the big questions now, as President Barack Obama weighs what to do inside the war-ravaged nation where ISIS leaders are based and where the Islamist terror group rose to prominence.
Obama ceded Thursday that "we don't have a strategy yet" for what to do about ISIS inside Syria, with a senior administration official adding that a decision is "a week or so" away.
There are certainly options, but none is clear-cut.
"There is no such thing as a no-risk strategy," said Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington. "It's a matter of taking the right risk and balancing that risk to make the right choice."
Here's a look at some possibilities, including why and how they could and could not work:
1) Ground forces
In other words, go all in.
When terrorists attacked on September 11, 2001, the United States showed its willingness to use its full military might when it attacked Afghanistan -- a campaign that dragged on for years and killed more than 2,300 American troops.
That steep cost, both human and financial, is the big reason this is very, very unlikely to happen again in Syria.
No U.S. officials have suggested troops on the ground. The fact none were sent to fight in Iraq -- a country where the U.S. has deeper ties and a government it works with -- is further indication there will be no U.S. ground invasion of Syria anytime soon.
There could be smaller-scale, targeted operations, though. After all, Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby told CNN that, this summer, elite U.S. commandos from units like Delta Force and Navy SEAL Team 6 went into Syria and tried to rescue American journalist James Foley and others held by Islamic militants.
They didn't find hostages, but who's to say U.S. Special Operations Forces couldn't conduct more such missions to save others or for some other purpose? Then there's the possibility American troops could go into Syria to help with the targeting of U.S. airstrikes.
Of course, all bets are off if ISIS pulls an al Qaeda and strikes inside the United States.
That hasn't happened yet, though some experts believe that such an attack from ISIS -- which, upon beheading Foley, warned other U.S. citizens could be next -- might be a matter of time.
2) Airstrikes
Obama gave the go-ahead to pound ISIS forces in Iraq from the air. Why not do the same in Syria, a country the President himself ceded Thursday has become a "safe haven" for the terror group?
Except it's not that simple.
It starts with the fact that Syria is a mess. Three years of civil war have torn apart the country, spurring the emergence of rebel groups fighting to oust President Bashar al-Assad and sometimes against each other. About the only thing al-Assad and rebel groups have in common is that ISIS is their enemy.
Obama is pushing to get al-Assad too, but they're on the same side when it comes to ISIS. Yet U.S. officials insist this shared cause doesn't mean they'll coordinate any military action with al-Assad's government, even if Syrian officials are demanding it.
It's one thing to anger Syria even more. It's another thing to anger its allies Iran and Russia. Russia, which is already at odds with the West over Ukraine, could block any U.N. Security Council effort to give a seal of approval to international strikes.
All of this brings many questions: Does the United States really want to conduct a military campaign in a country without a government that is stable and that it trusts? Can it count on opposition factions it supports to provide any long-term stability? And does it know that airstrikes will wipe out ISIS in Syria rather than stalling the group?
Absent a fortune-teller, it's hard to tell how any military action would turn out.
Still, if Obama decides that's the way to go now, White House spokesman Josh Earnest stressed, more needs to be done politically, diplomatically and economically long-term to keep ISIS down.
"Any sort of strategy that's predicated only on the use of American military force will not be an enduring solution," he said.
3) Support factions in Syria to fight ISIS
The Obama administration frequently touts its support for "moderate opposition" battling both al-Assad's forces and ISIS. Yet, for all its talk, it hasn't directly armed such forces.
The ideal is, if you arm groups like the Free Syrian Army, they can help take out ISIS.
That may not be realistic, considering ISIS with the Syrian government may be the most powerful forces now in the nation. Then there's the real possibility that if moderate forces lose, American weaponry may end up in the hands of ISIS, as has happened in Iraq.
Still, it helps to have someone local you trust to provide on-the-ground intelligence for airstrikes or compliment those strikes with a ground assault.
Smith, the Democrats' ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee, is among those who believes "U.S. military might alone is not going to contain ISIS. We are going to need partners locally."
"We have to strengthen them, not so much so they can win," Smith said of the Free Syria movement, "but so that they can survive and maintain some territory to give us a partner to work with."
4) Cut off ISIS's funding
If you can't pound ISIS into submission militarily, the reasoning goes, you can hit it where it hurts: the wallet.
The thinking goes that, in order to wage war, you need weapons, vehicles, ammunition. In order to govern a country, you need access to food, water and electricity. And usually to address these needs, a group needs money.
Implementing sanctions and freezing bank accounts are often the first, least controversial steps to go after a terrorist group. And they can have an impact, but they also have their limits.
For one, one shouldn't think such efforts will be effective overnight. They take time to coordinate, and it takes time to drain militants' piggy banks. Plus, it's not like there's a readily available list of ISIS donors to go after.
And the fact is, ISIS isn't like many other terror groups. Unlike others like al Qaeda, it's chief goal is as practical as it is ideological: to take over and govern territory.
Already, ISIS has proven adept at seizing weaponry. It's also paid attention to things like food stocks, electricity, sewage, medical care and more, as a recent Foreign Policy article noted.
"They are in this for the long haul," Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Michigan, said. "They are trying to structure themselves in a way that they can hold and expand their holdings."
Whether its government is effective or not, one thing ISIS has proven is its zealousness for the cause and willingness to sacrifice civilians who haven't believed in it from the beginning.
5) Build a true international coalition
One big thing the United States has going for it: Practically no one likes ISIS.
Sure, there are groups and individuals backing the formation of an Islamic State -- which is what ISIS calls itself now that it controls a vast swath of Syria and Iraq -- governed by sharia law. Some from oil-rich Muslim states in the Middle East may bankroll the group; others fight, with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder this summer estimating that there are 7,000 such foreigners with militant groups in Syria.
"There are clearly two camps in the world today: those who believe that sovereignty and supremacy in the world belongs to God, they are the Islamic State, (and) those who believe sovereignty belongs to man," said British firebrand preacher Anjem Choudhary, who sides with the Islamic State.
Yet ISIS has far, far more detractors than supporters. It has a bloody track record of beheadings, crucifixions, stonings, not to mention the widespread slaughtering of minorities, Christians and Muslims who don't prescribe to its strict interpretation of Islam.
Such actions -- like Foley's execution -- spurred widespread condemnation. Some have incentive to go beyond condemnation and act, militarily, against ISIS.
Start with nations that border Syria, like Jordan and Turkey. As its self-ordained caliphate shows, ISIS has shown that it doesn't abide by national borders. What's to stop it from advancing into another country, especially if it gets bigger, stronger and richer? That possibility might spur other countries, besides the United States, to step in sooner rather than later.
Even if they don't neighbor Iraq or Syria, nations with significant populations of Sunnis -- which is the sect of most Muslims worldwide, including in Middle Eastern nations like Saudi Arabia and Egypt-- may have reason to worry. Like with al Qaeda previously, disaffected young Muslims anywhere-- even in the West -- could join ISIS, then perhaps deciding to act out in their homelands.
"It's certainly not in the interest of governments in that neighborhood to have (ISIS) wreaking havoc or perpetrating terrible acts of violence," said Earnest, the White House spokesman.
These nations could band together. The United States could be part of this coalition, perhaps letting others take an equal or greater role in military operations.
The idea of Washington leading "from behind" has precedent: look at Libya. This international coalition got what it wanted with the downfall of dictator Moammar Gadhafi. But years later, Libya is not a model of anything good: beset by warring militias and without an effective central government.
Rogers, the House Intelligence committee chairman, thinks the Obama administration has had "no real strategy" on ISIS so far -- especially a strategy that addresses the group's base in Syria -- even though the group's been growing stronger for years.
"We're so far along into this," the Republican said of ISIS's rise. "It's not like this happened just last week."
You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at feedmyinbox.com
If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
No comments:
Post a Comment