PARIS: French authorities Thursday braced for more violent protests in the coming nights over the fatal shooting of a teen by a policeman, as they scrambled to contain an escalating crisis, halting public transport and enforcing curfews.
According to an internal security note, the “coming nights” are expected “to be the theater of urban violence” with “actions targeted at the forces of order and the symbols of the state,” a police source said.
One Paris suburb, Clamart, has already declared an overnight curfew, between 9:00 p.m. (1900 GMT) and 6:00 am from Thursday until next Monday.
In a show of tensions, a memorial march for 17-year-old Nahel M. ended with riot police firing tear gas as several cars were set alight in the Paris suburb where he was killed.
France has been hit by protests after Nahel was shot point-blank Tuesday during a traffic stop captured on video that has unleashed rage and reignited debate about police tactics.
“The whole world must see that when we march for Nahel, we march for all those who were not filmed,” activist Assa Traore, whose brother died after being arrested in 2016, told the rally led by the teenager’s mother.
The policeman accused of shooting Nahel in Nanterre was charged with voluntary homicide and remanded in custody, but it remained to be seen what impact that may have on the unrest.
Some 40,000 police have been mobilized to try to keep the peace on Thursday, more than four times Wednesday’s numbers on the ground when dozens were arrested.
Cars and bins were torched Wednesday night in parts of the country, while some 150 people were arrested nationwide following clashes and unrest that left a tramway’s carriages on fire in a Paris suburb.
Paris bus and tram services will be halted after 9:00 p.m. (1900 GMT) Thursday, the region’s president said.
President Emmanuel Macron has called for calm and said the protest violence was “unjustifiable.”
The riots are deeply troubling for Macron who had been looking to move past a half-year of sometimes violent protests over his controversial pension reform.
The teenager was killed as he pulled away from police who tried to stop him for traffic infractions.
A video, authenticated by AFP, showed two policemen standing by the side of the stationary car, with one pointing a weapon at the driver.
A voice is heard saying: “You are going to get a bullet in the head.”
The police officer then appears to fire as the car abruptly drives off.
Clashes first erupted as the video emerged, contradicting police accounts that the teenager was driving at the officer.
On Wednesday night, anger spread to Toulouse, Dijon and Lyon, as well as several towns in the Paris region.
Overnight Wednesday to Thursday, masked demonstrators dressed in black launched fireworks at security forces near the scene of Nahel M.’s killing.
A thick column of smoke billowed above the area where a dozen cars and garbage cans were set ablaze and barriers blocked off roads.
Graffiti on the walls of one building called for “justice for Nahel” and said, “police kill.”
In Paris, police fired flashballs to disperse protesters who responded by throwing bottles.
In the southern city of Toulouse, several cars were torched and police and firefighters pelted with projectiles.
At France’s second-largest prison complex, Fresnes, protesters attacked security at the entrance with fireworks.
The town hall of Mons-en-Baroeul outside the northern city of Lille was set on fire when some 50 hooded people stormed the building, the mayor told AFP.
Authorities in Lille stepped up measures Thursday aimed at preventing fresh violence, including a ban on gatherings and deploying drones.
Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne, speaking in a town north of Paris where the mayor’s office had been set on fire, said “obviously all escalation has to be avoided.”
France is haunted by the prospect of a repeat of 2005 riots, sparked by the death of two boys of African origin in a police chase, during which 6,000 people were arrested.
“There are all the ingredients for another explosion potentially,” one government adviser told AFP on condition of anonymity.
The head of the right-wing Republicans, Eric Ciotti, called for a state of emergency, which allows local authorities to create no-go areas, but a government source told AFP this option was not currently on the table.
There has been growing concern over police tactics, particularly against young men from non-white minorities.
Last year, 13 people were killed after refusing to stop for police traffic checks, with a law change in 2017 that gave officers greater powers to use their weapons now under scrutiny.
“What I see on this video is the execution by police of a 17-year-old kid, in France, in 2023, in broad daylight,” said Greens party leader Marine Tondelier.
Police brace for more violent protests over French teen’s killing
https://arab.news/9gwjh
Police brace for more violent protests over French teen’s killing
- According to an internal security note, the ‘coming nights’ are expected ‘to be the theater of urban violence’
- France is haunted by the prospect of a repeat of 2005 riots, sparked by the death of two boys of African origin in a police chase
Russia’s Putin calls for quick development of drone forces
- Drones have played a leading role for both sides
Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that drones had played a major role in the conflict in Ukraine and called for the rapid development and deployment of separate drone forces within the military.
“We are currently creating unmanned systems troops as a separate branch of the military and we need to ensure their rapid and high-quality deployment and development,” Russian news agencies quoted him as saying at a meeting on arms development.
Drones have played a leading role for both sides in the more than three-year-old conflict pitting Moscow against Kyiv. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has since the outbreak of the war in February 2022 stressed the importance of developing a domestic drone development and production industry.
Putin told the second day of the gathering that Russia was well aware how Ukraine was dealing with the issue.
“But on the whole, I do not believe we are lagging behind on anything,” he was quoted as saying. “More to the point, it seems to me we are bringing together good experience with a view to creating just such forces.”
Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousov proposed the creation of a drone force late last year, setting a target date of the third quarter of 2025.
Putin also stressed developing air defenses, which he said had destroyed more than 80,000 targets during the conflict that Russia still calls a special military operation.
“In this respect, a new state armaments program must ensure the construction of a versatile air defense system capable of operating in any circumstances and efficiently striking air attack weapons, regardless of their type,” he said.
On the opening day of the meeting, Putin called for due attention to be paid to the nuclear triad of land-based, sea-based and aircraft-launched weapons.
Americans split on Trump’s use of military in immigration protests, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds
- Poll shows partisan divide on military use in protests
- Few approve of Trump’s handling of Los Angeles protests
- Support for increased deportations remains mainstream in US
WASHINGTON: Americans are divided over President Donald Trump’s decision to activate the military to respond to protests against his crackdown on migrants, with about half supportive of the move, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll that closed on Thursday.
Some 48 percent of respondents in the two-day poll agreed with a statement that the president should “deploy the military to bring order to the streets” when protests turn violent, while 41 percent disagreed. Views on the matter split sharply along partisan lines, with members of Trump’s Republican Party overwhelmingly backing the idea of calling in troops while Democrats were firmly opposed.
At the same time, just 35 percent of respondents said they approved of Trump’s response to the protests in Los Angeles, which has included sending National Guard troops and US Marines to the city and also threatening to arrest Democratic officials, including the governor of California. Some 50 percent of people in the poll said they disapproved of Trump’s response.
Trump has argued the military deployment in Los Angeles was needed due to protests there following a series of immigration raids in the city. Some of the demonstrations in Los Angeles have turned violent — leaving burned out cars on city streets — and 46 percent of respondents in the Reuters/Ipsos poll said protesters opposing Trump’s immigration policies had gone too far, compared to 38 percent who disagreed with that view.
The protests have spread to other US cities including New York, Chicago, Washington and San Antonio, Texas — all of which have large immigrant populations and tend to vote for Democrats rather than Republicans.
Trump campaigned and won last year’s election on a promise to increase deportations of undocumented immigrants and Reuters/Ipsos polls have shown that his support on immigration policy has been consistently higher than on other matters, such as his stewardship of the US economy.
The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which surveyed 1,136 Americans nationwide and has a margin of error of about 3 percentage points, showed wide support for increased deportations. Some 52 percent of respondents — including one in five Democrats and nine in 10 Republicans — backed ramping up deportations of people in the country illegally. Still, 49 percent of people in the poll said Trump had gone too far with his arrests of immigrants, compared to 40 percent who said he had not done so.
The most heated protests have taken place in Los Angeles County, where one in three residents are immigrants and about half of people born abroad are naturalized US citizens, according to US Census estimates.
Nationwide, Americans took a generally dim view of Trump’s threats to arrest Democratic officials like California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat. Just 35 percent of respondents said Trump should order arrests of state and local officials who try to stop federal immigration enforcement.
Nationwide protests against immigration raids escalate, leading to arrests and curfews
- Volatile protests prompted city officials to enforce curfews in Los Angeles and Spokane, Washington state
- Activists are planning “No Kings” events across the country on Saturday to coincide with Trump’s planned military parade in the US capital
AUSTIN, Texas: Protests over federal immigration enforcement raids are flaring up around the country, as officials in cities from coast to coast get ready for major demonstrations against President Donald Trump over the weekend.
While many demonstrations against the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency have been peaceful, with marchers chanting slogans and carrying signs, others have led to clashes with police who have sometimes used chemical irritants to disperse crowds. Hundreds have been arrested.
Volatile protests prompted city officials to enforce curfews in Los Angeles and Spokane. And Republican governors in Texas and Missouri mobilized National Guard troops to be ready to help law enforcement manages demonstrations in those states.
Activists are planning “No Kings” events across the country on Saturday to coincide with Trump’s planned military parade in Washington, D.C. While those were already scheduled, they will happen amid the rising tensions of the week.
The Trump administration said immigration raids and deportations will continue regardless.
A look at some recent protests and reactions across the country:
Las Vegas
Police said 94 people were arrested on “various criminal and traffic” charges, and four officers were injured in a Wednesday night protest. Some in the estimated crowd of about 800 threw bottles and rocks at law enforcement, police said.
A large crowd gathered on Las Vegas Boulevard near the city’s federal courthouse and blocked several streets before police deemed the gathering an unlawful assembly. Police announced in English and Spanish that protesters must leave the area. Local media reported that tear gas, flash-bang grenades and rubber bullets were used to disperse the crowds.
Chicago
Hundreds of demonstrators packed a park plaza near Lake Michigan on Thursday. Veronica Castro, an organizer with the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, urged people to learn how to protect themselves and elected officials to speak out.
Demonstrators chanted “No hate, no fear.”
The group later marched along the city’s iconic Michigan Avenue, flanked by their own security marshals and Chicago police officers on bicycles and in slow-moving patrol cars.
The crowd, including parents with strollers, students and longtime organizers chanted, “Power to the people, no one is illegal.”
Seattle
Hundreds of protesters marched through downtown Seattle Wednesday evening to a federal building where immigration cases are heard. Some of them dragged a dumpster nearby and set it on fire. The building was covered in graffiti, with “Abolish ICE Now” written in large letters across its front window. They moved electric bikes and cones to block its entrance.
Dozens of officers squared off with protesters near the federal building, with some shooting pepper spray. Police worked to move the crowd away and some protesters threw fireworks and rocks at officers, according to the Seattle Police Department.
Spokane, Washington
Mayor Lisa Brown imposed an overnight curfew in downtown Spokane after a protest Wednesday afternoon outside an ICE office that ended with more than 30 arrests and police firing pepper balls at the crowd.
Brown said the curfew would “protect public safety,” and that the majority of protesters were peaceful.
“We respect their right to peacefully protest and to be upset about federal policies,” she said. “I have been that person who has protested federal policies and that is a right we have.”
San Antonio
Several hundred protesters marched through downtown San Antonio and near the historic Alamo mission. Although Texas National Guard troops were seen in the area, the demonstration was mostly peaceful with no significant clashes with law enforcement.
The Alamo building and plaza, among the most popular tourist attractions in the state, was closed to the public early and police guarded the property as the crowd gathered and marched nearby.
Tuscon, Arizona
A protest Wednesday outside an ICE office in Tuscon, Arizona, turned into a clash between masked security officers and demonstrators who blocked a roadway, threw balloons filled with paint and spray painted anti-ICE graffiti on the gates and walls of the facility.
Video clips showed a security officer who was hit with a water bottle. Masked protesters held makeshift shields as they inched toward the security team, and a member of the security team set off what appeared to be a flash-bang device.
At one point, a security officer sprayed a chemical irritant at protesters and a protester responded by firing irritant back at the officers. It was unclear if the officers were private security or federal agents. The Associated Press left messages with the Tucson Police Department and ICE’s operation in Arizona.
‘No Kings’
This week’s protests are leading into the scheduled “No Kings” demonstrations that organizers say are planned in nearly 2,000 locations around the country, from city blocks to small towns, courthouse steps to community parks, according to the movement’s website.
Organizers plan a flagship march and rally in Philadelphia, but no protests are scheduled to take place in Washington, D.C., where the military parade will be held.
In Florida, state Attorney General James Uthmeier warned that any “No Kings” protesters who become violent will be dealt with harshly.
“If you want to light things on fire and put people in danger, you are going to do time. We do not tolerate rioting,” said Uthmeier said Thursday.
Federal prosecutors are watching as well.
In a message sent Thursday, a Justice Department official told US attorneys across the country to prioritize cases against protesters who engage in violence and destruction. The email cites several potential federal charges, including assault, civil disorder and damage of government property.
Governors and the Guard
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe mobilized National Guard troops in their states ahead of the weekend demonstrations.
Abbott said more than 5,000 guard troops and more than 2,000 state police would be ready to assist local law enforcement if needed.
Several “No Kings” rallies are planned in Texas, including in San Antonio, Houston, Dallas and Austin. There were brief clashes between protesters and police who used chemical irritants during demonstrations in Austin and Dallas earlier in the week. Police in Austin made about a dozen arrests.
Mayors in San Antonio and Austin have said they didn’t ask for help from the National Guard.
Kehoe’s announcement called his decision a “precautionary measure” and did not provide specific troop levels or duties. His order authorized guard leadership to call up as many members as necessary.
Abbott and Kehoe stand in sharp contrast to California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has publicly sparred with Trump over the president’s decision to send National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles, where volatile demonstrations have mostly been contained to a five-block section of downtown.
All 22 other Democratic governors signed a statement backing Newsom, calling the Guard deployment and threats to send in Marines “an alarming abuse of power.”
Trump administration hit with second lawsuit over restrictions on asylum access
- CIvil lawsuit was filed in a Southern California federal court by four civil rights advocates
- Lawsuit focuses on people who are not on US soil and are seeking asylum at ports of entry
MCALLEN, Texas: Immigration advocates filed a class-action lawsuit Wednesday over the Trump administration’s use of a proclamation that effectively put an end to being able to seek asylum at ports of entry to the United States.
The civil lawsuit was filed in a Southern California federal court by the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, the American Immigration Council, Democracy Forward and the Center for Constitutional Rights.
The lawsuit is asking the court to find the proclamation unlawful, set aside the policy ending asylum at ports of entry and restore access to the asylum process at ports of entry, including for those who had appointments that were canceled when President Donald Trump took office.
Unlike a similar lawsuit filed in February in a Washington, D.C., federal court representing people who had already reached US soil and sought asylum after crossing between ports of entry, Wednesday’s lawsuit focuses on people who are not on US soil and are seeking asylum at ports of entry.
US Customs and Border Protection did not respond to a request for comment, but the agency does not typically comment on litigation. The Department of Homeland Security, another agency among the listed defendants, did not respond to a request for comment either.
Trump’s sweeping proclamation issued on his first day in office changed asylum policies, effectively ending asylum at the border. The proclamation said the screening process created by Congress under the Immigration and Nationality Act “can be wholly ineffective in the border environment” and was “leading to the unauthorized entry of innumerable illegal aliens into the United States.”
Immigrant advocates said that under the proclamation noncitizens seeking asylum at a port of entry are asked to present medical and criminal histories, a requirement for the visa process but not for migrants who are often fleeing from immediate danger.
“Nothing in the INA or any other source of law permits Defendants’ actions,” the immigrant advocates wrote in their complaint.
Thousands of people who sought asylum through the CBP One app, a system developed under President Joe Biden, had their appointments at ports of entry canceled on Trump’s first day in office as part of the proclamation that declared an invasion at the border.
“The Trump administration has taken drastic steps to block access to the asylum process, in flagrant violation of US law,” the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies stated in a press release Wednesday.
After feud with Trump, role of Musk’s SpaceX in Golden Dome missile shield in question
- Trump in May said the defense shield should be operational by the end of his presidency, January 2029
- The White House had considered a plan for SpaceX to play a key role in Trump's “Golden Dome" program
WASHINGTON: The role of Elon Musk’s SpaceX in an ambitious new US missile defense system is in question following the dramatic feud last week between the billionaire entrepreneur and President Donald Trump, according to three people familiar with the project.
The White House until recently had considered a plan for SpaceX, Musk’s rocket and satellite venture, to partner with software maker Palantir and drone builder Anduril to construct crucial elements of the project, dubbed “Golden Dome.” The administration had instructed the Pentagon to prioritize a network of satellites for the purpose, these people said.
But a new framework for the system, which would seek to track and prevent possible missile attacks against the United States, is now being considered that could reduce the role of SpaceX. One possibility, the three people said, could initially forego SpaceX’s satellite capabilities and focus on the expansion of existing ground systems for missile defense instead.
In a statement, a White House spokesman said “the Trump Administration is committed to a rigorous review process for all bids and contracts.” A senior Defense Department official said the Pentagon “has no announcements regarding future contracts associated with the Golden Dome effort.”
SpaceX, Anduril and Palantir didn’t respond to requests for comment.
A reduced role for SpaceX would represent the first known setback to Musk’s huge volume of business with the US government since his break with Trump last week. The shift in plans, especially for a project that Trump has touted as paramount for US defense strategy, also underscores the highly personalized nature of the president’s leadership, aerospace and defense experts said.
“That people guiding the program or building it are approved based on their political affiliation signals a real concern that the project itself is very politicized and not being conducted on the technical merits,” said Laura Grego, a missile defense expert and research director at the Union of Concerned Scientists, a non-profit based in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
In its statement to Reuters, the White House said any decision would be made “prioritizing the best deal for America and leveraging the most advanced and innovative technology.”
Trump in May said the defense shield should be operational by the end of his presidency, January 2029. But industry experts have said that timeframe, and a projected cost of some $175 billion, could be too optimistic.
The change in the proposed “architecture” of the system, the three people said, could have the political advantage of allowing the current administration to deliver at least a portion of it. It isn’t clear how soon a final decision on the project could come or whether the ultimate role of any company, including SpaceX, has been determined.
Trump’s efforts to roll out the project fast have led to uncertainty about the project’s details and a scramble by contractors to be involved, industry experts and some of those involved in its development told Reuters. “To this day, no one knows what the requirements are,” said one of the people familiar with the process. “There isn’t a coordinated effort with a true vision. All of these companies are just grabbing at this pot of money.”
SpaceX, Anduril and Palantir were all founded by entrepreneurs who have been major political supporters of Trump. The three companies had previously met with top administration officials and decisionmakers from the Defense Department to discuss Golden Dome, according to people familiar with those discussions.
Before his high-profile falling out with the president, Musk served as a key Trump adviser and donated more than a quarter of a billion dollars to help elect him. But the recent dispute, which included Musk calling for Trump’s impeachment and accusing the president of improper involvement with disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, triggered the change in direction, the three people told Reuters.
“Because of the blowup, the Pentagon has been given the space to look at other alternatives,” one of the people said.
In recent days, Musk has sought to temper the dispute, saying he regretted some of his comments and taking down some of his social media criticism of Trump, including the call for impeachment. Earlier this week, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Trump appreciated Musk’s apology and that she was unaware of any administration efforts to review Musk contracts because of the dispute.
Reuters couldn’t determine whether Musk’s conciliatory overtures might improve SpaceX’s chances of winning Golden Dome contracts or securing further new business with the US government.
SpaceX had pitched for a part of the Golden Dome initiative called the “custody layer,” a constellation of between 400 and 1,000 satellites that would detect missiles, track their trajectory, and determine if they are heading toward the US, Reuters reported in April. In a January 27 executive order, Trump mandated the selection of a proposed “architecture” for Golden Dome and an implementation plan by the end of March.
The order called a missile attack “the most catastrophic threat facing the United States.”
