

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The government of Angola has not done enough to combat pervasive
corruption and mismanagement, Human Rights Watch said in a report
released today. Even though the oil-rich country's gross domestic
product has increased by more than 400 percent in the last six years,
Angolans are not seeing their lives improve accordingly, Human Rights
Watch said.
The 31-page report, "Transparency and Accountability in Angola: An Update,"
documents how the government took only limited steps to improve
transparency after Human Rights Watch disclosed in a 2004 report that
billions of dollars in oil revenue illegally bypassed the central bank
and disappeared without explanation. The report details newly disclosed
evidence of corruption and mismanagement and includes recommendations
for reversing the pattern.
"The government needs to take strong action to combat the corruption
and secrecy that undermine Angolans' rights," said Arvind Ganesan,
director of the Business and Human Rights Program at Human Rights
Watch. "Here is a nation with a wealth of resources while its people
live in poverty."
Human Rights Watch said that a recent agreement with the
International Monetary Fund (IMF), enacted in the wake of the global
financial crisis and drop in the price of oil, offers some hope for
improvement if its provisions are carried out.
The government has improved the publication of oil revenue figures,
the Human Rights Watch report says, but human indicators in Angola
remain abysmal and have not been commensurate with the rapid growth in
Angola's national wealth. Angola is the largest producer of oil in
sub-Saharan Africa, yet millions of Angolans have limited access to
basic social services. Angola ranked 143rd out of 182 countries in the
United Nations Development Programme's Human Development Index.
Angola's ranking in Transparency International's 2009 Corruption Perceptions Index is growing worse, from 158th out of 180 countries in 2008 down to 162nd in 2009.
The report also details new evidence of corruption and
mismanagement, including that of Dr. Aguinaldo Jaime, who served as the
governor of the Angolan Central Bank from 1999 to 2002. As documented
by a February 2010 US Senate report, Jaime initiated a series of
suspicious $50 million transactions with US banks. For each attempt,
the banks, concerned about the likelihood of fraud, ultimately rejected
the transfer or returned the money shortly after receiving it. During
Jaime's three-year tenure as central bank governor, the government
could not account for approximately $2.4 billion.
Recent statements by President Jose Eduardo dos Santos seem to
indicate a willingness to combat government corruption. He has called
for a "zero tolerance" policy against corruption. And as the US Senate
conducted its recent investigation into corruption in Angola and
elsewhere, he announced a new Law on Administrative Probity, to reduce
corruption by government officials.
However, given that the president and ruling party have been in
power for more than three decades, including the entire period in which
oil-fueled corruption has been rampant, skeptics will wait to see
whether meaningful action will accompany these statements, Human Rights
Watch said. Further, a new constitution was recently enacted that will
enable dos Santos, in power now for 30 years, to remain in power for 13
more years.
"Dr. Jaime's activities underscore the need for accountability,"
Ganesan said. "If the Angolan government is serious about transparency
and reform, it should rigorously investigate government officials,
publish audits of its expenditures, and act on President dos Santos'
pledge of 'zero tolerance' for corruption."
While the recently announced reforms have not gone far enough, a new
Stand-By Arrangement with the IMF offers both the framework and
international impetus to make substantive improvements and combat
corruption in Angola.
This may be an opportunity for the Chinese government to address
problems with transparency and accountability, Human Rights Watch said.
The Chinese government and Chinese companies are some of the largest
investors, trading partners, and consumers of Angola's oil. The Chinese
government and Chinese companies have invested billions in
oil-for-infrastructure deals while remaining relatively silent on
governance in Angola and elsewhere.
The China Investment Fund, a prominent private Chinese company that
has extensive ties to Sonangol, the Angolan national oil company, is of
particular concern. It has been controversial in Angola and other
countries, such as Guinea.
Human Rights Watch said that IMF board members, such as the United
States and China, should ensure that Angola complies with provisions of
the Stand-By Arrangement, specifically by making public the audits of
the state oil company Sonangol and providing regular updates detailing
Angola's expenditures.
In addition to the role of the United States as an IMF board member,
the Obama Administration has been outspoken about corruption, but some
of its policy proscriptions are unlikely to have a significant impact.
Instead, Human Rights Watch urged the administration to fully implement
the recommendations from the US Senate to combat the use of US
financial institutions by foreign kleptocrats to spend their money in
the United States.
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
"I don't care about any other part of him: his choices caused mass death. That's it," said one critic.
Hours after Sen. Lindsey Graham unexpectedly died on Saturday, many of his Democratic colleagues in the US Senate posted statements on their social media pages paying tribute to the South Carolina Republican.
Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said that he would most remember Graham (R-SC) for his "his sense of humor and how he deployed it to move his policy positions forward."
"Though we did not often agree," Schiff added, "Senator Graham was never disagreeable."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) similarly said of Graham that "even though we disagreed on much, he was always willing to negotiate, with humor and wit," adding "my heart goes out to his loved ones."
Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ) said he was "saddened" to hear of news of Graham's death, which he said came "as a real shock."
"I’m grateful I had the chance to work with Lindsey," said Kim, "including several international trips working on foreign policy."
However, many critics argued that these tributes to Graham overlooked his destructive legacy in public office, including his decades of war mongering and his slavish devotion to the authoritarian President Donald Trump.
"I don't give a fuck that Graham used to be friends with Democratic senators," wrote Thomas Lecaque, associate professor of history at Grand View University. "He was a bloodthirsty bastard who cheered the killing of Muslims and sold his soul to the fascists to be able to push it more effectively. I don't care about any other part of him: his choices caused mass death. That's it."
Princeton historian Kevin Kruse, responding directly to Schiff's post, reminded him of Graham's behavior during the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings when he "threw an angry tantrum in defense of a SCOTUS nominee credibly accused of rape."
"Did you all have a good collegial chuckle over that?" Kruse asked.
Brandon Friedman, co-founder of the Rakkasan Tea Company and a veteran of the Iraq War, also responded directly to Schiff.
"What I'll remember most about Senator Graham," Friedman wrote, "is how he sent my friends to die in an unnecessary war in Iraq."
Jen Rubin, editor-in-chief of The Contrarian and former columnist for The Washington Post, described the Democrats' tributes to Graham as "nauseating" and "everything that is wrong" with the US Senate.
Nicholas Grossman, professor of international relations at the University of Illinois, said the Democrats' statements were just one more signal of weakness from the party.
"The Democratic Party's approval rating is in the toilet," Grossman wrote, "and the main reason is voters see Dem leaders and prominent members acting like things are basically okay instead of fighting like there's an emergency. Slot 'my friend Lindsey Graham, so funny, how great to work with him' comments into that."
Cartoonish Eli Valley was apoplectic about Democrats' fawning hagiography of their late Republican colleague.
"That Democrats see mass-murdering fascists dismantling the country as nothing more than 'colleagues they dislike' is why we've been in a non-stop plummet," Valley wrote. "Incredible this is still debatable, by people who ostensibly oppose fascism, ten years into this?!?"
Political consultant Jamison Foser wrote a parody of the Democrats' statements that imagined them paying tribute to none other than Satan.
"Deeply saddened to learn of the loss of my dear friend Satan, the Prince of Lies," wrote Foser. "Though we often disagreed about matters such as the appropriate role of torture in the afterlife, I will most remember how his quick wit and affable nature made our weekly golf outings a ritual. He will be missed."
Despite the strait's closure, Trump insisted it was "open as far as we're concerned."
US President Donald Trump on Sunday twice told journalists to stop asking him about the status of the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran once again closed after the president declared an end to the ceasefire deal between the two countries.
The first instance came during an interview with NBC News' Kristen Welker, who pointed to conflicting statements from the Iranian government and US Central Command about the status of the strait, which is an essential shipping lane for global petroleum supplies.
Trump replied that "it's open, and I don't want to talk about it because I want to honor the life" of the late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who died on Saturday from what his office described as "a brief and sudden illness."
"So I don't want to talk about it," Trump continued. "I told you that before the call."
WELKER: Iran says the Strait of Hormuz is closed. CENTCOM says it's open. Which is it?
TRUMP: It's open, and I don't want to talk about because I want to honor the life of Lindsey Graham, so I don't want to talk about it. I told you that before the call. pic.twitter.com/3ed7dN1bhK
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 12, 2026
Shortly after, during an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper, Trump was again asked whether the strait was still open.
"It's open as far as we're concerned," Trump told Tapper. "Don't talk about it. Talk about the reason you asked me to speak."
"Okay," Tapper replied. "We appreciate your time, sir."
TAPPER: Iran has declared the Strait of Hormuz closed. Is that true?
TRUMP: It's open as far as we're concerned. Don't talk about it. Talk about the reason you asked me to speak. pic.twitter.com/TwssTycQdF
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 12, 2026
Iran shut down shipping traffic in the strait after Trump launched an illegal war against the country in late February. The strait's closure resulted in spiking oil and gasoline prices, which coincided with further erosion in Trump's approval ratings.
Although traffic through the strait initially picked up in the wake of a June memorandum of understanding signed by the US and Iran, it has since slumped as the ceasefire between the two nations has fallen apart.
Ana Marie Cox, contributing editor at The New Republic, bashed both Welker and Tapper for heeding the president's requests and not pushing him to answer questions about the war he unlawfully started.
"Frankly astonished that supposed news sources agreed to terms to interview Trump and appeared to be deferential to them," Cox wrote in a social media post, "enough that they were apologetic in brining up other topics."
Cox's sentiment was echoed by Kai Ryssdal, host of NPR's Marketplace, who remarked that "the guy being interviewed doesn’t get to pick the questions."
Journalist Helen Kennedy challenged Trump's assertion that asking about the status of the Iran war was irrelevant when talking about Lindsey Graham.
"Making war with Iran was Lindsey Graham's favorite thing," Kennedy observed. "It's not like it's unrelated."
"Lindsey Graham will forever be remembered as an enabler of a regime that has murdered people, destroyed democratic norms, and caused irreparable harm to this country. What a horrific legacy," said one critic.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of the most relentless proponents for using US military force overseas, died on Saturday night at the age of 71.
In a statement posted on Graham's (R-SC) social media account, the senator's office said that he "passed away from a brief and sudden illness."
"Sen. Graham's family appreciates prayers at this time," the office added, "and asks for privacy during this incredibly difficult period."
During his life, Graham advocated either starting or getting involved in multiple wars across the world, and he was reportedly instrumental in convincing President Donald Trump to launch an illegal attack on Iran without any authorization from the US Congress.
Although Graham was once a Trump critic—he infamously declared in 2016 that the Republican Party would get "destroyed" if it made the former Celebrity Apprentice host its presidential nominee—the South Carolina Republican grew to become one of the president's staunchest allies.
Some critics of Graham reacted to his death by rehashing what they considered to be his least admirable traits.
David Dayen, executive editor of The American Prospect, remarked that Graham "never met a war he didn't want to send your kids to."
Alejandra Caraballo, clinical instructor at the Harvard Law School Cyberlaw Clinic, also reflected on Graham's lifetime of war mongering.
"You can say a lot about Lindsey Graham," Caraballo wrote, "but at least he got to see the thing he most wanted before he died, bombing school children in Iran."
Princeton historian Kevin Kruse predicted that Graham would leave behind a decidedly poor legacy.
"When Lindsey Graham appears in a history book," wrote Kruse, "it'll be his prediction in 2016 that the Republican Party would be destroyed for supporting Donald Trump and then a few lines about how he proved it by becoming Trump's toady. That's pretty much it. That's his legacy. Pathetic lickspittle."
Steve Schmidt, a former Republican strategist who left the party due to its embrace of Trump, wrote that Graham was "a simple, tragic man" who "lacked a moral core."
"The great empty spaces of his life were filled with an insatiable need for 'relevance,'" Schmidt observed. "He found it as a cast member in the most malignant reality show ever made."
Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch, had a similar analysis of Graham's character.
"Lindsey Graham supported the International Criminal Court when it charged [Russian President Vladimir] Putin but turned on it when it charged [Israeli Prime Minister] Netanyahu," wrote Roth. "Principled, he wasn't."
Nicholas Grossman, professor of international relations at the University of Illinois, wrote that Graham "spent the last decade of his life in public service... trying hard to be remembered as an enemy of the Constitution who worked to destroy American democracy."
Grossman added that Graham "exhibited occasional signs that he knew why that was bad but kept doing it anyway."
Ruth Zakarin, CEO of the Massachusetts Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence, offered a grim assessment of the late senator.
"Lindsey Graham will forever be remembered as an enabler of a regime that has murdered people, destroyed democratic norms, and caused irreparable harm to this country," wrote Zakarin. "What a horrific legacy."