Bangkok, Thailand – Thailand is expected to soon pass a new cybersecurity law which will create a government agency with sweeping powers of search and seizure, triggering concerns for freedom of expression and data security among civil society and business groups as elections loom.

But experts involved in drafting the bill say they have taken their worries into consideration.

“The draft law was criticised for giving too much power to one person,” said Bhume Bhumiratana, one of the seven cybersecurity experts on the bill’s preparation team.

“We’ve reworked the draft to move that power over to a committee,” added Bhume, an adviser to the Thai Ministry of Digital Economy and Society.

“The ability to seize data has been changed to now require a court warrant. The scope of the law itself has been changed from broad language to focus on protecting critical information infrastructure like servers and fibre optic cables.”

Emergency use

The National Cybersecurity Committee will be established once the legislation is passed – expected as soon as this month.

It’s believed that it will consist of up to 15 members, including the prime minister and the deputy prime minister, and will only be able to seize computers and data without a court warrant in the case of an emergency.

But what constitutes an emergency is the sticking point.

“It’s likely that every cyber threat will be considered an emergency, making a court order irrelevant,” said Arthit Suriyawongkul, coordinator at Thai Netizen Network – a digital rights and civil liberties group based in the capital, Bangkok.

The Cybersecurity bill was first drawn up in 2015 following the previous year’s military coup that brought the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) to power. It was shelved until Thailand’s rubber-stamp parliament made amendments in 2016 to strengthen the existing law relating to online activity, the Computer Crimes Act.

The government maintains the two pieces of legislation are a tool of law enforcement and regulatory control, and necessary as the country gears up for long-delayed elections on March 24.

With King Maha Vajiralonkorn’s coronation due to take place in May, there were concerns the military government might push the vote back again, after postponing the polls four times over the past five years. The last coronation took place 69 years ago for the late King Bhumibol Adulyadej. 

But with the March 24 date announced earlier week, the cybersecurity bill is expected to become law before Thai voters go to the polls.

“We’re not saying we don’t want this law,” said Arthit at Thai Netizen Network. “The question is more about accountability and transparency.

“In the past five years, there’s been an abuse of power. If you talk about the monarchy or the NCPO online they count that as a cyber threat.”

Silencing criticism

In its World Report 2019, Human Rights Watch called on the NCPO to stop suppressing fundamental freedoms in Thailand.

The global human rights group noted that hundreds of activists and dissidents had faced criminal charges such as sedition, computer crimes and “lese majeste”, Thailand’s royal insult law under the military-backed government.

Former Thai diplomat and writer Pavin Chachavalpongpun said the NCPO used lese majeste to silence those critical of monarchy and military relations.

Pavin himself has had his passport revoked. And the NCPO even ordered Thai Facebook users not to share his posts.

“The new king doesn’t want more lese-majeste cases, so there’s been a significant drop in the last year. The palace wants cyber laws to be used instead,” he said.

Following the death of King Bhumibol in 2016, the NCPO threatened legal action against Facebook if it did not remove content it said was in violation of lese majeste.

According to Facebook, it only complied with one 2017 request for user data from Thailand’s military government. In 2018, it restricted 285 posts deemed in violation of the same law.

Google meanwhile said the NCPO made requests to remove 9,986 items identified as critical of the government in 2017 and complied with 93 percent of requests made.

The industry association group Asia Internet Coalition, which represents Facebook, Google and other tech companies, wrote a letter to Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society expressing its misgivings about the law.

The group added that a data protection bill, also before parliament alongside its cybersecurity counterpart, does not meet international standards on data privacy.

Abuse risk

Even those who know the legislation well have concerns.

“Data protection won’t be enforced fairly,” Bhume said. “It will cover most businesses but has exemptions for several government agencies,” he added.

“Everyone who collects data has a responsibility to protect its users. When a data breach happens, a business may face a fine or pay costs to the victims.”

Still, few Thais are aware of the impending changes to the cybersecurity and data protection laws.

Bhume blames “misinformed” people in the government for wanting to treat cyber threats as national security incidents, and for ratcheting up fear in the media about the need for a cyber warfare unit to defend Thailand from attacks.

“Why the need to seize data? If the goal is to get security stronger then all you need is collaboration and cooperation between the public and private sectors,” he said.

He insists there will still be room for discussion, and even amendment, after it has passed.

With political parties gearing up for the election, and continuing doubts about whether the vote will really be free and fair, Pavin has more immediate concerns.

“I think with the election coming, this [law] could be used for political purposes to go after critics of the NCPO,” he said.

Image: BERTRAND GUAY/AFP/Getty Images

For the first time this year, the United States has sent two warships through the strategic Taiwan Strait, according to the Taiwanese government.

The move risks further heightening tensions with China, which considers Taiwan a breakaway province and has not ruled out the use of force to bring the self-ruled island under its control.

It is also likely to be viewed in Taiwan as a sign of support from US President Donald Trump’s administration amid growing friction between Taipei and Beijing.

Taiwan’s defence ministry said in a statement late on Thursday the US ships were moving in a northerly direction and that their voyage was in accordance with regulations.

It added that Taiwan closely monitored the operation to “ensure the security of the seas and regional stability”.

There was no immediate comment from the Chinese government.

China has stepped up pressure on Taiwan since President Tsai Ing-wen, from the pro-independence ruling party, took office in 2016. It has regularly sent military aircraft and ships to circle the island on drills in the past few years.

Beijing sent several bombers and aircraft through the Bashi Channel, which separates Taiwan from the Philippines, earlier on Thursday, Taiwan’s defence ministry said in a separate statement.

A similar Chinese operation was conducted on Tuesday, the ministry said, and both were monitored closely.

Taiwan drills after Xi’s speech

In a speech in early January, Chinese President Xi Jinping said China reserves the right to use force to bring Taiwan under its control. In response, Tsai vowed to defend the island’s democracy and called for international support to protect Taiwan’s way of life.

Taiwan’s military has hosted multiple drills since Xi’s speech, emphasising what it says is a readiness to counter any invasion.

On Thursday, the navy showed off its new, long-range surveillance drone, the “Rui Yuan” (Sharp Hawk), which officials said can fly for 12 hours and was now helping to monitor movements in the disputed strait between Taiwan and China.

“The drones are now an irreplaceable part of our reconnaissance strategy,” Taiwan defence ministry spokesman Chen Chung-chi told AFP news agency. “They are our primary option for activities in the strait.”

Trump recently signed into law the Asia Reassurance Initiative Act reaffirming the US commitment to Taiwan, including arms sales.

Washington has no formal ties with Taiwan but is bound by law to help it defend itself and is its main source of weapons.

The Afghan Taliban has named one of its co-founders as the leader of its political office in Qatar, as part of a major reshuffle that comes as talks with the United States to end the 17-year war appear to gain momentum.

The appointment of Abdul Ghani Baradar on Thursday was announced as a meeting in Doha between the group’s representatives and US special peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad that was originally scheduled to last for two days entered its fourth day.

In a statement, the Taliban said the reshuffle in their team, which included new shadow governors for several Afghan provinces, was “taken to strengthen and properly handle the ongoing negotiations process with the United States”.

It was not clear whether the talks in the Qatari capital were to continue on Friday, or how soon Baradar could join them.

“Baradar will soon fly to Qatar. He has been given the new position because the US wanted senior Taliban leadership to participate in peace talks,” a senior Taliban official said.

Release from prison

Baradar is one of four men who founded the Taliban movement in Afghanistanin 1994. He served in several key positions when the Taliban ruled Afghanistan from 1996-2001.

He fled to Pakistan after the US invasion in 2001 and was arrested in Pakistan in 2010.

Baradar was released from a prison in Pakistan in October last year, and he later joined his family in Afghanistan.

His release, according to security experts, was part of high-level negotiations led by Khalilzad with the Taliban.

David Sedney, deputy US assistant secretary of defense for Afghanistan and Pakistan under former President Barack Obama, called Baradar’s appointment “a startling change … that bodes very well for peace”, adding that he was “more than cautiously optimistic” about the outcome of the talks in Doha.

“Ten years ago, Mullah Baradar led a dissident faction of the Taliban that wanted peace talks with the [Afghan] government of then-President Hamid Karzai,” Sedney told Al Jazeera.

“The government of Pakistan was opposed to those talks; they arrested Mullah Baradar and held him in prison until last fall during which time he was allegedly treated very toughly and perhaps even tortured.”

Sedney said that following Barade’s release at the request of the US “many people thought he would fade into the distance, but instead he’s taken advantage of a fractured Taliban leadership and the desire of many Taliban for peace to reassert his authority”.

“So this is a major, major change for the Taliban, and one that bodes very well for peace. Mullah Baradar has been on the side of peace for over a decade and this is a sign that there is great hope,” Sedney added. “Many things could go wrong but there has been no such hope for peace in Afghanistan for almost the last 20 years.”

Diplomatic efforts to end the United State’s longest-running conflict intensified last year after the appointment of the Afghan-born Khalilzad to lead direct talks with the Taliban.

He has held at least four meetings with Taliban representatives. 

During the first two days of talks in Doha, the meeting focused on a plan for the withdrawal of the foreign forces and a guarantee that Afghanistan would not be used for hostile acts against the US and its allies, according to a Taliban official.

“The mechanism for a ceasefire and ways to enter into an intra-Afghan dialogue were the two other big topics that were supposed to be discussed on Thursday,” the official told Reuters news agency.

Members of Afghanistan’s High Peace Council (AHPC), a body that oversees peace efforts but does not represent the government, said they were hoping that positive news would emerge from Doha.

“When talks take a long time, it means the discussion is in a sensitive and important stage, and the participants are getting close to a positive result,” said Sayed Ehsan Taheri, the spokesman for AHPC in Kabul.

“I hope this meeting opens a way for an intra-Afghan dialogue.”

The Taliban, who say they are fighting to expel foreign troops from Afghanistan, has repeatedly rejected the offer to hold direct talks with President Ashraf Ghani’s government, which they consider an illegitimate foreign-imposed regime.

The US and regional powers insist that the peace process should be “Afghan-led and Afghan-owned”.

Despite the talks, violence has persisted amid questions about how the Afghan government forces would withstand the Taliban threat without Washington’s military support following US President Donald Trump’s reported intention to bring home almost half of his country’s 14,000 troops deployed in Afghanistan.

The Actual Starters: Paul George, Oklahoma City Thunder (18.853); Kevin Durant, Golden State Warriors (16.82); LeBron James, Los Angeles Lakers (14.052)

The Should-Be Starters: Anthony Davis, New Orleans Pelicans (21.912); Nikola Jokic, Denver Nuggets (19.605); Rudy Gobert, Utah Jazz (18.965)

Next Up With Gripes: Karl-Anthony Towns, Minnesota Timberwolves (13.622); Jusuf Nurkic, Portland Trail Blazers (13.099); Steven Adams, Oklahoma CIty Thunder (11.269)

Snub No. 1: Anthony Davis, New Orleans Pelicans (21.912)

Astoundingly, the actual Western Conference starters checked in at Nos. 4, 5 and 6 in our objective analysis. Paul George, bolstered by his two-way prowess during an inspired season for the Oklahoma City Thunder, served as the leading member of that group, with Kevin Durant not too far behind. LeBron James checked in even further back, though that’s largely because he’s missed a significant portion of the season recovering from a groin injury that helped prove he’s not a true bionic man.

All three forwards have produced fantastic seasons. They all rank within the top dozen in player score, regardless of conference or positional affiliation. But none of them are Anthony Davis, who should’ve been a lock for the starting five during a season that could result in serious MVP consideration. 

Perhaps Davis, whose player score trails only that of James Harden, is being penalized for the lack of success enjoyed by the New Orleans Pelicans, currently sitting at No. 12 in the Western Conference despite laying claim to the entire Association’s No. 12 net rating. Maybe he’s being dinged for the troublesome left index finger now keeping him out of the lineup. 

Either way, he’s done enough as an individual to merit far more respect. His 29.3 points, 13.3 rebounds, 4.4 assists, 1.7 steals and 2.6 blocks per game count as historic numbers, and the two-way burden he’s shouldering for the bayou-based franchise would make Atlas shrug, clearly incapable of hefting so much weight for such a prolonged period. If Davis isn’t on his game as both a defensive stopper and alpha-dog scorer, the Pelicans won’t stand a chance that night. 

Durant, George and James are each playing at All-Star levels. This is still the most egregious snub of all. 

Snub No. 2: Nikola Jokic, Denver Nuggets (19.605)

For the purposes of this article, we’re not buying into the notion that players should be rewarded just because they’re on good teams. But Nikola Jokic’s case is a bit different; the Denver Nuggets, replete with a collection of quality contributors who won’t earn much reserve consideration, are great because of him and his teammate-boosting heroics. 

Jokic’s efficient scoring makes him valuable enough. While shooting 50.4 percent from the field, 31.5 percent from beyond the rainbow and 84.7 percent at the stripe, the big man rains in 19.8 points per night with a steady diet of twine-tickling jumpers and finesse-driven post moves.

But his individual point production isn’t what makes him most special. Not even close.

Thanks to his touch lobs to cutters, the dimes squeezed through tight lanes and the transition feeds that clearly establish him as the best quarterback in Colorado, Jokic has produced more potential assists per game than all but 16 players—the vast majority of whom are point guards. Even more impressively, his Nuggets teammates have connected on 65.9 percent of their shots off his assist-worthy passes. That’s not too shabby for a collection of compatriots who have shot 46.2 percent from the field this season, and 42.5 percent on shots that wouldn’t result in Jokic assists. 

Jokic is an offensive wizard, and he’s keying a top-five offense while still finding time to play his improved brand of positional defense.

Snub No. 3: Rudy Gobert, Utah Jazz (18.965)

Rudy Gobert is a stellar offensive contributor in his own right. Though reliant on set-up passes from his teammates, he rarely takes bad shots and thrives in pick-and-roll situations, displaying both timing and touch on his athletic dives to the rim. But even while he averages 14.9 points on a devilishly good 66.6 true shooting percentage, defense remains his primary calling card. 

Only Joel Embiid is contesting more shots at the basket, which makes sense when the fourth-rated Utah Jazz defense intentionally funnels players toward the French 7-footer’s painted domain. He’s the lifeblood of the stopping unit, swatting shots with aplomb and actively deterring players from even daring to test his lanky arms and preternatural timing. It all adds up to a 4.77 score in ESPN.com’s defensive real plus/minus, which, if maintained, would allow him to pace the league for the third consecutive season. 

In reality, Gobert was never going to be an All-Star starter. He’s not even a veritable lock to make the roster as a reserve, given the depth of talent in Western Conference frontcourts. But he should be both in a world that values defense as much as it does offense and views value as value even when not derived from scoring exploits. 

Adam Fromal covers the NBA for Bleacher Report. Follow him on Twitter, @fromal09.

Unless otherwise indicated, all stats accurate heading into games Jan. 24 and courtesy of Basketball Reference, NBA.com, PBPStats.com, NBA Math or ESPN.com.

Politicians in the United States have discussed a temporary funding proposal aimed at ending a record-long partial federal government shutdown, after two competing measures to terminate the impasse fell short in the Senate.

A bill backed by Republican President Donald Trump to end the shutdown by funding a US-Mexico border wall, and a separate measure supported by Democrats to reopen shuttered agencies without such funding did not get the votes on Thursday required to advance in the 100-member chamber.

The shutdown, now in its 34th day, was triggered last month by Trump by demanding $5.7bn for the wall as part of any legislation to fund about a quarter of the government.

It has left 800,000 federal workers as well as private contractors without pay and struggling to make ends meet, with the effects on government services and the economy reverberating nationwide.

Shortly after Thursday’s votes, a possible way out of the deepening crisis began to take shape when Senate leaders huddled in private to discuss the proposal to fund lapsed federal agencies for three weeks to allow for negotiations over border security.

Asked if he would support the plan, discussed in private by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer, Trump was noncommittal, saying he would still want funding for his wall.

“If they come to a reasonable agreement, I would support it,” he said, but added: “We have to have a wall in this country.”

Sarah Sanders, a White House spokeswoman, also warned in a statement that a three-week funding bill would “only work if there is a large down payment on the wall”.

But Lindsey Graham, a Republican senator who often has the president’s year, said he discussed with Trump the proposal for a stopgap funding bill.

“All of us believe that if we had three weeks with the government open, with all the discord coming from a shutdown, that we could find a way forward to produce a bill that he would sign,” Graham said on the Senate floor.

He added in a Twitter post that Democratic priorities for disaster relief were also included, “showing good faith from both sides”.

Political acrimony

Trump had backed the Senate measure which would have reopened the government, funded the wall and included some immigration policy changes. It earned 50 votes to 47 against, but it needed 60 to advance.

The competing proposal by Senate Democrats that would open government through February 8 without funding Trump’s wall, and leave room for border security negotiations, also failed to move forward by a similar tally.

House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, told reporters earlier she was willing to meet with Trump to discuss the shutdown.

Her comments came one day after she essentially withdrew an invitation for Trump to give his State of the Union in the House chamber next Tuesday, saying that would not happen until the shutdown ended.

Trump, who had planned to come despite the shutdown and considered giving the speech at another venue, conceded late on Wednesday and said he would deliver the speech in the House in the “near future”.

Though politically bruised, Trump stood firm on his demand for billions of dollars in funding for the border wall as part of an overall budget package.

“We will not Cave!” he tweeted at Pelosi before the Senate votes.

Dire warnings

Trump has touted Republican unity during the longest-ever halt to federal operations in the US. But in a sign of cracks in that resolve, or a desire for compromise, six Republican senators voted with Democrats on their measure to temporarily reopen government agencies without money for Trump’s wall.

They included freshman Senator Mitt Romney, his party’s 2012 presidential nominee.

“Democrats have said they’re not willing to negotiate unless the government’s open. Well they tried their effort. I voted for it. It didn’t happen. Now they’ve got to negotiate,” Romney said.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll last week found more than half of Americans blamed Trump for the shutdown even as he has sought to shift blame to Democrats after saying last month he would be “proud” to close the government for border security.

The air travel industry issued dire warnings, including one from the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA).

“In our risk-averse industry, we cannot even calculate the level of risk currently at play, nor predict the point at which the entire system will break,” NATCA President Paul Rinaldi said in a statement.

“It is unprecedented.”

Most Democrats oppose direct funds for wall construction, but some have begun publicly advocating for negotiating a solution that includes boosted border funding, including for border structures.

And Pelosi herself said on Thursday that “we will have some of our proposals for what comes next” in upcoming legislation offerings.