After more than 50 years of unbroken rule, the Assad family’s grip on power in Syria has come to a dramatic end. Rebel forces, led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), have breached the heart of the Assad regime in Damascus, forcing President Bashar al-Assad to flee and effectively ending the Alawite dynasty’s reign over Syria. A Legacy of PowerThe Assad family's rule began with Hafez al-Assad, who seized control in a 1970 coup. His ascent came amid political instability, marked by a series of failed coups in post-independence Syria. As a member of the Alawite minority, Hafez capitalised on sectarian divisions to consolidate power, making the Alawite community the bedrock of his regime. His rule would be characterised by a ruthless divide-and-rule strategy, placing Alawites in key military and government positions and securing a loyal power base that would ensure the family’s dominance for decades. Hafez's brutal suppression of the Muslim Brotherhood in Hama in 1982 – which saw tens of thousands of deaths – set the tone for his leadership, leaving behind a regime known for its violent crackdowns on dissent. Succession and the Rise of Bashar al-AssadWhen Hafez al-Assad died in 2000, the country expected a period of reform under his son, Bashar al-Assad. Initially hailed as a moderniser, Bashar was groomed for leadership after the death of his older brother Bassel in 1994. His early years in power brought optimism for political and economic reform. However, the hopes of a more open Syria quickly faded as Bashar inherited his father’s authoritarian structures, including a tightly controlled political system and a powerful network of loyalists in the military and intelligence services. Bashar’s inner circle, including his brother Maher and cousin Rami Makhlouf, consolidated vast economic and political power, leading to widespread corruption and growing discontent. By the time the Arab Spring reached Syria in 2011, Bashar’s regime was already struggling with economic mismanagement, poverty, and a growing wealth gap. The regime's violent response to peaceful protests escalated into a full-scale civil war. The Civil War and Assad’s EndgameThe Syrian civil war, which began as peaceful demonstrations in 2011, rapidly devolved into a brutal conflict after Assad’s security forces opened fire on unarmed protesters. This crackdown, which sparked nationwide unrest, was met with military resistance from various rebel factions, and the regime's forces, backed by Russia and Iran, fought to hold on to key areas. Over the years, the conflict has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives and displaced millions. Despite initial optimism that Bashar could bring change, his regime remained entrenched in violence and corruption. The rise of extremist groups such as ISIS, as well as foreign intervention from powers like the US, Russia, and Turkey, complicated the war and prolonged the suffering of the Syrian people. By 2024, a renewed offensive led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) – a faction once linked to al-Qaeda – has dealt a decisive blow to Assad’s rule. HTS, under the leadership of Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, has managed to capture key cities, including Aleppo and Homs, before advancing into Damascus. The regime’s collapse became inevitable as rebel forces finally breached the capital. A Fragile FutureThe Assad family's exit from Syria marks the end of an era, but questions remain about the country’s future. The leadership of HTS, despite its attempts to shed its extremist image, raises concerns about Syria’s stability. The group’s past ties to al-Qaeda and its authoritarian style of governance have sparked fears of further conflict and repression. The fall of the Assad regime has reverberated across the Middle East, signalling the diminishing influence of Russia and Iran, which had supported the regime. Russia’s military focus has been diverted by the war in Ukraine, while Iran’s regional ambitions have been impacted by the weakening of its Syrian ally. The collapse also opens up new power dynamics in the region, particularly in the contest for influence between Israel, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. As the conflict shifts into a new phase, millions of displaced Syrians, both within the country and abroad, face an uncertain future. The end of the Assad dynasty marks a new chapter in Syria’s turbulent history, but it is far from clear what lies ahead for the war-torn nation. Get Latest News Live on Times Now along with Breaking News and Top Headlines from Middle East, World and around the world.Champions League expert picks, predictions, best bets: Liverpool to top Girona; Real Madrid playing with fire
None
KIRKLAND, Wash., Dec. 13, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq: MPWR), a global company that provides high-performance, semiconductor-based power electronics solutions, announced today its fourth quarter dividend of $1.25 per common share to all stockholders of record as of the close of business on December 31, 2024. The dividend will be paid on January 15, 2025. Safe Harbor Statement This news release includes “forward-looking statements” intended to qualify for the safe harbor from liability established by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations, estimates and projections about our business and industry, management’s beliefs, and certain assumptions made by us, all of which are subject to change. Forward-looking statements can often be identified by words such as “anticipates,” “expects,” “forecasts,” “intends,” “believes,” “plans,” “may,” “will,” or “continue,” and similar expressions and variations or negatives of these words. All such statements are subject to certain risks, assumptions and uncertainties, including those described in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Qs, and in other documents that we file or furnish with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially and adversely from those projected, and may affect our future operating results, financial position and cash flows. Accordingly, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date they are made. Except to the extent required by law, MPS does not undertake, and expressly disclaims, any duty or obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statement after the initial distribution of this release, whether as a result of new information, future events, changes in assumptions or otherwise. About Monolithic Power Systems Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (“MPS”) is a fabless global company that provides high-performance, semiconductor-based power electronics solutions. MPS’s mission is to reduce energy and material consumption to improve all aspects of quality of life and create a sustainable future. Founded in 1997 by our CEO Michael Hsing, MPS has three core strengths: deep system-level knowledge, strong semiconductor design expertise, and innovative proprietary technologies in the areas of semiconductor processes, system integration, and packaging. These combined advantages enable MPS to deliver reliable, compact, and monolithic solutions that are highly energy-efficient, cost-effective, and environmentally responsible while providing a consistent return on investment to our stockholders. MPS can be contacted through its website at www.monolithicpower.com or its support offices around the world. ### Monolithic Power Systems, MPS, and the MPS logo are registered trademarks of Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. in the U.S. and trademarked in certain other countries.
ANDERSON COUNTY, Texas — The Texas attorney general’s office is deliberately running out the clock on a soon-to-expire House committee to avoid cooperating with its demand that death row inmate Robert Roberson be able to testify before the committee in person, according to the two lawmakers spearheading that effort. “What the attorney general’s office, I feel like is doing right now, is trying to delay, as much as possible, and not work with us,” state Rep. Jeff Leach, R-Plano, told The Texas Tribune during a Friday event exploring the committee’s intervention in the Roberson case. “They’re basically ignoring the Supreme Court’s order, knowing that in a month or so, when the new legislative session convenes, our committee goes away,” he said. Leach, a member of the House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence, and the committee’s chair, state Rep. Joe Moody, D-El Paso, appeared Friday at a Texas Tribune event to discuss the historic legislative intervention that halted Roberson’s Oct. 17 execution. The committee is planning for Roberson to testify in person at the Capitol on Dec. 20, two months after the committee forced a delay of his execution through an extraordinary legal intervention. The committee is awaiting confirmation from Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office on whether it will voluntarily comply with the panel’s order and allow the state criminal justice department to transport Roberson from prison to the Capitol so he can testify. Moody discussed how the Texas Supreme Court has told the legislative and executive branches of state government to cooperate on this matter on three separate occasions. But after asking the executive branch if it would agree to produce Roberson, Moody said, its representatives “couldn’t answer the simple question of, can we agree or do you want me to issue a subpoena?,” Moody said. “They have refused to answer that very simple question.” As a result, Moody set the hearing for Dec. 20 and gave the attorney general’s office until the end of the day Friday to answer. If they don’t, Moody said he will issue a new subpoena for Roberson. “I’ve been in this business long enough — that’s just a foot drag,” Moody said. “So I set the hearing and I gave him a deadline.” He said he hopes that Texans question the delays by Paxton’s office. “Why don’t they want to hear from Robert? Why do they not want the Legislature to do this? Why?” The Texas attorney general’s office did not immediately respond to the comments made by Leach or Moody. It’s the latest in the dramatic back and forth between the two government branches over Roberson’s testimony. The day before Roberson’s scheduled Oct. 17 execution, the House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence held a hearing airing his claims of innocence and lack of due process. The panel’s surprise move to subpoena Roberson on Oct. 16 then successfully forced a delay in his execution. Roberson, who has maintained his innocence in the death of his child for more than 20 years, became a political lightning rod in recent months as members of the bipartisan Criminal Jurisprudence Committee — convinced that the courts had not properly applied a 2013 junk science law to his case — waged a controversial campaign to buy him more time. Roberson was convicted of capital murder in 2003 for the death of his 2-year-old daughter Nikki, who was diagnosed with shaken baby syndrome. He has sought to use the junk science law to vacate his conviction, arguing that new scientific evidence debunked Nikki’s shaken baby diagnosis and showed that she died of undiagnosed pneumonia, not abuse. The committee’s subpoena prompted the ongoing battle between lawmakers and Paxton’s office over securing Roberson’s testimony. The subpoena also created a separation of powers conflict between the state’s legislative and executive branches, prompting the Texas Supreme Court to stay Roberson’s execution on Oct. 17 as it worked through the legal dispute. In an Oct. 28 Texas Supreme Court brief, members of the criminal jurisprudence panel accused Paxton’s office of stonewalling and refusing to comply with the subpoena. “The executive branch has shown no willingness to work out its differences with the legislative branch or meet its statutory duty to assist the Committee,” the brief states. The criminal jurisprudence panel held a hearing on Oct. 21 with plans for Roberson to give his testimony in person. But Paxton quashed those plans, saying that the inmate would only testify via video, “in the interest of public safety.” Both the committee and Roberson’s attorney objected to a virtual set-up, saying that Roberson’s autism and lack of technological experience due to his more than two decades in prison meant that he could not testify effectively over video. Lawmakers then sought to visit Roberson on death row to take his testimony there. But according to the lawmakers’ brief, Paxton’s office again scuttled those plans, telling Moody that “the executive branch would no longer permit any form of hearing with Roberson.” Instead, the brief states, the executive branch proposed a joint letter in which Moody and Leach “admit that Roberson was a murderer, that they had overstepped their authority, and that no legislative committee should ever act similarly in the future.” At the Tribune event, Moody said they had no intent of signing such a letter. “I’ve got to censor myself when talking about that letter because I thought someone was joking with me when they sent it to me,” Moody said. “That was a letter that was sent to us, knowing that we would never sign it. It is written in a way that says, make sure that they never sign this, because it was saying, you know, we’re idiots, we made a mistake, we’re so sorry, Robert’s a murderer.” Paxton, meanwhile, has accused the lawmakers of “sidelining” the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s legal counsel, and said that nothing compelled the executive branch to bring Roberson to the Capitol. On Nov. 15, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that legislative subpoenas could not be used to block death warrants, clearing the way for Roberson’s execution. But the court noted that there was now plenty of time for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice to produce Roberson for testimony. The prosecuting district attorney has not yet requested a new execution date, which could not be set within 90 days of the request. “If the committee still wishes to obtain his testimony, we assume that the department can reasonably accommodate a new subpoena,” the court said. “So long as a subpoena issues in a way that does not inevitably block a scheduled execution, nothing in our holding prevents the committee from pursuing judicial relief in the ordinary way to compel a witness’s testimony.” Leach hinted that fighting the committee after the Supreme Court’s decision will have consequences. “Our AG is doing a lot of really good work,” Leach said. “But look, if you’re going to ignore the Legislature and say, ‘We don’t care about you and we’re not gonna do what the Supreme Court told us to do’ — then if we have to, we’ll be back in front of the Supreme Court. And I don’t think ... that should be necessary. Related Articles Man convicted of injuring a child based on Shaken Baby Syndrome exonerated, Dallas County DA announces Trial judge in Robert Roberson’s death row case agrees to recusal Texas high court says execution in 'shaken baby syndrome' case can't be halted by lawmaker subpoenaNone
Friendly reminder |
The authenticity of this information has not been verified by this website and is for your reference only. Please do not reprint without permission. If authorized by this website, it should be used within the scope of authorization and marked with "Source: this website". |
Special attention |
Some articles on this website are reprinted from other media. The purpose of reprinting is to convey more industry information, which does not mean that this website agrees with their views and is responsible for their authenticity. Those who make comments on this website forum are responsible for their own content. This website has the right to reprint or quote on the website. The comments on the forum do not represent the views of this website. If you need to use the information provided by this website, please contact the original author. The copyright belongs to the original author. If you need to contact this website regarding copyright, please do so within 15 days. |