Connect with us

Published

on

If it wasn’t for the soldiers on the door, you’d walk on by, oblivious to the people behind the window. 

Just off Manhattan’s Madison Avenue, between the midtown skyscrapers, a shuttered bar is now the impromptu overflow for New York’s central migrant registration centre. And through the steamed-up windows is a room full of stories.

Each person has a long journey behind them, from Africa, the Middle East and South America to the southern border of the United States and now here.

Some flee persecution, some escape war. Some have had lives upturned by climate change. All need work. All seek a better life.

“It wasn’t going well for us in Venezuela,” mother of two Danieles tells me.

“Most of all it was for the two of them.” She points to her toddlers.

Stone VT
Image:
Migrants waiting in a shuttered bar

Nearby, Omar, damp and with no belongings and no bed for the night, says: “We’re finding a way to get a future, a good economy to try to help us and our families back in Venezuela to be able to live.”

More from US

Fear and hope; the push and pull of humanity. They are familiar stories that I’ve heard over and over on the migration trail, from Lebanon to Turkey, from Greece to France, from Texas to New York.

The Big Apple is, proudly, a city of immigrants. Nearly 40% of people here were born in another country. And its Statue of Liberty is a symbol of a nation built on immigration.

Yet now New York is the test for a nation divided by migration.

It’s not entirely clear why Britain’s home secretary has chosen America to raise, some say grandstand, her proposals to tackle global migration.

If Suella Braverman thinks America is a migration showcase, she will be bitterly disappointed.

If she wants to use it as an example of a failing system then it’s an awkward message diplomatically, and she’ll find a government here that would rather not talk about it.

Just as in Britain and Europe, migration is a bitterly divisive issue here.

America’s southern border is a perfect example of an asylum system that is neither firm nor fair. On that, she will find common ground with Britain’s own system.

New York is a snapshot of a nationwide challenge. More than 100,000 people have arrived on Manhattan Island over the past year.

The city authorities recently signed a $275m contract with the Hotel Association of New York to set aside 5,000 rooms for migrants. Yet more than that arrive most weeks.

Read more:
Where do US migrants come from and how do they get there?
Migrant surge at border pushes Texas city to ‘breaking point’

Stone migration

There are currently more than 60,000 people housed in 200 different sites across the city.

Most arrive via the southern border with Mexico after a journey through Central America. In August, 82,000 people entered Panama overland from South America.

The numbers for this year are looking set to be double the number in 2022.

As they pass into America to claim asylum they immediately become pawns in the politics, most pushed north to be someone else’s problem. And if that sounds familiar it’s because it’s what’s happening in Europe too, from Italy, to France, to the UK.

For a sense of America’s broken system, consider this: more than two million immigration cases are pending nationwide. That is up from about 100,000 a decade ago and the average time to determine a case is now four years.

US soldiers watch over a group of migrants waiting near El Paso, Texas, to process their immigration claim as the United States prepares to lift Title 42 restrictions
Image:
US soldiers watch over a group of migrants waiting near El Paso, Texas

This month the city’s mayor issued a stark assessment of the challenge as he sees it.

“We’re getting no support on this national crisis. We’re receiving no support,” Eric Adams said.

“And let me tell you something New Yorkers: never in my life, have I had a problem that I did not see an ending to. I don’t see an ending to this. I don’t see an ending to this. This issue will destroy New York City, destroy New York City.”

Mr Adams is a Democrat, the party of President Biden with whom he is now clashing over the issue of migration.

Mr Adams blames the president. Mr Biden, on the occasions that he acknowledges the issue, blames it on a system he can’t change without bipartisan agreement, which he will never get.

And that’s the nub of it. Whether it’s in the villages of Kent, the islands of Greece, the towns of Texas or the streets of Manhattan there is no common ground on migration. Politicians represent divided societies. It’s “we can do it” up against “we really can’t”.

Between the hard line and the compassion is a reality. This is a time of unprecedented migration. The movement we are seeing represents a new normal that is testing open societies globally.

Continue Reading

US

Day 34: Why Trump really flipped the script on Ukraine

Published

on

By

Day 34: Why Trump really flipped the script on Ukraine

👉 Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app 👈

As President Trump claims he is “close” to signing a mining deal with Ukraine, and his secretary of state Marco Rubio talks about a lack of “gratitude” from President Zelenskyy for US military assistance, our US correspondents Mark Stone, Martha Kelner and James Matthews discuss if this is the real reason Trump’s administration appears to have turned its back on Ukraine.

And, why Canada is taking its feud with Donald Trump on to the ice.

You can email James, Mark and Martha on trump100@sky.uk

Continue Reading

US

Trump fires top US military officers – including America’s most senior commander

Published

on

By

Trump fires top US military officers - including America's most senior commander

Donald Trump has purged top military figures in the Pentagon, including firing America’s most senior commander.

He also pushed out five other admirals and generals in an unprecedented shake-up of US military leadership.

The Pentagon had been bracing for mass firings of civilian staff as well as a dramatic overhaul of its budget and a shift in military deployments.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Charles ‘CQ’ Brown – America’s highest-ranking general and only the second black general to serve as chairman – was fired with immediate effect.

The president will also replace the head of the US Navy, a position held by Admiral Lisa Franchetti, the first woman to lead a military service, and the Air Force vice chief of staff, the Pentagon said.

He is also removing the judge advocates general for the Army, Navy and Air Force, critical positions that ensure enforcement of military justice.

The campaign to rid the military of leaders who support diversity and equity in the ranks has been condemned by Democrats.

There is nothing apolitical about Trump

By David Blevins, Sky News correspondent

The purge of America’s top military officials, carried out by President Trump and his Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, is unprecedented, writes Sky News correspondent David Blevins, in Washington.

Their dismissal late on Friday sent shockwaves through the defence establishment and raised concerns about the direction of military leadership.

General Charles Q Brown, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was abruptly removed two years into his four-year term.

America’s most senior military officer comes into office two years into a presidential term, meaning they serve under two presidents.

The role is intended to be apolitical but there is no such thing as non-partisan politics in the Trump playbook.

Brown’s tenure had been marked by a focus on diversity, equity and inclusion, putting him at odds with the administration.

Prior to his appointment as defence secretary, Hegseth questioned Brown’s promotion, hinting that it had been influenced by race.

In his book, The War on Warriors, Hegseth wrote: “The military standards, once the hallmark for competency, professionalism, and ‘mission first’ outcomes, have officially been subsumed by woke priorities.”

Supporters of the administration argue the changes are necessary to refocus military priorities in line with the president’s objectives.

But critics contend that such a sweeping overhaul of leadership undermines the apolitical nature of the military and unsettles the rank and file.

Rhode Island’s senator Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said: “Firing uniformed officers as a type of political loyalty test… erodes the trust and professionalism that our servicemembers require to achieve their missions.”

Representative Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat, said the firings were “un-American, unpatriotic, and dangerous for our troops and our national security.”

“This is the definition of politicising our military,” he said.

Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said: “Firing uniformed leaders as a type of political loyalty test, or for reasons relating to diversity and gender that have nothing to do with performance, erodes the trust and professionalism that our servicemembers require to achieve their missions.”

Read more:
Dozens turn out in support of Luigi Mangione
Former Trump adviser denies using ‘Nazi’ salute

During the election, Mr Trump spoke of firing “woke” generals and those he saw as responsible for the withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Defence secretary and former Fox News personality Pete Hegseth has questioned whether General Brown would have got the job if he were not black.

There is no indication his appointment was not based on merit.

👉 Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app 👈

On Friday, Mr Trump said: “I want to thank General Charles ‘CQ’ Brown for his over 40 years of service to our country, including as our current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

“He is a fine gentleman and an outstanding leader, and I wish a great future for him and his family.”

It’s unclear who Mr Trump will choose to replace the judge advocates. Mr Hegseth previously criticised military lawyers, saying most “spend more time prosecuting our troops than putting away bad guys”.

Continue Reading

US

Dozens turn out in support of Luigi Mangione over killing of US healthcare boss Brian Thompson

Published

on

By

Dozens turn out in support of Luigi Mangione over killing of US healthcare boss Brian Thompson

Dozens of supporters were outside court as the man accused of fatally shooting the chief executive of UnitedHealthcare made his first appearance.

Luigi Mangione has pleaded not guilty to multiple counts of murder following the 4 December killing of Brian Thompson, 50, outside a midtown Manhattan hotel.

The 26-year-old is accused of ambushing and shooting the executive as he walked to an investor conference.

Luigi Mangione supporters stand outside the Supreme Court. Pic: AP Photo/Stefan Jeremiah
Image:
Luigi Mangione supporters stand outside the Supreme Court. Pic: AP Photo/Stefan Jeremiah

Dozens of people who showed up in court to support the suspect including former army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning who was jailed for stealing classified diplomatic cables.

Dozens more queued in the hallway.

More on Luigi Mangione

Mangione is also facing federal charges that could carry the possibility of the death penalty.

The judge set a deadline of 9 April to submit pre-trial motions.

Luigi Mangione is accused of fatally shooting Brian Thompson. Pic: Steven Hirsch/New York Post via AP
Image:
Luigi Mangione is accused of fatally shooting Brian Thompson. Pic: Steven Hirsch/New York Post via AP

In addition to the New York cases, Mr Mangione also faces charges of forgery, carrying firearms without a licence, and other counts in Pennsylvania, where authorities arrested him at a McDonald’s.

Police say he was in possession of a gun, bullets, multiple fake IDs and a handwritten document that expressed “ill will” towards corporate America.

He is being held in a Brooklyn jail alongside several other high-profile defendants, including music mogul and rapper Sean “Diddy” Combs, and disgraced crypto entrepreneur Sam Bankman-Fried.

The killing prompted some to voice their resentment at US health insurers, with Mangione attracting a cult following.

A poll taken in the wake of the shooting showed most Americans believe health insurance profits and coverage denials were partly to blame for the incident.

Continue Reading

Trending