Trump Jerusalem move hinders US interests in the region - Al Jazeera

Trump Jerusalem move hinders US interests in the region

by Khalid Al-Jaber & Giorgio Cafiero

12/12/2017

The US president's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is costing Washington immensely throughout the greater Arab and Muslim world, write Al-Jaber and Cafiero

The US president's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is costing Washington immensely throughout the greater Arab and Muslim world, write Al-Jaber and Cafiero

Despite warnings from close US allies, US President Donald Trump controversially recognised Jerusalem as Israel's capital and started the process of moving Washington's embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Trump's decision came 50 years after Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza, Egypt's Sinai Peninsula and Syria's Golan Heights; 70 years after the UN resolution to partition Palestine; and 100 years after the Balfour Declaration.

Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital upended decades of US foreign policy and created scores of anti-US/anti-Israel protests worldwide, while effectively killing the idea that Washington is a neutral party in the Palestinian-Israel conflict among the few who still had that perception. Arab capitals have almost unanimously considered Trump's decision on Jerusalem to be a sharp tilt towards Israel, and an indication of Washington's support for the consolidation of the Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem. The Council of the League of Arab States, at the level of Arab foreign ministers, declared opposition to Trump's decision and considered it not only invalid, but also a serious breach of international law.

Nonetheless, within Trump's inner circle, there is a belief that the decision was opportune and made at an appropriate time. From these voices' perspectives, Arab leaders must accept this decision and deal with the potential unrest which this move may create within their countries.

Perhaps one of the unintended consequences of Trump's move is that his decision has now put the Palestinian issue back at the forefront in the Middle East. Indeed, since 2001, the wars in Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, and Yemen, the Arab Spring revolutions, waves of sectarian violence, and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant's (ISIL, also known as ISIS) meteoric rise to power have taken regional and global attention away from the struggle for justice in Palestine.

Undoubtedly, Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital will further isolate the US from the rest of the world. Given the administration's rejection of Palestinian claims to East Jerusalem, in violation of international law which recognises East Jerusalem as belonging to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Washington has signalled its abandonment of a two-state solution more than ever. To be sure, there is no other country that recognises the legitimacy of Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem, which Trump has now endorsed. With strong support from the international community for a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the US is now alone with Israel's government in opposing this plan. Although no objective observer previously saw Washington as being an honest peace broker between the Palestinians and Israelis, it is now abundantly clear that Washington is unable to play this role.

Odds are good that Tehran will capitalise on Saudi Arabia's relatively cautious condemnation of Trump's decision to add momentum to the Iranian regime's narrative that Washington's GCC allies, chiefly Saudi Arabia, are indifferent to Jerusalem and the Palestinian issue at large.

Although the Israeli government quickly embraced Trump and his approach to US foreign policy in the Middle East, the US president's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is costing Washington immensely throughout the greater Arab and Muslim world. It is doubtful that Saudi Arabia or other Gulf states allied with Washington will take actions against the US as a result of Trump's decision; however, angry elements within their own societies may react against the US and its interests in the region in the form of terrorism and other violent actions. Unquestionably, the US president's move on Jerusalem will create new risks for all of Washington's allies in the Middle East, as the decision will offer extremist groups a valuable opportunity to capitalise on anti-US sentiment and direct such anger towards regimes that are close to the US and non-confrontational towards Israel.

How will Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital affect the Arab world's geopolitical order?

It seems likely that the perception of Russia being a more responsible superpower than the US will only grow among Arabs. Russia's strong condemnation of Trump's decision will naturally sit well among Arab/Muslim governments and societies which are beginning to accept Moscow as an indispensable mediator in the region, and a pillar of a new security architecture, following Russia's direct military intervention in Syria.

Iran, too, will likely stand to gain influence as a result of Trump's decision. Whereas Tehran has suffered in recent years from a perception among Sunni Arabs that Iran's foreign policy is naturally sectarian, Trump's move offers the regime an opportunity to expand its soft-power influence among Arabs and Muslims of both sects, effectively weakening this perception of Iran being pro-Shia or anti-Sunni. Odds are good that Tehran will capitalise on Saudi Arabia's relatively cautious condemnation of Trump's decision to add momentum to the Iranian regime's narrative that Washington's GCC allies, chiefly Saudi Arabia, are indifferent to Jerusalem and the Palestinian issue at large.

Lastly, another way in which the US position on Jerusalem is likely to hinder Washington's interests in the Middle East pertains to GCC-Israel relations. As the US has sought to promote more official relations between Tel Aviv and the six GCC members, the Arabian Peninsula sheikdoms - led by Bahrain - have recently signalled a growing interest in pursuing a partnership with Israel in recent months. Whether such a declaration of any official Saudi-Israeli alliance would have been possible without the establishment of a Palestinian state is unclear, yet it is unquestionably true that any hopes for such a development are far less realistic now, after the Israeli occupation of Jerusalem and widespread outrage over Trump's endorsement of it are receiving more attention in the Arab world.

DONALD TRUMP DRINKS '12 CANS OF DIET COKE' A DAY - WHAT COULD THIS BE DOING TO HIS BODY - Independent

11/12/2017

DONALD TRUMP DRINKS '12 CANS OF DIET COKE' A DAY - WHAT COULD THIS BE DOING TO HIS BODY

His reliance on artificial sweeteners could cause weight gain and obesity

SARAH YOUNG

@sarah_j_young

President Donald Trump insatiably consumes Diet Coke and watches up to eight hours of television every day, insiders reveal.

Now, a leading Harley Street Nutritionist is warning that this type of sedentary lifestyle could be damaging to his health.

In a lengthy article documenting how Donald Trump copes with the daily demands of presidency, the New York Times discovered that he drinks roughly 12 cans of Diet Coke daily, and watches news channels on TV from the moment he wakes up.

What Donald Trump orders from McDonald's

After a night of five-to-six hours sleep, it has been reported that the President switches on the television straight away, usually with his phone in hand ready for any tweets that may occur to him.

The insiders also reveal that Trump’s compulsion to watch TV is so strong that when meetings are held in the White House dining room, a 60-inch TV remains on constantly.

What’s more, the he is also said to drink around 12 cans of Diet Coke every day - consuming far more than an adult's daily-recommended dose of caffeine.

However, alongside the pressure of presidency, one nutritionist says that leading such a voracious lifestyle could prove detrimental to Trump’s health.

“The majority of evidence suggests that most sedentary people have a much greater risk of dying early,” leading Harley Street Nutritionist Rhiannon Lambert told The Independent.

“With inactivity believed to play a significant role in the development of insulin resistance, long term sedentary behaviour is likely to increase the risk of conditions such as type 2 diabetes and heart disease.

“Interestingly one of the markers in studies for sedentary behaviour is often TV watching.”

Similarly, Lambert adds that while diet drinks might be lower in calories, they should not be considered a healthy choice.

“It has long been suggested that artificial sweeteners may have a stimulating effect on appetite and, therefore, may play a role in weight gain and obesity.

Diet drinks strongly linked to increased risk of stroke and dementia

“Even though drinking diet drinks is safe in moderation, it doesn’t make them a healthy choice. They certainly offer absolutely nothing in the way of nutrition.”

Instead, she says that water should always be your first choice of fluid.

“Water is essential for many of our bodily processes, so replacing it with diet drinks is a negative thing. If it's the fizziness you crave, try sparkling water.”

Haley Says Trump’s Accusers Should Be Heard - Associated Press

Haley Says Trump’s Accusers Should Be Heard

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

December 11, 2017

U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley walks into a Security Council emergency meeting over North Korea's latest missile launch on Aug. 29, 2017, in New York City. Photographer: Spencer Platt/Getty Images North America

Washington (AP) -- The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations said Sunday that women who accuse someone of sexual misconduct deserve to be heard, even if it involves President Donald Trump.

"I know that he was elected, but women should always feel comfortable coming forward. And we should all be willing to listen to them," Nikki Haley said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

Trump, a Republican, won the White House last year despite the election season release of a 2005 "Access Hollywood" tape in which he described grabbing women's private parts, followed by accusations by several women of aggressive sexual misconduct. Press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders has since reiterated the White House's position that the women who accused Trump of sexual harassment are lying.

On Sunday, Haley, who was the first female governor of South Carolina, praised the courage of women who have raised complaints of harassment in various industries, including government and Hollywood, saying they will "bring a conscience to the situation."

"Women who accuse anyone should be heard. They should be heard and they should be dealt with, and I think we heard them prior to the election," said Haley, a Republican. "I think any woman who has felt violated or felt mistreated in any way, they have every right to speak up."

Asked whether Trump's election settled the issue, Haley said it was "for the people to decide."

The wave of allegations have brought down powerful figures, including the resignations last week of Rep. John Conyers Jr., D-Mich., Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., and Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz.

Trump sex harassment accusers demand congressional inquiry - BBC News

Trump sex harassment accusers demand congressional inquiry

11 December 2017

Three women who accused President Donald Trump of sexual misconduct have demanded a congressional inquiry.

At a New York City news conference, the trio accused Mr Trump of groping, fondling, forcibly kissing, humiliating or harassing them.

Three of them - Jessica Leeds, Samantha Holvey, and Rachel Crooks - detailed their allegations shortly beforehand live on television.

The White House said the women were making "false claims".

Trump obscene remarks were real - TV host

Monday morning's press conference was organised by Brave New Films, which last month released a documentary, 16 Women and Donald Trump, about the claims made by multiple women.

The claims have been given a new lease of life by the harassment scandals that have engulfed high-profile public figures since October's fall of Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein.

On NBC News on Monday, Ms Holvey said Mr Trump had ogled her and other competitors in 2006 at the Miss USA beauty pageant, which he owned.

The former Miss North Carolina, who was 20-years-old at the time, said "he lined all of us up" and was "just looking me over like I was just a piece of meat".

"It left me feeling very gross," Ms Holvey told NBC host Megyn Kelly.

She later told the reporters: "They've investigated other Congress members, so I think it only stands fair that he [Mr Trump] is investigated as well

"This isn't a partisan issue, this is, how women are treated every day."

Ms Leeds, now in her 70s, says that when she was 38 she sat next to Mr Trump in the first-class cabin of a flight to New York and he sexually assaulted her.

Ms Leeds said: "He jumped all over me."

She said she came forward because: "I wanted people to know what kind of person Trump really is, and what a pervert he is."

Speaking in 2016, Apprentice contestant Summer Zervos accuses Donald Trump of 'thrusting his genitals' at her

Ms Crooks said she was kissed on the lips by Mr Trump outside a lift in Trump Tower when she was a 22-year-old receptionist at a real estate company there.

"I was shocked," she said. "Devastated."

The White House said on Monday: "These false claims, totally disputed in most cases by eyewitness accounts, were addressed at length during last year's campaign, and the American people voiced their judgment by delivering a decisive victory.

"The timing and absurdity of these false claims speaks volumes and the publicity tour that has begun only further confirms the political motives behind them."

The president rejected such allegations last year and vowed to sue the accusers, though no lawsuit has yet been filed.

But over the weekend Mr Trump's ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, said his accusers "should be heard".

Speaking to CBS News, Mrs Haley said she was "incredibly proud of the women who have come forward".

Meanwhile, three Democratic senators - Cory Booker of New Jersey, Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York - called on Mr Trump to resign over the allegations.

During his successful run for the presidency last year, Mr Trump was heard boasting of grabbing women's vaginas in a leaked videotape.

The Trump-Russia Probe Is About to Get Uglier - Bloomberg

The Trump-Russia Probe Is About to Get Uglier

Unpleasant facts are spilling out. Republicans don't want to know them.

By Albert R. Hunt

December 11, 2017, 2:00 AM GMT+11

A long way to go. Photogrpaher: Alex Wong/Getty Images

Here are two certainties about the Trump-Russia investigation. It won't end soon. It will get uglier.

A new shoe drops almost daily in special counsel Robert Mueller's probe. First, Former national security adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying and agreed to cooperate. Then the White House changed its story (again) on what President Donald Trump knew after he was first advised in January that Flynn posed security problems.

Last week came news that Mueller had subpoenaed financial records from Deutsche Bank pertaining to people affiliated with Trump. Then Donald Trump Jr. said he wouldn't tell Congress about his dad's 2016 conversations with a Kremlin-linked Russian lawyer, invoking a dubious claim of attorney-client privilege.

This is not a saga in its closing chapter.

Equally clear is that no matter what is revealed, Trump and his allies won't go quietly. Already, some congressional Republicans are trying to smear Mueller, the most experienced and respected special counsel in more than 40 years. If cornered, does anyone doubt that Trump will summon his core supporters to the streets?

The constant revelations create such a blur that context sometimes is overlooked. Trump and his operatives have lied repeatedly, denying that they had any contacts with Russians. Now we now know of at least 19 meetings among 31 interactions.

There are three avenues Mueller is exploring. Did the Trump team aid and abet the Russian efforts to hack and steal e-mails with an eye toward influencing with the U.S. presidential election? Did the president try to obstruct the investigation into those efforts? What was the nature of any financial arrangements Trump may have had with Russians linked to the Kremlin? Many of the Trump defenses seem to be unraveling.

U.S. intelligence agencies have reported "with high confidence" that the Russian government was behind break-ins to the email accounts of Democratic operatives during the 2016 presidential campaign as part of a campaign to "undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process" and harm Hillary Clinton's "electability and potential presidency." In a January report, the agencies said that Russian President Vladimir Putin and his government "developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump."

The question now is whether Trump or his team knew about this and facilitated the dissemination of the stolen material through WikiLeaks and other sources. The secrecy and contradictory accounts of their communications with Russian sources undercuts their repeated claims that their contacts were innocent.

By last week, Trump opponents were taking to public forums to talk about the evidence supporting an obstruction-of-justice case against Trump himself. That's based on a chain of events involving Trump's effort to pressure James Comey to drop the Russia probe and then firing him as director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation when he didn't.

News organizations have also reported that Trump tried to influence other key officials to curtail investigations, including National Intelligence Director Dan Coats, National Security Agency director Admiral Mike Rogers and House Intelligence Committee chair Richard Burr. Coats and the others have avoided commenting directly on these accounts, which nevertheless appear to worry the White House enough to produce a claim last week by Trump's personal lawyer, John Dowd, that a president can never be guilty of obstruction because he is the chief law-enforcement officer under the Constitution.

That drew scornful responses from legal scholars and even some pushback from the White House lawyer handling the Russia case. As well it should; obstruction was the central impeachment charge against Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.

Duke University law professor Samuel Buell, a former prosecutor, wrote in July that "it is highly likely that special counsel Robert Mueller will find that there is a provable case that the president committed a felony offense," namely obstruction.

And that's keeping in mind an important reminder from Bill Ruckelshaus, a former acting FBI director who was a hero of Watergate when he quit Nixon's Justice Department in 1973 rather than following an order to impede the investigation of that landmark case. What's publicly known about inquiries like this one, he told me in June, is just a little of what's actually happening.

There is, for example, evidence that Mueller has expanded his investigation to look at financial deals involving Trump family interests.

Robert Anderson, a top counterintelligence and cybersecurity aide to Mueller when the latter was FBI director from 2001 to 2013, wrote in Time last month that Mueller "appears to have uncovered details of a far-reaching Russian political-influence campaign." Anderson predicted that the conspiracy would prove to involve wire fraud, mail fraud and moving money around illicitly between countries. He said more informants are likely to emerge, and declared, "When the people who may be cooperating with the investigation start consensually recording conversations, it's all over."

The issue of whether a sitting president can be indicted is unsettled. Those who know Mueller believe that he's less likely to pursue a prosecution than to send Trump's case to Congress to consider impeachment.

Trump loyalists have already started fighting that battle, with bitter preemptive counterattacks issuing from top congressional Republicans like House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy and even Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Charles Grassley. They've made it clear that they're more interested in discrediting Mueller than in learning about what happened between the Trump camp and Russia.

Trump, if caged, will lash out furiously. Maybe he'd try to fire Mueller and issue pardons for his family and friends. He'd rally his hardcore supporters, urging them to protest against the threat to him. Thus it's impossible to envision a peaceful resolution like the one that occurred in 1974, when Nixon was forced out to avoid impeachment.

"At the end of the day, Richard Nixon was found to have a sense of shame," notes Watergate prosecutor Richard Ben-Veniste. "It remains to be seen whether anything can shame Donald Trump."

UK reaches historic Brexit divorce deal Northern Ireland compromise paves way for trade talks to begin - Financial Times

10/12/2017

Financial Times
UK reaches historic Brexit divorce deal Northern Ireland compromise paves way for trade talks to begin 
 Harsh lessons for the next phase of Brexit © EPA Share on Twitter (opens new window) Share on Facebook (opens new window) Share on LinkedIn (opens new window) Save Save to myFT Alex Barker in Brussels  Britain reached a historic deal on its EU exit terms on Friday, enshrining special rights for 4m citizens and paying €40bn-€60bn in a hard-fought Brexit divorce settlement that clears the way for trade talks next year. Theresa May and Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission president, met early on Friday to sign off a 15-page “progress report” that will allow EU negotiators to recommend opening a second phase of talks on post-Brexit relations. Shortly after the breakfast started, Mr Juncker’s chief of staff Martin Selmayr tweeted pictures of white smoke rising from a chimney stack, indicating the deal was done. Essential stories related to this article Brussels Briefing Brexit border shenanigans open the door to coalition capers Philip Stephens Harsh lessons for the next phase of Brexit Analysis Brexit How the UK blundered into an Irish border quagmire The final breakthrough on Northern Ireland’s border came after a week of high drama in Brussels and Westminster, with agreed compromises scuttled on Monday by the Democratic Unionist party, Mrs May’s parliamentary allies. Arlene Foster, DUP leader, told Sky News she had secured “substantial changes” to the text of the deal. “There is no red line down the Irish Sea and clear confirmation that the entirety of the UK is leaving the EU, leaving the single market and leaving the customs union”. The stand-off forced Mrs May to delay her planned trip to Brussels on Thursday afternoon. Gavin Barwell, her chief of staff, tweeted in the early hours of Friday: “Home for three hours sleep then back to work”. The prime minister’s decision to seal the agreement on Friday marked the finale of a three-week diplomatic effort to finalise the most contentious divorce terms. EU leaders will formally decide at a summit next week whether it represents “sufficient progress” to start the second phase of negotiations. Mrs May is to meet Donald Tusk, the European Council president, later in the morning. In a move intended to show an immediate EU response to Britain’s offer, Mr Tusk intends to release draft negotiating guidelines this morning that set EU priorities for the next phase, including in trade and a post-Brexit transition negotiations. Even British officials admit the overall terms are closer to opening demands made by the EU, including the size of the financial settlement, the breadth of protected citizen rights and commitments made regarding the Northern Ireland border. However, the UK won significant compromises, most notably in rejecting EU demands that Britain submit in some areas to the direct jurisdiction of European courts after Brexit. For most of the nine-month negotiation to untangle past relations, money issues proved the most divisive issue. But after a decisive move by Mrs May late last month, it became the first strand of talks “closed off” by negotiators, with little sign of a revolt from Brexiters in Westminster. According to senior officials involved in talks, the final deal commits the UK to honouring outstanding EU liabilities when they fall due over coming decades, with the UK share calculated as if it “remained a member state”. This includes budget commitments signed off up to two years after Brexit. While the net estimates for this settlement vary between €40bn and €60bn, the UK pledge in effect means no EU member state will lose out as the EU’s long-term budget is discharged. Mrs May started negotiations saying Britain had no legal obligation to pay any exit bill. Although the draft paper contains no figures, during talks the UK estimated a net payment of €40bn-€45bn while the EU put it at around €55bn. When contingent liabilities, such as loans to Ukraine, are added the bill rises to an estimated €55.5bn-€65.5bn. A second pillar of the deal largely enshrines existing EU residence and social security rights of 3m EU citizens in the UK, and around 1m UK nationals living on the continent. The settlement allows an EU national to claim permanent residence in the UK, retain most family reunion rights enjoyed today and, if eligible, to claim UK benefits even if they or their children move overseas. Some EU family rights in Britain are restricted, however, to match those of UK citizens who want to marry foreign nationals. Britain secured a significant concession during talks by forcing the EU to drop its demand that the divorce settlement fall under the direct jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. However, in a compromise that has alarmed some Brexiters, Britain did pledge to indefinitely pay “due regard” to relevant European court rulings on the citizen rights enshrined in the treaty. For 10 years after Brexit, British courts can also refer questions over the EU law to Luxembourg for rulings. After that cut-off date, courts would still respect the accumulated case law in this area.

North Korea says US naval blockade would be ‘declaration of war’ Pyongyang slams Washington - Financial Times

10/12/2017
North Korea says US naval blockade would be ‘declaration of war’ Pyongyang slams Washington proposal as America and allies launch rocket-tracking drills Read next S Korea’s Moon to press Xi over Pyongyang nuclear crisis US and South Korean military jets perform maneuvers over the Korean peninsula last week © AFP Share on Twitter (opens new window) Share on Facebook (opens new window) Share on LinkedIn (opens new window) Save Save to myFT Bryan Harris in Seoul 11 MINUTES AGO 0 North Korea has slammed a proposed US naval blockade, saying such a move would constitute another “declaration of war”. The fiery comments in the state-run Rodong Sinmun newspaper came a day before the US, South Korean and Japan launched rocket tracking drills on Monday aimed at improving detection and monitoring of the reclusive regime’s ballistic missile tests. Tensions on the peninsula remain high amid growing concern that the US might launch military action against North Korea or that a miscalculation during training drills on either side could provoke a full-scale conflict. Essential stories related to this article North Korea nuclear tensions US-North Korea tensions fuel fears on Chinese border Japan to buy cruise missiles capable of striking North Korea Drones South Korea to create ‘drone-bot combat unit’ to swarm North Despite being outgunned in conventional weaponry, Pyongyang has this year succeeded in developed a host of new advanced weapons, including a powerful nuclear device and several long-range missiles capable of hitting the US. The launch last month of its most advanced missile — the Hwasong 15 — triggered outcry in the US and prompted the state department to raise the possibility of a naval blockade. “In addition to implementing all existing UN sanctions, the international community must take additional measures to enhance maritime security, including the right to interdict maritime traffic transporting goods to and from [North Korea],” it said in a statement that prompted derision from Pyongyang. North Korea would consider a blockade a “cruel violation on our sacred sovereignty and dignity and another public declaration of war”, Rodong Sinmun reported. Live ordnance explodes beside the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz in an exercise this month in the western Pacific © AFP “If they show any slight sign of carrying out the sea blockade, they should prepare for immediate and ruthless self-defensive countermeasures.” North Korea regularly employs such rhetoric as part of its diplomatic strategy and has previously accused the US of declaring war. However, independent analysts in South Korea also criticised the proposed blockade, saying it would only worsen the situation and that the US Pacific Command was not in a position to seal North Korea’s maritime borders. “If the US goes ahead with the blockade, it will only aggravate the situation by provoking North Korea to conduct more nuclear tests and launch missiles under the banner of self-defence,” said Hong Hyun-ik, a senior researcher at the Sejong Institute. Share this graphic “Instead of searching for a real solution to the nuclear crisis, which is dialogue with the North, the US is attempting to maintain its hegemony in north-east Asia.” North Korea has emerged as a top priority for US President Donald Trump, who has pushed tough new sanctions on Pyongyang as well as a diplomatic offensive that has prompted several countries to cut ties with the regime. In South Korea, President Moon Jae-in initially attempted to engage with Kim Jong Un, North Korea’s supreme leader, but found his efforts either rebuffed or ignored. Seoul is now pursuing tough sanctions to bring Pyongyang to the negotiating table and on Monday added 20 North Korean companies and 12 individuals to its blacklist. Later this week Mr Moon will travel to Beijing on a state visit that many expect will be used to press Xi Jinping, China’s president, to do more to resolve the crisis. On Sunday Beatrice Fihn, head of the Nobel Peace Prize-winning International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, said the destruction of humankind was “one impulsive tantrum away”, in an apparent reference to the escalating war of words between Messrs Trump and Kim.

In Alabama, evangelicals weigh good, evil and Roy Moore - NBC News

DEC 11 2017, 6:28 AM ET

In Alabama, evangelicals weigh good, evil and Roy Moore

by JONATHAN ALLEN

MONTGOMERY, Ala.— The race for a U.S. Senate seat here has become a battle between good and evil.

For many across the country and some in this Deep South state, Republican Roy Moore is the bad guy.

Before accusations of sexual misconduct with teenage girls surfaced, he had twice lost his seat on the Alabama Supreme Court for defying federal orders to remove a monument to the Ten Commandments that he'd built at his courthouse and to abide by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage. And his commentary on a range of issues — from homosexuality to slavery — has offended Democrats and some moderate Republicans here.

Trump records robocall for Roy Moore 2:00

But for many white evangelical Christians, a dominant political force in the state, Moore is the hero in the latest high-stakes chapter of a centuries-long American morality play, a "godly" man beset by evil persecutors from outside the faith, outside the state and outside a value system in which Christianity, patriotism and the Republican Party are inextricably tied. Their views are so vital to Moore's chances because they account for 49 percent of adult Alabamians.

"They’ve taken evil and tried to redefine it as good and they’ve taken good in our society and redefined it as evil," said Franklin Raddish, the South Carolina-based founder of Capitol Hill Independent Baptist Ministries, a Moore supporter who set up a Bible study group at the Alabama Supreme Court. "It’s a culture war of right and wrong."

For Raddish, the "they" refers to "socialists," and, he said, "the Democrat Party is the party of socialists."

Raddish said pastors who support Moore in Alabama have become reluctant to talk to reporters for fear of being misquoted and receiving the kinds of harassing calls and emails he said he has fielded. NBC's requests to interview several evangelical pastors in the state went unanswered.

At a Pensacola, Fla., campaign rally Friday night in which President Donald Trump issued a full-throated endorsement of Moore, the president explained the us-versus-them mentality as a conflict between God and secularism.

"We've stopped the government's attacks on our Judeo-Christian values," Trump said. "We don't worship government, we worship God."

To Moore's supporters, Democrat Doug Jones — the former prosecutor who won decades-overdue convictions against men who participated in the 16th Street church bombing that killed four black girls in Birmingham in 1963 — has become an embodiment of evil. Not only does he represent a party that supports abortion rights, but he told NBC's Chuck Todd in September that he does not back efforts to restrict abortions to the first 20 weeks of pregnancy.

Abortion

There is no social or political issue of greater import to white evangelical Christians than abortion, and the Senate's role in confirming federal judges makes it the single-most galvanizing issue for them in this race. Federal judges hold the power to rule on whether state-level restrictions violate the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion and, at the Supreme Court level, to potentially overturn that ruling.

"I don't think you'll be very successful in Alabama ... being a person who supports abortion through the ninth month," said Abraham Hamilton, general counsel and public policy analyst for the American Family Association, based in Tupelo, Miss.

Hamilton said it's not all about abortion, noting that the bill of particulars against Jones is much longer:

Jones was a delegate to the 2012 Democratic National Convention, where President Barack Obama was unanimously re-nominated; he talks about defending the Second Amendment and his affinity for hunting, but also about the idea that some limitations on gun-owners' rights are consistent with the Constitution; and he opposes Trump's border wall — an issue with great support among Moore's faithful but on which white evangelical Christians are not monolithic.

Image: Alabama Senate Candidate Doug Jones Holds Women's Wednesday Campaign Rally

Democratic Senatorial candidate Doug Jones speaks as he hosts a "Women's Wednesday" campaign event on Dec. 6, 2017, in Cullman, Alabama. Joe Raedle / Getty Images

And Jones backs same-sex marriage, the issue over which Moore lost his state Supreme Court post the second time and which ranks a close second to abortion as a hot button for religious conservatives.

But much of it boils down to the notion that Jones — who was born in Fairfield, and educated at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa and Samford University in Homewood — represents the kind of outsider that Moore and many white evangelical Christians here have been fighting not only on modern social matters but since the Civil War, Reconstruction and the Civil Rights era.

At a rally in Florence in September, Moore was asked when the United States was last great. His response, as reported by The Los Angeles Times: "I think it was great at the time when families were united — even though we had slavery — they cared for one another. ... Our families were strong, our country had a direction."

Almost every line of argument against Jones starts with his connections to politicians and groups outside Alabama that are perceived by evangelical Christians to be hostile to their cause.

On Friday, Trump called him a "puppet" of Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. And when former Vice President Joe Biden came to the state to support Jones last month, Alabama Republican Party Chair Terry Lathan said she'd welcome national Democrats and their allies — the abortion-rights group Planned Parenthood specifically — because of the backlash that would rally the evangelical-laden GOP.

No matter who attacks Moore, whether it's Democrats or Republicans like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who said he believed the GOP candidate's accusers and called on him to drop out of the race, the critic is cast in the role of outsider persecutor. The fact that the attacks come from Washington, where the federal government sent troops to fight the Confederacy and integrate schools only adds to the familiarity of the battle lines.

A recreational vehicle decked with a "Roy Moore for Senate" sign and the American and Israeli flags drives north on I-65 toward Montgomery, Alabama, on Dec. 9, 2017. Jonathan Allen / NBC News

Heath Carter, a historian at Indiana's Valparaiso University who studies evangelical Christianity in political reform movements, said that Moore's supporters see him as the protagonist fighting against those seeking to undermine their faith and culture.

"It fits right into a narrative that's been up and running for a long time: These types of attacks will come," Carter said. "It’s part of being a true believer.

A 'Godly' man

In mid-November, at a firehouse in northeastern Alabama, the candidate's wife, Kayla Moore, called her husband a "godly" man. "He has never one time lifted a finger to me. He is the most gentle, most kind man that I have ever known in my life. He's godly. He's loving, and everybody in this community knows it," she said.

It can be hard for some to reconcile that description with the allegations of sexual misconduct with teenagers decades ago — which Moore has repeatedly denied — and with the support that Trump enjoys from evangelical Christian voters despite the many women who have said the president physically accosted them before he was elected.

Women attend a 'Women For Moore' rally in support of Republican candidate for U.S. Senate Judge Roy Moore, in front of the Alabama State Capitol, Nov. 17, 2017, in Montgomery, Alabama. Drew Angerer / Getty Images

Stephanie Martin, an assistant professor of political communicatiions at Southern Methodist University who studies conservative political movements, said Kayla Moore is trying to telegraph the idea that her husband "sits as sort of the God-head of his family and he’s a protector and a provider and he is a leader and he takes his responsibilities to be masculine very seriously."

In that telling, Martin said, the view is that women should trust Moore.

"It is kind of an anti-feminist supposition and it is a pro-traditional feminine notion," she said. "So it says, 'OK, so he was interested in women who were much younger than him, but he never did it without her parents' permission.'"

Many of Moore's backers don't believe the allegations, some will support him despite the claims, and a handful have sought to justify his alleged pursuit of girls and young women as Christian.

"Take Joseph and Mary. Mary was a teenager and Joseph was an adult carpenter. They became parents of Jesus," Jim Ziegler, the Alabama state auditor told The Washington Examiner last month, noting that Moore isn't accused of having had sex with any underage girls. "There’s just nothing immoral or illegal here. ... Maybe just a little bit unusual."

The common response among voters has been that it's not up to them to judge Moore, only God can do that, and that they know him as a man of integrity.

Divisions within the faith

Trump remains popular with Alabamians. A Morning Consult survey in October pegged his approval rating at 59 percent in a state he won with 62 percent of the vote. His recent declaration that the United States would recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, mentioned by Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., at Trump's Friday night rally, was immensely popular with evangelicals who believe that Jewish control of Jerusalem is a predicate for the second coming of Jesus Christ.

But there are signs of wear in his relationship with white evangelical Christians across the country.

A Pew Research poll released this week shows that Trump's approval rating among white evangelical Christians dropped from 78 percent in February to 61 percent now.

President Donald Trump walks onto the stage to speak at a campaign-style rally at the Pensacola Bay Center on Dec. 8, 2017, in Pensacola, Fla, where he told voters to back Roy Moore. Susan Walsh / AP

Some evangelical leaders, particularly those outside the Deep South, have been vocal in their criticism of the president and of Moore. They worry about the faith's connection to partisan politics — that the desire to elect certain candidates and promote certain policies has led religious leaders to turn a blind eye.

Russell Moore, the president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, has risked his post in part by being critical of Trump and Moore. "The religious right," he said in an October 2016 speech, "turns out to be the people the religious right warned us about."

And, after the allegations against Moore surfaced, he took to Twitter to denounce evangelicals who gave him a pass.

@drmoore

Christian, if you cannot say definitively, no matter what, that adults creeping on teenage girls is wrong, do not tell me how you stand against moral relativism.

9:16 AM - Nov 14, 2017

Historically, there's been a divide between northern and southern white evangelicals, with the former having often been deeply involved in social reform movements, such as abolition, civil rights and labor rights efforts, that were resisted in the Deep South.

Carter, the Valparaiso professor, described the modern divide as more of clash between religious intellectual elites and rank-and-file pastors and their flocks. Like Russell Moore, the elites want to define morality more along religious lines and less around politics.

He said that for many adherents to the various denominations that make up evangelicalism religion "mixes very freely" with nationalism and Republicanism.

That helps explain why Roy Moore's supporters frame Tuesday's election as an assault on their faith, their party and their country.

"The stakes in this particular race can appear to be cosmic and eternal," Carter said, "and that gets people pretty motivated."