Ukraine conflict: Evacuation planned in frontline town of Avdiivka

Ukrainian officials are preparing for a possible evacuation of the eastern frontline town of Avdiivka amid renewed fighting with pro-Russian rebels.

If evacuation takes place, officials say up to 8,000 people could be removed each day from the government-held town, which has no water or electricity.

Shelling and the deaths of several more people were reported by both sides on Tuesday.

Each blames the other for the upsurge in violence.

It erupted despite an attempt to renew a ceasefire last month.

Ukrainian forces say the outbreak began when rebels launched an attack on Avdiivka, which borders land controlled by the separatists.

Seven soldiers and a number of rebels have been killed in recent days, and there have been civilian casualties on both sides but precise numbers are unclear.

Bread queues

For several hours 200 coal miners were trapped underground on Tuesday when shelling cut power at a pit in the rebel-run area of Donetsk.

Engineers at Zasyadko eventually managed to get generators working and started bringing the miners back to the surface.

"Everything is going bad," a resident in Avdiivka told the BBC. "People are scared and try to go out. It's very cold. There are bread queues. Only a few shops are open," said the woman, who identified herself as Nadiya.

On Tuesday, the head of the Kiev-appointed administration, Pavlo Zhebrivsky, said plans were being made for an evacuation of residents.

"As of now, we can evacuate up to 8,000 people in the course of the day. The region's towns are ready to receive up to 9,000 people," he was quoted as saying by Interfax news agency.

The population of the town is uncertain but is believed to range between 16,000 and 22,000.

Officials say the evacuation will go ahead if the fighting escalates further. About 10 tonnes of food will soon arrive in the city, they add.

Why is Avdiivka so important? By Anastasiya Gribanova, BBC Ukrainian

Recaptured from pro-Russian rebels in 2014, Avdiivka is a key stronghold for the Ukrainian army which it is desperately trying to retain.

The town is close to rebel-controlled Donetsk and important roads and intersections used by the rebels to transport machinery and ammunition.

Just as important is the town's coking and chemical plant - the biggest of its kind in Europe. If it fell into rebel hands it would cut much-needed supplies to Ukraine's steel industry.

The renewed violence coincided with President Donald Trump's first phone-callwith Russian President Vladimir Putin since he took office.

The Kiev government fears it may lose US support during Mr Trump's presidency. According to the Kremlin, Mr Trump and the Russian leader agreed to a "partner-like co-operation" on issues including Ukraine.

While Ukraine accuses rebels of starting the violence, Russian government spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Tuesday blamed government forces.

"Such aggressive actions, supported by the armed forces of Ukraine, undermine the aims and the task of realising the Minsk accords," he said on Tuesday.

A ceasefire was agreed in Minsk in February 2015 but there have been frequent violations. The latest truce began on 23 December.

More than 9,700 people have died since the conflict erupted in 2014, as Russia annexed Ukraine's southern Crimea peninsula, and pro-Russian rebels later launched an insurgency in the east.

The US and EU imposed sanctions on Russia in response to its actions in eastern Ukraine. Russia has denied backing the rebels.

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38807778

Austria to ban full-face veil in public places

Austria's ruling coalition has agreed to prohibit full-face veils in public spaces such as courts and schools.

It is also considering a more general ban on state employees wearing the headscarf and other religious symbols.

The measures are seen as an attempt to counter the rise of the far-right Freedom Party, whose candidate narrowly lost last month's presidential vote.

The centrist coalition nearly collapsed last week amid crisis negotiations over the government's future direction.

'Symbolic' step

Detailing the package of reforms, the coalition devoted just two lines to the planned ban on the Islamic niqab and burqa.

"We are committed to an open society, which also presupposes open communication. A full-face veil in public places stands in its way and will therefore be banned," it said.

An estimated 150 women wear the full niqab in Austria but tourism officials have expressed fears that the measures will also deter visitors from the Gulf.

One government spokesman told an Austrian newspaper that the ban would apply for ski resorts such as Zell am See as much as the centre of Vienna.

Several European countries have imposed similar bans but the Austrian move is, according to the vice chancellor a "symbolic" step.

Integration Minister Sebastian Kurz said it was important to be seen to be neutral, especially for anyone dealing with the public in the police or schools.

France and Belgium introduced a burqa ban in 2011 and a similar measure is currently going through the Dutch parliament.

Chancellor Angela Merkel said last month that the full-face veil should be prohibited in Germany "wherever it is legally possible". The UK does not ban the niqab or burqa.

Further measures agreed by Austria's Social Democrats and their conservative People's party partners include electronic tagging of former jihadists and a proposed curb on foreign workers.

Many of the plans must be hammered out in detail and receive parliamentary approval before they can come into force, BBC Vienna correspondent Bethany Bell reports.

What is a niqab and a burka?

The niqab is a veil for the face that leaves the area around the eyes clear. However, it may be worn with a separate eye veil. It is worn with an accompanying headscarf.

The burka is the most concealing of all Islamic veils. It is a one-piece veil that covers the face and body, often leaving just a mesh screen to see through.

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38808495

India admits rupee withdrawal bad for economy

India's controversial withdrawal of high value banknotes late last year has had an "adverse impact" on the economy, the government has admitted.

The country's Economic Survey, released on the eve of the national budget, said the measures had slowed growth.

The dramatic move to scrap 500 ($7.60) and 1,000 rupee notes was intended to crack down on corruption and so-called black money or illegal cash holdings.

But it also led to a cash shortage, hurting individuals and businesses.

The report forecast that India's economy would grow 6.5% in the year to March 2017, down from 7.6% the previous financial year.

But it also stressed that the estimate was based "mainly" on data from before the note withdrawal kicked in - causing some to suspect growth may be lower still.

India's Finance minister Arun Jaitley who will deliver the Union budget in Delhi on Wednesday, said he expected the economy to "revert to normal" from March onwards after supplies of cash in the economy were replenished.

'Reduced demand'

Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the so-called "demonetisation" policy on November 8 last year.

Within hours the two notes were no longer accepted as legal tender - taking the equivalent of about 86% of India's cash supplies out of circulation and sparking scenes of chaos outside banks and cash machines.

Low-income Indians, traders and ordinary savers who rely on the cash economy were badly hit, with hordes thronging banks to deposit expired money and withdraw lower denominations.

"The adverse impact... on GDP will be transitional", the government's chief economic adviser, Arvind Subramanian, wrote in the report.

"Growth slowed as demonetisation reduced demand ... and increased uncertainty," he added, saying negative impacts included including job losses and falling income for farmers.

However the report said the scheme could be "beneficial in the long-run" if corruption fell and there were fewer cash transactions - many of which are done to dodge taxes.

'Acknowledgement'

The government has previously said the move was a success with the banks flush with cash and significant increases in tax collection.

"It's very nice to understand that the survey is acknowledging the negative impact," said Aneesh Srivatava, chief investment officer at IDBI Federal.

"This is perhaps the first acknowledgement coming from the government. Otherwise so far there has been a denial."

Deadlines for spending the notes or swapping them for new currency have already passed.

Some people, including those of Indian origin living abroad, will be able to exchange the notes in branches of India's central bank until 31 March 2017 - but the process will be more complicated than going to a regular bank.

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-38807695

India IT sector fears new US H-1B visa bill for skilled workers

India is concerned that a new US bill designed to limit the number of highly skilled workers entering will heavily impact the country's IT industry.

The bill introduced to the US House of Representatives proposes doubling the minimum salary of H-1B visa holders to $130,000 from $60,000.

Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, introducing the bill, said it would stop companies "replacing" American workers.

India's foreign ministry said it had expressed concern to the US.

"India's interests and concerns have been conveyed both to the US administration and the US Congress at senior levels," a statement from the ministry said.

Indian media organisations have described the move as a big setback to the IT industry.

The proposed new legislation mainly targets foreign companies based in the US that bring in foreign employees on the visa quota.

Google recalls staff after Trump order

A senior official from India's IT body told the BBC that the bill was "disappointing".

"The new bill does not treat all IT companies with H-1B visa holders equally," Shivendra Singh, vice-president and head of global trade development of the National Association of Software and Services Companies (Nasscom), told the BBC.

"If the objective is to protect American workers, then this bill will defeat that objective. Companies that are not dependant on H-1B visas will continue to bring in skilled workers on lower wages which will nullify the whole objective of saving US jobs."

Amar Ambani, the head of research of India Infoline, said that if the bill were implemented, it would be "horrible" news for India's IT sector.

"More than 50% of their revenues come from that market. And this comes at a time when India's IT sector is already facing challenges to improve their margins and profitability," he told the BBC.

The H-1B has a cap of 65,000 visas each financial year, according to US Citizenship and Immigration Services. Around 85% go to Indians, many of whom work in the IT industry.

The phrase H-1B is the top trend on Twitter in India.

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-38808445

Russian doping scandal: Emails confirm Lord Coe 'aware' of claims

Claims that Lord Coe misled an MPs' inquiry have grown after new emails confirmed he was "made aware" of corruption allegations in his sport four months before they became public.

The president of the IAAF, athletics' governing body, told a select committee in December 2015 he was "not aware" of specific allegations of corruption around the Russian doping scandal.

But the email from Lord Coe to the IAAF's ethics commission in August 2014 states: "I have now been made aware of the allegations."

In 2015, Lord Coe told Parliament: "I was certainly not aware of the specific allegations that had been made around the corruption of anti-doping processes in Russia."

Lord Coe denies there is any discrepancy between his evidence and what the emails say he knew.

MPs had wanted the IAAF [International Association of Athletics Federations] president to return to the committee after former athlete David Bedford's testimony to the Culture, Media and Sport select committee inquiry into doping in sport appeared to contradict Lord Coe's.

The president has so far declined to return to the committee, but agreed to two requests from MPs to release missing correspondence between him and Michael Beloff, chair of the IAAF ethics commission.

The emails, published on Tuesday by the committee, cast fresh light on the issue of what Lord Coe knew - and when - about the burgeoning Russian corruption and doping scandal which has blighted world athletics.

Committee chairman Damian Collins told the BBC: "Whatever excuse he gives, it is clear that Lord Coe decided not to share with the committee information that was relevant to our inquiry on doping in sport.

"The committee asked him about his knowledge of doping in Russian athletics and of corruption within the sport. In his answers, he gave the impression that he was unaware of specific allegations.

"Thanks to evidence that was presented by the BBC Panorama programme last year, and by David Bedford to the committee this January, we can see that he was aware, at least in general terms, of the allegations that had been brought forward by the Russian athlete Liliya Shobukhova."

Dr Rosena Allin-Khan MP, shadow minister for sport, said: "These are very troubling allegations. The release of these emails by the select committee casts serious doubts over the evidence previously given by Lord Coe to the inquiry.

"World Athletics is going through one of the most serious doping scandals in its history and requires the strongest possible leadership. Lord Coe must immediately come back to the Select Committee and clarify his evidence in light of this new information.

"He must be honest about which allegations he knew of and when he found out about them. The IAAF and BOA [British Olympic Association] need transparency and honesty throughout their organisations now more than ever, and that has to start at the very top."

The background

Last June the BBC's Panorama programme and the Daily Mail alleged Lord Coe - then an IAAF vice-president - had been alerted to the scandal months before it was revealed by the German journalist Hajo Seppelt in December 2014.

The programme revealed Lord Coe had been sent an email by Bedford, the former world 10,000m record holder, containing several attachments detailing allegations from Russian marathon champion Shobukhova that she had paid almost half a million euros to cover up positive doping tests after being blackmailed by senior IAAF officials.

Collins told Panorama it appeared Lord Coe had "deliberately misled" them.

Lord Coe told the programme he hadn't opened the attachments and had simply forwarded the email on to the IAAF's Ethics Committee, and that since he did not open the attachments, he had not been aware of the detail of the corruption allegations and therefore had not misled Parliament.

His spokeswoman told the BBC his failure to open the attachments had been nothing more than a "lack of curiosity".

In his evidence to the select committee in December, Bedford said he was "surprised and disappointed" that Lord Coe, who became president of the IAAF in August 2015, said he had not opened the attachments.

However, fresh questions have emerged for Lord Coe following his disclosure to the committee of the full email chain between him and Mr Beloff.

What does the email say?

The email, from Lord Coe to Mr Beloff, is dated August 2014 and reads: "I have in the last couple of days received copied documentation of serious allegations being made by and on behalf of the Russian female athlete Shobukhova from David Bedford.

"I have spoken to David today on the phone and he advises me that he has shared this information with you. Should I forward this documentation to you?

"The purpose of this note is of course to advise you that I have now been made aware of the allegations...but would be grateful for your advice."

What does Lord Coe say now?

In a detailed four-page letter to the Select Committee, which accompanies the disclosure of the emails, Lord Coe says there is "no discrepancy".

He said he was not asked specifically by MPs about when he first heard of the corruption of doping cases.

He said he was on holiday abroad when he received a call from Mr Bedford asking if he was aware of the Shobukhova allegations, and on answering "no", Mr Bedford agreed to send them without going into the detail of what the allegations were.

Lord Coe says he then dictated the 14 August email to an assistant.

The letter to the Committee reads: "David had thought the allegations were serious enough to send information about them first to the ethics commission and then to me, and I knew I therefore had a duty to inform the ethics commission that I was aware of allegations having being made, and I wanted to ensure that Michael [Beloff] had all the information David [Bedford] had sent to me."

Mr Beloff responded on 16 August 2014 that he already had the information.

Lord Coe wrote: "Having received these responses from Michael [Beloff] I was satisfied that I had done what I was required to do under the code of ethics.

"I have made clear I did not read David Bedford's emailed documents but asked my office to forward them to the person and the commission with exclusive authority to investigate.

"I trust this clarifies the matter to the satisfaction of the committee, and as such there are no grounds for suggesting that I misled the committee in any way."

More questions for Lord Coe?

Questions remain as to why Lord Coe, if he was unaware of the detail of the allegations, would state to Beloff he had "now been made aware of the serious allegations being made by, and on behalf of the Russian female athlete Shobukhova".

Collins told the BBC: "It was not possible to know this, without some knowledge of the attachments contained in the email, as all David Bedford's email to Lord Coe said was that the documents he was sending to him related to 'an issue that is being investigated by the IAAF ethics commission'.

"However, if it is true that Lord Coe was somehow unaware of the details of the complaint that had been made by Shobukhova, it is regrettable that neither he nor his team could find the time to read the 1700 word summary of the allegations that was sent to him by David Bedford.

"This episode adds further weight to the concern that senior figures within athletics could have done more to make themselves fully aware of serious allegations of corruption and doping within their sport, and then acted on that information to make sure that it was being properly investigated."

Lord Coe, as a member of the House of Lords, cannot be compelled to give evidence to a select committee, unlike members of the public, but it is likely that the committee will take a dim view on Lord Coe's refusal to return when writing up their final report on doping in sport, which is expected to be published within weeks.

The BBC Panorama programme also revealed claims Lord Coe had been helped to the presidency of the IAAF by Papa Massata Diack, at a time when Diack was under investigation for serious corruption.

Diack, who is the son of the disgraced former president of the IAAF Lamine Diack, is now banned for life from athletics, is wanted by Interpol and remains in hiding in Senegal. Lord Coe denied anything inappropriate occurred during his election campaign.

Source: http://www.bbc.com/sport/athletics/38809210

Trump sacks defiant acting attorney general Sally Yates

onald Trump has fired the acting US attorney general after she questioned the legality of his immigration ban.

Sally Yates, who was appointed by Barack Obama, ordered justice department lawyers not to enforce the president's executive order.

A White House statement accused Ms Yates of "betraying" the justice department and being "weak on borders".

Mr Trump replaced her with Dana Boente, US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

Mr Boente said he was "honoured to serve President Trump" and immediately directed his department to enforce the controversial order.

Mr Trump also replaced the acting director of the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Daniel Ragsdale, who has been in the post since 20 January. He is the former deputy director.

No reason was given for Mr Ragsdale's sacking. He has been replaced by Thomas Homan, the executive associate director of enforcement and removal.

Mr Trump's order temporarily banned nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the US, and sparked street protests in the US and abroad.

Ms Yates, a career prosecutor who served as deputy attorney general under Barack Obama, said in a letter that she was "not convinced" that the president's order was lawful.

"As long as I am the acting attorney general, the department of justice will not present arguments in defence of the Executive Order," she said.

Within hours, the White House announced: "President Trump relieved Ms Yates of her duties."

A statement claimed she had "betrayed the department of justice by refusing to enforce a legal order designed to protect the citizens of the United States".

It also described her as "weak on borders and very weak on illegal immigration".

Democrats hits back at Ms Yates' dismissal. Senator Chuck Schumer, the party leader, said in a statement that the "attorney general should be loyal and pledge fidelity to the law, not the White House. The fact that this administration doesn't understand that is chilling".

---

"Monday Night Massacre?" Analysis by Anthony Zurcher, North America reporter, BBC News

Donald Trump's critics are calling it the "Monday Night Massacre". That's a reference to President Richard Nixon's Saturday night sacking of his attorney general during the depths of the Watergate scandal of 1973, the last time top justice department officials were forced out by a president.

This time around is a bit different, however. Acting Attorney General Sally Yates essentially forced Mr Trump's hand when she ordered justice department lawyers not to defend the president's recent immigration order in court.

Mr Trump could not abide such defiance from an Obama Administration holdover due for replacement soon anyway. Once again, however, his White House team could not help but turn the rhetorical volume up to 11 in announcing the firing, accusing Ms Yates of having "betrayed" the justice department.

Ms Yates's move follows on the heels of a similarly extraordinary reaction to a letter, signed by more than 100 career state department officials, condemning the immigration action as un-American.

It's easy to imagine that this administration - just over a week in power - feels set against a Washington bureaucracy seeking to undermine it at every turn. If that kind of bunker mentality grows in the days ahead, this political bloodletting likely will be only the beginning.

Her replacement, Mr Boente, was also appointed by Barack Obama, in 2015. He was confirmed by the US Senate - making him eligible for appointment while Mr Trump waits for his own nominee to be approved.

Senator Jeff Sessions is awaiting a confirmation hearing for the role later this week.

Meanwhile, hundreds of diplomats and foreign servants have been drafting a "dissent cable" to formally criticise the president's executive order.

A draft version of the cable said that immigration restrictions will not make the US safer, are un-American and will send the wrong message to the Muslim world.

The ban bars citizens from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.

The White House has consistently defended Mr Trump's executive order despite the controversy, with press secretary Sean Spicer saying diplomats should "get with the programme".

In addition, former President Barack Obama has apparently broken with the convention of former presidents avoiding comment on their successors.

Commenting on the protests about the immigration order, President Obama said he was "heartened".

"Citizens exercising their constitutional right to assemble, organise and have their voices heard by their elected officials is exactly what we expect to see when American values are at stake," he said in a statement, which did not mention Mr Trump by name.

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38805944

Senegal troops poised at the Gambia border as Jammeh mandate ends

Senegalese troops backed by other African forces are poised to enter the Gambia on Thursday after last-ditch diplomatic efforts to persuade the long-time president, Yahya Jammeh, to stand down appear to have failed.

Jammeh’s mandate ended at midnight but he has steadfastly refused to leave office after losing elections last month to Adama Barrow, prompting west African states to ramp up pressure on the president. The Gambia has been in a state of political uncertainty since Jammeh refused to cede power, using the courts and parliament to try to extend his 22-year rule.

On Tuesday Jammeh had announced a national state of emergency, prompting the UK Foreign Office to change its travel advice and warn against all but essential travel to the Gambia.

Witnesses said the situation was calm in the capital, Banjul, overnight, although troops had been deployed in the city.

Fears of violence have prompted tens of thousands of people, many of them children, to flee the Gambia through its land borders. As tourists were evacuated amid scenes of chaos at Banjul airport on Wednesday, Col Abdou Ndiaye, a spokesman for the Senegalese army, said troops were at the Gambian border and would enter the country at midnight if the deadline for a transfer of power passed. “We are ready,” he told Reuters. “If no political solution is found, we will step in.”

Soldiers from Nigeria, Mali, Togo, Ghana and Senegal make up the regional force, but it is being headed by a Senegalese general and has the backing of the 15-nation Economic Community of West African States (Ecowas), which has repeatedly called on Jammeh to stand down.

Jammeh’s army chief said late on Wednesday his troops would not fight their entry into the country. “We are not going to involve ourselves militarily. This is a political dispute,” the chief of defence staff, Ousman Badjie, said after eating dinner in a tourist district close to Banjul, eyewitnesses told Agence France-Presse.

“I am not going to involve my soldiers in a stupid fight. I love my men,” he added. “If they [the Senegalese] come in, we are here like this,” Badjie said, putting his hands up in a surrender gesture.

In a last-ditch attempt to persuade Jammeh to accept a deal and leave the country, the president of Mauritania, Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz, flew in to Banjul on Wednesday. Members of the opposition remained hopeful that Jammeh would go peacefully with Abdel Aziz rather than face war. “He’s been calling [Ecowas’s] bluff but I don’t think he wants to die,” said James Gomez, a senior member of the coalition that is poised to govern the country.

However Abdel Aziz later left the talks and did not take Jammeh with him.

Gomez had earlier said Barrow’s swearing-in as president would not be held in the Gambia’s national stadium as planned.

“We cannot risk bringing people to the stadium,” he said. “It’s not in our hands; it’s in Ecowas’s hands. They want us to follow the constitution, which states that the president’s term ends at midnight.”

The UN security council is scheduled to meet on Thursday to adopt a statement on west Africa that will reaffirm the demand for Jammeh to hand over power, diplomats said.

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/19/senegal-troops-poised-at-the-gambia-border-as-jammeh-mandate-ends