text:
Russian Rule-of-Law Abuses to Be Examined at Upcoming Helsinki Commission Hearing
Security, Economic, Human Rights Violations by the Russian Government under Scrutiny
WASHINGTON—The Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, also known as the Helsinki Commission, today announced the following hearing:
"Russian Violations of the Rule of Law: How Should the U.S. Respond? 3 Case Studies"
Live Webcast: http://bit.ly/1VRaf3G
The actions of the Russian government have raised questions about Russia's failure to respect its commitment to the rule of law in the areas of military security, commerce, and laws bearing on human rights – each corresponding to one of the three dimensions of security established by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
Using the Helsinki Final Act as a basis for discussion, the hearing will focus on security violations of the Budapest Memorandum; the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE), Open Skies, Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaties, and the Vienna Document. Regarding international legal and commercial agreements such as the Energy Charter Treaty, the New York Convention and bilateral investment treaties the hearing will review developments in the Yukos Oil case. On human rights, it will inquire into cases of abduction/unjust imprisonment, torture, and abuse, including those of Nadiya Savchenko, Oleg Sentsov, and Eston Kover.
The following witnesses are scheduled to testify:
Vladimir Kara-Murza, Coordinator, Open Russia Movement
Alan Larson, Senior International Policy Advisor with Covington & Burlington LLP, former Under Secretary of State for Economics and Career Ambassador, U.S. State Department
Tim Osborne, Executive Director of GML Ltd. - the majority owner of the now liquidated Yukos Oil Company
Stephen Rademaker, Principal with the Podesta Group, Former Assistant Secretary of State for the U.S. State Department Bureau of Arms Control and the Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation
Stacy Hope
Helsinki Commission Digital Digest January 2022
Russia's Assault on Ukraine and the International Order to Be Discussed at Helsinki Commission Hearing
WASHINGTON—The Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, also known as the Helsinki Commission, today announced the following hearing: RUSSIA'S ASSAULT ON UKRAINE AND THE INTERNATIONAL ORDER Assessing and Bolstering the Western Response Wednesday, February 2, 2022 2:30 p.m. Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 562 Watch live: www.youtube.com/HelsinkiCommission Russia's Ukraine gambit is the most flagrant manifestation of the Kremlin's assault on the international order. Moscow's actions degrade the security environment in Europe and are a direct assault on settled international norms. These include the territorial integrity of states and the self-determination of peoples affirmed in the Helsinki Final Act and subsequent agreements of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Witnesses will examine the latest developments in the Kremlin-driven crisis in and around Ukraine and the urgency for the United States to bolster Ukraine's defenses and deter further Russian aggression. The following witnesses are scheduled to testify: Dr. Fiona Hill, Senior Fellow, Center on the United States and Europe, Brookings Institution Lieutenant General (Retired) Ben Hodges, Pershing Chair, Center for European Policy Analysis Ambassador (Retired) William B. Taylor, Vice President, U.S. Institute of Peace
Half Measures Are Worse Than Nothing in Ukraine
Europe begins the new year on the brink of major war. Russia has amassed more than 100,000 troops and heavy equipment along Ukraine's border and issued an ultimatum to the West demanding it trade Ukraine's sovereignty in exchange for its peace. Such demands are a strategic nonstarter, but the seriousness of the Kremlin's threats appear all too real. To stop this war before it begins, muddling through is not an option; this demands immediate and bold action. Russia claims its 100,000-plus troops at Ukraine's doorstep is a response to NATO enlargement and its infrastructure in Ukraine and Eastern Europe. These arguments are unconvincing. The Kremlin has used NATO as a straw man for its grievances, yet Russian disquiet has little to do with NATO itself, which has no immediate plans to expand anywhere near Russia and would not threaten Russia if it did. Although the United States and its European partners have provided material and technical military assistance to Ukraine, it has not changed the region's balance of power. Instead, Russia's demands evince anxiety over global status and the possibility that its borderlands may be able to escape from its grip. In particular, Ukraine has the size and industrial capacity to make it a credible economic and military power regardless of whether it joins NATO. For Russia, a strong and hostile Ukraine is intolerable, even though Russian aggression husbanded Ukraine's pro-West turn. By supporting Donbass separatism and annexing Crimea, the Kremlin stoked patriotism in Ukraine, lanced Ukraine's most Russia-friendly population, and earned Kyiv's hostility. Ukraine is not the only country for which this applies, but it may be the most significant given its size, geography, and symbolic position in official Russian neoimperial mythology. War should be avoided at all reasonable costs. Another invasion would risk tens of millions of lives and further undermine Europe's increasingly fragile security. The United States and Europe should be willing to negotiate in good faith to avoid wider conflict—so long as Ukraine, Georgia, and Eastern Europe's sovereignty are preserved. However, acceding to Russia's maximalist demands would strip Ukraine of its already battered sovereignty and invite a new Iron Curtain over Europe—consigning many millions of people to generations of domination and conflict. History and international relations theory may offer some guidance in this crisis. In the runup to the Peloponnesian War between the sprawling Athenian league and Sparta's opposing empire, Athens faced a dilemma between its ally Corcyra and Corinth, a powerful member of the Spartan alliance. As chronicled by classical historian Donald Kagan in his On the Origins of War: And the Preservation of Peace, Corcyra called on Athens for protection, but Athens was anxious to intervene lest it precipitate a ruinous great-power war with Sparta, which was increasingly fearful that Athens, the rising force in Greece, would eclipse Spartan power. Yet Athens worried that abandoning Corcyra would undermine its alliances and invite Spartan aggression. As a compromise, Athens deployed a mere 10 ships out of its vast 400-ship fleet to join the Corcyraeans in the hopes that it would be enough to deter Corinth's advancing 150-ship armada. However, as Kagan notes, Athens's symbolic deployment was not strong enough to deter Corinth—much less defeat it—but too aggressive to completely assuage Spartan fears about Athenian ambitions. In the ensuing Battle of Sybota, the Corinthian armada destroyed the combined Corcyraean-Athenian fleet, launching a spiral of events that led to the devastating Peloponnesian War. As the United States deliberates with its partners and allies to craft countermeasures against Kremlin aggression, the West should avoid its own 10-ship trap. In some ways, NATO's 2008 Bucharest summit decision is an example, where the alliance promised eventual membership to Georgia and Ukraine without a concrete pathway. This compromise left Georgia and Ukraine vulnerable while stoking the Kremlin's strategic anxieties. The recently departed Columbia University political scientist Robert Jervis considered such problems in his international relations theory classic Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Jervis weighed deterrence against a "spiral" model, which posited that counterescalating in response to perceived escalation could provoke the opposite of the intended response. An attempt at deterrence could instead be viewed as further provocation. While deterrence preaches strength and resolution, the spiral model generally counsels conciliation. However, Jervis theorized that while the deterrence and spiral models are often presented as opposing, generalizable theories, their usefulness varies with the circumstances. He surmised that deterrence is applicable between two powers with genuinely incompatible positions, and the spiral model best applies to disputes between status quo powers where their perceived incompatibility is mostly illusory. One exercise Jervis suggests is to interrogate evidence that the second power is not engaged in revisionist aggression. In this case, a charitable reading of Russian actions suggests that Russia's grievances are oriented to the security situation on its borders—the "belt of Russia's vital interests." In this interpretation, Russia's historical influence along its borders need not be a cause for alarm on its own, much less for war. Indeed, if arms limitations and codes of conduct represent an acceptable compromise to defuse the present crisis without sacrificing the freedom or sovereignty of the states on Russia's border, this is worth pursuing. However, which vital interests necessitate Russian dominion over its periphery? Although Russia's perceptions of insecurity may be real, it is demonstrably not materially insecure, with a large, full-spectrum, and sophisticated military that is arguably the most powerful in Europe. Russia's neighbors are far weaker, Western states largely disarmed after the Soviet Union's dissolution, and remnant Allied forces remained in Western Europe in compliance with the NATO-Russia Founding Act, even as Russia has significantly militarized. And Russia's economic fortunes are far better served by peace and integration with the West, not conflict. However, the stability and integrity of European security architecture as enshrined in the Helsinki Final Act remain fundamental to U.S. national security. Any countenance of the Kremlin's broader abrogation of that framework and the restoration of a new Yalta Conference would reverse decades of peace and prosperity—and likely drive continental militarization that would only compound Russian security anxieties and conflict. It appears the West and the Russian regime's positions are indeed incompatible. In response, the United States and its allies must be wary of the 10-ship trap. Although caution is often a virtue in national security and foreign policymaking, a moderate response to the enormity and notoriety of Russia's belligerence would likely neither protect Ukraine nor satisfy Russian imperial appetites. Broad economic sanctions on their own are likely to be sufficient to forestall an invasion; and token, light deployments behind NATO's high walls while Ukraine burns will inflame Kremlin paranoia without arresting or appreciably punishing Russian militarism. Negotiations and diplomacy should be given the time to work, and any kind of durable solution is unlikely to completely satisfy either party. However, the United States and its allies should undergird these talks with serious and significant measures to prevent another, greater war in Ukraine before it begins. As in Corcyra, half measures are unlikely to ameliorate the crisis and may only exacerbate them. What, then, do full measures look like? The critical factors here are speed and plausibility: steps that not only can be taken quickly but that Russia will believe Washington will carry through. Although economic sanctions have been broadly regarded as useful tools in this regard, most measures being envisioned are likely already baked into Russian calculations or may not have an immediate effect. In addition, the United States—and Europe, if it is willing—should significantly curtail Russian energy imports and aim to wean Russian hydrocarbons from European markets entirely—perhaps even going so far as to employ Defense Production Act authorities to stockpile and potentially surge liquefied natural gas and other fuel alternatives to Central and Eastern Europe. Boosting other energy sources on a strategic scale could also accompany this approach. Moscow must be convinced that military aggression will only dramatically increase and complicate what it believes are its existing security vulnerabilities. Toward that end, the United States and Europe could begin studying withdrawal from the NATO-Russia Founding Act, and planning can begin in earnest for repositioning heavy forces in Europe in the event of a wider Russian war. NATO can signal that new European applications for NATO membership would be welcomed and expediently ratified (perhaps even pre-ratified in some form), particularly from Sweden and Finland, should Russia go through with its militaristic gambit. Washington could also consider scenarios to provide aspirants—Ukraine, Georgia, and potentially the Nordics—with bilateral treaty guarantees prior to NATO accession. In Corcyra, the compromise of 10 Athenian ships only served to anger Corinth and Sparta as well as fed beliefs that war was not only necessary but an urgent enterprise. Against the colossal coercive symbolism and military reality posed by the Russian buildup—and the even greater weight of the Kremlin's demands—the United States and Europe should prepare responses to match the moment. Michael Hikari Cecire is a senior policy advisor at the U.S. Helsinki Commission.
Helsinki Commission Marks One-Year Anniversary of Navalny's Imprisonment
WASHINGTON—Ahead of the one-year anniversary of Alexei Navalny's arrest on January 17, Helsinki Commission Chairman Sen. Ben Cardin (MD), Co-Chairman Rep. Steve Cohen (TN-09), Ranking Member Sen. Roger Wicker (MS), and Ranking Member Rep. Joe Wilson (SC-02) issued the following statements: "In the past year, while Alexei Navalny has remained unjustly imprisoned, the Kremlin has doubled down on its absurd persecution of his anti-corruption organizations as 'extremist,'" said Chairman Cardin. "Nevertheless, Mr. Navalny's colleagues, friends and allies, in the face of grave threats, continue to risk their own freedom to expose Putin's thuggery across Russia." "Putin would not have gone to the trouble to imprison Alexei Navalny unless he perceived a serious threat to his power," said Co-Chairman Cohen. "Mr. Navalny and his team across Russia were instrumental in revealing the ill-gotten gains of Putin and his cronies. This tells you all you need to know about why they are a target." "During his imprisonment, Alexei Navalny has used his own suffering to call attention to the plight of the hundreds of other political prisoners in Russia," said Sen. Wicker. "We have not forgotten him or others who are persecuted for their beliefs, and we look forward to a Russia in which they finally are free." "Despite the Kremlin's attempts to push Alexei Navalny out of public view and prevent him from challenging Putin, we will not stop calling for his release," said Rep. Wilson. "Russians who challenge Putin should not have to fear for their safety in their own country." In August 2020, Alexei Navalny was the victim of an assassination attempt by the FSB that used a Russia-developed chemical weapon in the Novichok family. He spent months recovering after being flown to Berlin for treatment. Navalny returned to Moscow on January 17, 2021, and was arrested at the airport. In February, a Russian judge sentenced Navalny to three and a half years in a prison colony for violating the terms of a suspended sentence related to a 2014 case that is widely considered to be politically motivated. Previous time served under house arrest reduced his prison time to two years and eight months. In June, the Moscow City Court ruled that Alexei Navalny's Anti-Corruption Foundation and its regional networks would henceforth be considered "extremist" organizations, essentially outlawing these groups and criminalizing their activity. In September, Russian authorities opened a new probe against Navalny and his closest associates for creating and directing an "extremist network." This, combined with other ongoing criminal investigations, could lead to additional jail time for Navalny and threaten those associated with his organizations, many of whom have been forced to flee Russia.
Helsinki Commission Welcomes First Charges Under the Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act
WASHINGTON—Following the first charges filed under the Helsinki Commission's Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act for a doping scheme at the Tokyo Olympics, Helsinki Chairman Sen. Ben Cardin (MD), Co-Chairman Rep. Steve Cohen (TN-09), Ranking Member Sen. Roger Wicker (MS), Ranking Member Rep. Joe Wilson (SC-02), and former Commissioner Rep. Michael Burgess (TX-26) issued the following statements: "Swift utilization of the Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act is exactly what we hoped for with this legislation," said Chairman Cardin. "I thank the U.S. attorneys and investigators who put in long hours of work pursuing this case. They understood the importance of cleaning up cheating and corruption in international sports, which often is a tool of autocratic governments. These first charges are only the beginning and serve as a very public part of the global anti-corruption strategy supported by the Biden administration and spearheaded by the Helsinki Commission for many years." "I welcome this first enforcement action under the Rodchenkov Act and urge the Department of Justice to continue unraveling the corruption that infects international sport," said Co-Chairman Cohen. "Sports should bring people together and celebrate achievement—they should not be an opportunity for fraud. My own GOLD Act would expand the Rodchenkov Act and I call on my colleagues to pass it swiftly." "These charges are the culmination of years of work to hold administrators, doctors, and officials accountable for their role in corrupting international sport," said Sen. Wicker. "They demonstrate that our new approach is working. I thank the public servants at the U.S. Department of Justice and urge them to continue their efforts to enforce this critically important law." "Dictators and their cronies interfere in everything we hold dear, including sports. They view victory in international sport as a way to trumpet the greatness of their oppressive systems. Cheating in sports is part of their foreign policy," said Rep. Wilson. "With the Rodchenkov Act, we are holding these corrupt networks to account. I applaud the Department of Justice for prosecuting fraudsters at the Tokyo Olympics and call on them to do the same in Beijing." "From a young age, professional athletes dedicate themselves to becoming the best in their sport. For those skilled enough to make it to the Olympics, their efforts should not be tainted by doping schemes," said Rep. Burgess. "Yesterday's charges provide hope to those that have been defrauded. They would not have been made possible without the Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act. I worked to enact this law to maintain sport integrity and keep all American athletes safe and protected from fraud. Further, yesterday's action is a win for athletes such as Katie Uhlaender, whose moving testimony spurred Congress into action. I hope that yesterday's charges are only the beginning of combatting fraud in international sport competition." "This is exactly the kind of action we hoped for following the enactment of this groundbreaking anti-doping legislation," said Dr. Grigory Rodchenkov, the former head of Moscow's anti-doping laboratory and the Russian whistle-blower after whom the law is named. "We are grateful to United States Attorney Damian Williams for taking this monumental first step toward restoring the Olympic games to their role as a cherished forum for nations to convene in the spirit of peace, fairness and cooperation. We cannot continue to allow corrupt states and the overlords of sport commerce to exploit our athletes and traditions of peace to advance the economic and geopolitical interests of the few. Yesterday's action is entirely appropriate and puts real teeth into anti-doping enforcement, while also setting an example of international cooperation and fair play for future generations." The Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act, which became law in December 2020, criminalizes doping in international sport. In July 2021, the Helsinki Commission hosted a hearing on the enforcement of the Rodchenkov Act at the Tokyo Olympics. Earlier that year, Dr. Rodchenkov spoke out publicly for the first time about the impact of the Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act on a Helsinki Commission podcast, calling it a "game-changer." On Wednesday, the New York Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) announced the charges against Eric Lira, who they allege "obtained various performance enhancing drugs ('PEDs') and distributed those PEDs to certain athletes in advance of, and for the purpose of cheating at, the 2020 Olympic Games held in Tokyo in the summer of 2021."
Russia sent troops near Ukraine and to Kazakhstan. The U.S. is watching and waiting
Transcript SCOTT SIMON, HOST: The Biden administration is heading into an intense week with Russia. The U.S. has already condemned the massing of tens of thousands of Russian troops along the border with Ukraine. But the White House seems to be taking a different approach to Russian involvement in the former Soviet Republic of Kazakhstan. NPR's Michele Kelemen explains. MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: First, a word on why Kazakhstan matters to the U.S. Senator Ben Cardin, who chairs the U.S. Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, puts it this way. BEN CARDIN: It does bridge between Russia and China, Asia and Europe. It really is one of the key locations. It is a country that's rich in resources. It's a country that has a critical location from a security point of view, from a counterterrorism point of view. KELEMEN: U.S. companies are heavily invested in Kazakhstan's energy sector, and the U.S. saw the country as a relatively stable, though not a democratic partner. Cardin, who was speaking via Skype, says he was disappointed to see Kazakhstan's president invite in troops from the Collective Security Treaty Organization, a group of ex-Soviet states led by Russia. CARDIN: When Russia sends troops, they rarely remove those troops. And it's not what the Kazakhs need. It's not what the people need in that country. KELEMEN: The latest turmoil started with protests over gas prices and corruption. But some major cities also saw mobs taking over government buildings. And experts point to another layer of conflict, an attempt by the country's president, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, to sideline other government elites linked to Kazakhstan's longtime ruler, Nursultan Nazarbayev. And in that complex picture, the U.S. has little leverage, according to Emma Ashford of the Atlantic Council. EMMA ASHFORD: Even if we wanted to intervene, even if there was a clear side upon which we thought we could intervene - which I don't think there is - we just don't have that much leverage in Kazakhstan. We have limited ties in the country, and they're almost all commercial in the energy sector. KELEMEN: She thinks the U.S. needs to be cautious and not feed into Russian conspiracies. ASHFORD: We know that Vladimir Putin in particular, you know, the Russian government, has this historical tendency to see American fingers in every pot - you know, American action in every protest in the post-Soviet space. And even though that's not true, I think we should probably avoid giving the impression that we're going to get more involved. KELEMEN: Secretary of State Antony Blinken has been on the phone with his counterpart in Kazakhstan, calling on authorities to protect the rights of peaceful protesters and raising questions about why the government felt the need to invite in Russian-led troops. (SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING) ANTONY BLINKEN: It would seem to me that the Kazakh authorities and government certainly have the capacity to deal appropriately with protests, to do so in a way that respects the rights of the protesters while maintaining law and order. So it's not clear why they feel the need for any outside assistance. So we're trying to learn more about it. KELEMEN: For now, those Russian troops seem to be focused mainly on protecting key infrastructure. And Blinken is reluctant to conflate the situation in Kazakhstan with Ukraine, where Russia has seized territory and is threatening to take more. (SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING) BLINKEN: Having said that, I think one lesson in recent history is that once Russians are in your house, it's sometimes very difficult to get them to leave. KELEMEN: Regional experts say if Kazakhstan's president is able to reinforce his political power in the midst of this crisis, he will be indebted to Moscow. Michele Kelemen, NPR News, Washington.
Helsinki Commission Calls for Peaceful Solution in Kazakhstan
WASHINGTON—In response to the violent clashes between protesters and authorities in Kazakhstan, Helsinki Commission Chairman Sen. Ben Cardin (MD), Co-Chairman Rep. Steve Cohen (TN-09), Ranking Member Sen. Roger Wicker (MS), and Ranking Member Rep. Joe Wilson (SC-02) issued the following joint statement: "We are deeply concerned about the situation in Kazakhstan and condemn the violence that has accompanied widespread protests across the country. The reported deaths of both protesters and police are extremely disturbing. "We call on President Tokayev and Russian troops not to use disproportionate force against protesters. At the same time, we call on protesters to cease any violent attacks against police, public buildings, or private property. "We urge both sides to find a peaceful way to resolve this crisis. We also urge President Tokayev to ensure respect for human rights, especially freedom of the media and the right to due process for those who have been arrested in connection with the protests." A wave of protests began on January 2 in the western part of the oil- and gas-rich country in response to a sharp increase in the price of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). The unrest spread quickly to other parts of Kazakhstan and grew increasingly violent. Authorities deployed tear gas and stun grenades against protesters and blocked internet access in an effort to quell the unrest, while demonstrators attacked government offices. There are reports of deaths among both law enforcement and protesters, as well as of widespread looting. Kazakhstani President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev declared a nationwide state of emergency on January 5, accepted the resignation of his cabinet, and reduced LPG prices, but protests continued. The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), a security alliance among select former Soviet states including Russia, is sending Russian troops at the request of President Tokayev. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated already strained economic and social disparities, and demonstrators are demanding increased political liberalization and accountability for government corruption. OSCE observers concluded that the 2021 parliamentary elections "lacked genuine competition" and underscored the need for political reform.
Helsinki Commission Cautions Russia Against Dissolving Russian Human Rights Organization Memorial
WASHINGTON—As the latest court proceedings conclude for Russian human rights group Memorial International, U.S. Helsinki Commission Chairman Sen. Ben Cardin (MD), Co-Chairman Rep. Steve Cohen (TN-09), Ranking Member Sen. Roger Wicker (MS), and Ranking Member Rep. Joe Wilson (SC-02) issued the following joint statement: "The Kremlin continues to twist Russia's so-called justice system to punish civil society, opposition politicians, and independent media who dare to speak out against the abuses of Putin's regime. The United States should raise the stakes and impose concrete consequences on any officials who support such vindictive action against the Russian patriots who defend the human rights of their fellow citizens." In a December 17, 2021 letter, Chairman Cardin, Co-Chairman Cohen, Sen. Wicker, Rep. Wilson, and Helsinki Commissioner Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) urged President Joe Biden to sanction 17 Russian officials and associates involved in the harassment and prosecution of Memorial and its leadership. "The United States has a moral duty to prevent this attack on universal rights and freedoms," they said. "Publicly sanctioning the Russian officials involved in the attack on Memorial and their enablers would be an effective way to support pro-democracy forces in Russia and deter perpetrators." In November 2021, Russia's Supreme Court notified Memorial that the General Prosecutor's office was suing to dismantle the organization for alleged violations of Russia's "foreign agent" laws. In a November 17 statement, the Helsinki Commission expressed concern about the organization's potential dissolution, noting, "We continue to see an alarming increase in attacks on civil society, opposition politicians, and independent media in Russia. Now the Kremlin actively seeks to dismantle Memorial, a respected network of organizations dedicated to revealing and preserving the history of Soviet repression and fighting for political prisoners in Russia today. Memorial's efforts to defend truth and human rights are essential and must be protected for generations to come." Memorial, established in the final years of the Soviet Union by dissidents including Andrei Sakharov, is one of the most respected and enduring human rights groups in the region. Its local chapters focus on preserving the truth about Soviet repressions, particularly under Stalin, and honoring the memories of those lost. Memorial also maintains a comprehensive database of current political prisoners in Russia and continues to advocate for the rights of the people of Russia, especially in the North Caucasus. The Helsinki Commission has convened numerous events featuring Memorial representatives.
Defending Ukraine, Deterring Putin
The Kremlin has dramatically increased its military activities and capabilities in and around Ukraine, leading to predictions that the regime may be preparing for an aggressive military operation in the coming months. Russian military movements have sufficiently concerned U.S. and allied observers that CIA Director William Burns was personally dispatched to Moscow to telegraph U.S. concerns. Secretary of State Antony Blinken also has added to a chorus of alarm, and Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba has described Russia's movements as preparations for an invasion. On December 7, President Biden held a two-hour phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the apparent buildup. The Helsinki Commission, including Co-Chairman Rep. Steve Cohen (TN-09) and Commissioner Rep. Marc Veasey (TX-33), convened a virtual briefing to evaluate the Russian regime's actions and capabilities near Ukraine and assess potential options for U.S. and Western countermeasures to deter aggression and preserve Ukrainian sovereignty. Panelists included Dr. Andrew Bowen of the Congressional Research Service, Robert Lee of Kings College London, Dr. Mary Vorotnyuk of the Royal United Services Institute, and Katsiaryna Shmatsina of the European Values Center for Security Policy in Prague. The discussion was moderated by Helsinki Commission Senior Policy Advisor Michael Hikari Cecire. Cecire began the discussion by describing the apparent urgency of the situation on Ukraine's border, noting that more than 100,000 Russian troops and heavy offensive equipment had amassed in a potential war footing, in addition to thousands more troops already in states of high readiness and propositioned in and around Ukrainian territory. Dr. Andrew Bowen described the strategic environment in which the buildup is occurring, and noted that Russian political leadership has asserted that it regarded the presence of NATO and Western military and political influence on its border as a red line. Although Ukraine has no immediate likelihood of joining NATO, the Russian regime may regard Ukraine's growing independent capabilities and partnerships with the West as indicative of a graduate deterioration of its own relative security position. As such, its military buildup may be intended to either compel a diplomatic accommodation with the West to forestall Ukraine's continued Western path, or, if necessary, launch military operations to do so through the use of force. Dr. Bowen noted that Congress has played a significant role in supporting activities to bolster Ukraine's defenses, including through the provision of lethal aid, and has also supported efforts to reinforce NATO's Eastern flank in response to Russia's aggressive actions. Robert Lee focused on Russian military capabilities currently arrayed at Ukraine's border. He noted that tens of thousands of troops had been mobilized from Russia's other geographic combatant commands and deployed to Ukraine's border, including significant heavy offensive weaponry and specialized assets. According to some assessments, total Russian deployments may represent as much as two-thirds of its total combat power to in and around the Ukraine theater, suggesting a nationwide military mobilization and all the preparations for a major invasion. While the preponderance of Russian offensive assets suggests that it may have the capabilities in place for any number of offensive scenarios, including a move on Kyiv, it is not necessarily a foregone conclusion that the Kremlin has any intent to seize and hold territory. The Kremlin's intent may be just to destroy or significantly degrade Ukraine's military and undermine its broader strategic situation to achieve its aims. However, Russia also has activated some 100,000 additional reserve forces, which may be employed for a number of scenarios. Responding to a question from Co-Chairman Cohen, Lee observed that it was hard to determine the likelihood of a renewed Russian invasion, but that the risk is certainly greater than it has been at any point since the conflict began in 2014, and that the capabilities are all in theater for war. Co-Chairman Cohen also asked if the buildup today was proportionally similar to past buildups in 2014-2015, which was the last time Russian forces semi-overtly invaded Ukraine in large numbers. Lee replied that the current buildup is much more significant, though it is also true that the Ukrainian military is more capable today than it was in the past. Co-Chairman Cohen then inquired about past Russian casualties, which Lee described as being in the "hundreds" at least, though exact figures were not made publicly available. Co-Chairman Cohen then reiterated the gravity of the situation, and the seriousness with which he and the U.S. government was taking the issue. Cecire then introduced Dr. Maryna Vorotnyuk, who also made the point that the Russian regime's full intentions were obscure, and not entirely knowable. However, she noted that the array of capabilities that the Kremlin has assembled on Ukraine's border is suggestive, as are the demands the Kremlin has made in combination with the military buildup. On the latter point, she noted that there was an internal logic to Moscow linking its threatening posture over Ukraine with its demands with the West, because Russia's war on Ukraine could be regarded as a kind of proxy war against the West as a whole. In a more comprehensive way, Russian demands seek a revised security architecture that would effectively undermine the sovereignty of Ukraine as well as other non-NATO states like Georgia, giving Russia free rein over its periphery. While this may be a nonstarter for the West, Dr. Vorotnyuk noted that Russia likely would settle for an accommodation from the West that would reduce Western involvement in the region and leave Ukraine and other countries weak and vulnerable to Russian pressure. While some may find such a route appealing, she noted, such a response would not likely lead to a more constructive Russia, and could even invite more aggression as Moscow's intent was never solely about or limited to Ukraine. As such, it is important for the West to remain resolute in defending and advocating for Ukraine's sovereignty. Katsiaryna Shmatsina spoke about Belarus' role in the broader calculus. She recalled how, after Belarusian protests were being crushed by the regime, EU diplomatic leaders asked how Belarus might be used as an appendage of Russian strategic power. She noted that this appears to be the case in the ongoing episode with Ukraine, with the hybrid migrant crisis at the Belarusian border, the mooted possibility that Russian forces might use Belarusian territory to attack Ukraine, and the solidarity Russia has showed with the regime in Minsk through the flights of nuclear-capable bombers—suggesting that Belarus is not merely a side act, but a key element of Russian strategy in the region. For his part, Belarusian President Lukashenko has been severely weakened by the protests and his subsequent reliance on Russian support, leaving him nowhere else to turn and cementing Belarus's place in the Kremlin's alliance system and regional strategy. Shmastsina counseled that the situation in Belarus should merit greater international attention, particularly from the West, because it is inseparable from the ongoing military buildup in and around Ukraine and another aspect of Russia's broader campaign against the West. Rep. Veasey noted that in a past visit to Ukraine, the assessment was that Russia was not necessarily interested in taking and holding territory and asked whether this view was still accurate. Dr. Vorotnyuk replied that this was very likely the case, but ultimately that the likely Russian aim was to permanently weaken Ukraine and be able to "veto" its alignments with the West. Particular territorial objectives could also be under consideration, such as a land corridor from the Donbas to Crimea—both of which Russia already holds—or a particular city, such as Odesa, and its port access to the Black Sea. Rep. Veasey then asked why Ukraine, but not Georgia, was being targeted in this way. Lee responded that Georgia no longer threatens to retake the Russia-held separatist regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia by force, and that Ukraine is a much larger country with a more capable military and economic capacity, which holds a unique place in Russia's historical narrative. Rep. Veasey then raised the issue of corruption, which continues to be seen as a major issue in Ukraine as compared to, for example, Georgia, and asked whether this is a serious problem. Dr. Vorotnyuk noted that it was a major issue, but that it is not a justification for Russian aggression, and that Western assistance with Ukraine is very much helping to address issues like corruption and democratic governance. Related Information Panelist Biographies
Helsinki Commission Welcomes Passage of Trap Provision in 2022 National Defense Authorization Act
WASHINGTON—Helsinki Commission Chairman Sen. Cardin (MD), Co-Chairman Rep. Steve Cohen (TN-09), Ranking Member Sen. Roger Wicker (MS), and Ranking Member Rep. Joe Wilson (SC-02) today welcomed the passage of the Transnational Repression Accountability and Prevention (TRAP) provision as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2022. "By co-opting and undermining the rule of law to harass and intimidate dissidents and political opponents, corrupt regimes threaten our national security," said Chairman Cardin. "Our provision will make it U.S. policy to fight exploitation of INTERPOL, including by naming and shaming member states that abuse its mechanisms. This amendment will protect the United States, our allies, and all those fighting or fleeing authoritarian regimes from extraterritorial and extrajudicial abuse." "We've seen time and again how corrupt dictators take advantage of INTERPOL to intimidate and harass those who expose their immoral deeds, even after they have fled their homes and their country in search of safety," said Co-Chairman Cohen. "The TRAP provision will protect these dissidents and ensure that our own institutions are not used against us—or them." "There is no reason for any democracy, especially the United States, to be forced to play a part in authoritarian regimes' blatant abuse of INTERPOL Red Notices," said Sen. Wicker. "I am pleased Congress has taken action to name publicly the abusers, such as Russia and China, and prevent American law enforcement from having to do the dirty work of these repressive autocrats." "INTERPOL should enable us to crack down on criminals worldwide," said Rep. Wilson. "Instead, the criminals have taken over the institution, using it to target those who oppose them. The TRAP provision will protect the United States from this abuse and ensure that we do everything we can to restore the rule of law to INTERPOL." "Increasing transparency and accountability at INTERPOL underscores the bipartisan commitment of the United States Senate to push back against countries, large or small, seeking to distort legitimate law enforcement cooperation to instead pursue political opponents or personal vendettas," said Sen. Bob Menendez (NJ), Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "This new provision will strengthen protections for human rights defenders, political dissidents, and journalists, and pave the way for the international community to join the United States in pressing for reforms and standing against the abuse of INTERPOL Red Notices by China and Russia, among others." The Transnational Repression Accountability and Prevention (TRAP) Act was introduced in 2021 in the Senate by Sen. Wicker and Chairman Cardin and in the U.S. House of Representatives by Co-Chairman Cohen and Rep. Wilson. The legislation makes fighting abuse of INTERPOL a key goal of the United States at the organization, mandates that the United States name the worst abusers of INTERPOL and examine its own strategy to fight INTERPOL abuse, and protects the U.S. judicial system from authoritarian abuse.
Chairman Cardin Calls for Release of Osman Kavala, Welcomes Council of Europe Infringement Proceedings Against Turkey
WASHINGTON—Following the recent ruling of a Turkish court that will keep philanthropist Osman Kavala jailed until his trial begins in January 2022 and the subsequent decision by the Council of Europe to begin infringement proceedings against Turkey, Helsinki Commission Chairman Sen. Ben Cardin (MD) issued the following statement: "Justice has been denied, once again, for Osman Kavala, whose only apparent crime is being a Turkish patriot. Despite earlier rulings from a Turkish court and the European Court of Human Rights requiring the state to release Mr. Kavala, Turkish authorities have already jailed him for more than four years—in clear violation of Turkey's OSCE commitments. "The ongoing injustice against Mr. Kavala is not unique. Thousands of Turkish citizens have been victims of the arbitrary court system. It is welcome news that the Council of Europe will start infringement proceedings against Turkey. Although Turkey is an important NATO ally, its leaders repeatedly have failed to uphold its commitments to respect human rights and the rule of law. "I urge the Turkish government to comply with its international obligations and release Mr. Kavala." Turkey's failure to comply with the decision of the European Court of Human Rights, of which the country is a member, prompted the Council of Europe to start infringement proceedings. The process has been used only once before in more than seven decades of the organization's history and may result in Turkey losing its voting rights or being excluded from the Council. Osman Kavala is a Turkish entrepreneur and philanthropist who has for decades supported civil society organizations in Turkey. In 1990, he contributed to the establishment of The Helsinki Citizens' Assembly, a democracy and human rights non-profit inspired by the Helsinki Final Act. In November 2017, Turkish authorities arrested Mr. Kavala, alleging that he attempted to overthrow the Turkish government. Mr. Kavala was acquitted of these charges in February 2020, only to remain in detention and be charged with a new offense in March 2020. The same month, the European Court of Human Rights ruled Mr. Kavala should be released from pre-trial detention. Domestic and international human rights watchdogs consistently report that the charges against Mr. Kavala are unsubstantiated and politically motivated. Recently, ambassadors from ten Western countries, including the United States, advocated for his release. These demands were rejected by the Government of Turkey. Mr. Kavala is a recipient of the 2019 European Archaeological Heritage Prize and the Ayşenur Zarakolu Freedom of Thought and Expression Award from the Human Rights Association's Istanbul branch.
30 Years After Ovcara
By Robert Hand, Senior Policy Advisor On November 20, 1991, after the fall of the city of Vukovar in Croatia, militant Serb forces removed 265 ill and injured Croats from a hospital. They were taken to the nearby Ovčara farm southeast of Vukovar, where they were abused before being shot and killed, with their bodies dumped in a mass grave. In addition to wounded members of the Croatian armed forces were civilians, including some women and children. The Helsinki Commission strongly supported the international effort to prosecute those responsible for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in the former Yugoslavia, including those most responsible for the crime at Ovčara, which took place early in a series of conflicts associated with Yugoslavia's disintegration throughout the 1990s. Many obstacles stood in the way, but after years of persistent effort justice prevailed. However, malicious acts supporting territorial aggression continue in the OSCE region and elsewhere. When remembering Ovčara, it is important to acknowledge the brave few in Serbia—civil society advocates, political activists, journalists, lawyers and judges, and everyday citizens—who consistently have refused to associate themselves with the terrible crimes committed in their name in the 1990s, and seek to this day not only justice but a needed acknowledgement of reality in the face of continued denial and revisionism. A wider acknowledgement led by those holding power today will mean a better future for Serbia and its neighbors tomorrow.


This section provides information on institutional and academic resources relevant to Southeast Asia and Southeast Asian programs and studies. Please note that this is a work in progress as we will add more in the course of time, and we hope that you will help us by writing to us to suggest resources that should be included. Although we will try our best to identify relevant resources, we recognize that we cannot be exhaustive in view of the large, and growing, numbers of institutions and news agencies related to Southeast Asia.


text:
The code below will help you to implement an C# app to add launch action to PDF. Want to add launch action to PDF in your C# app? ByteScout PDF SDK is designed for it. ByteScout PDF SDK is the component to help programmers in generating new pdf files, modifying and updating existing pdf documents or pdf forms. Provides support for auto-filling pdf forms, adding text with adjustable font, style, size, font family, new form fields, vector and raster drawings.

C# code samples for C# developers help to speed up coding of your application when using ByteScout PDF SDK. In order to implement the functionality, you should copy and paste this code for C# below into your code editor with your app, compile and run your application. This basic programming language sample code for C# will do the whole work for you to add launch action to PDF.

Trial version of ByteScout PDF SDK is available for free. Source code samples are included to help you with your C# app.

## REQUEST FREE TECH SUPPORT

[Click here to get in touch](https://bytescout.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/requests/new?subject=ByteScout%20PDF%20SDK%20Question)

or just send email to [support@bytescout.com](mailto:support@bytescout.com?subject=ByteScout%20PDF%20SDK%20Question)

## ON-PREMISE OFFLINE SDK

[Get Your 60 Day Free Trial](https://bytescout.com/download/web-installer?utm_source=github-readme)
[Explore SDK Docs](https://bytescout.com/documentation/index.html?utm_source=github-readme)
[Sign Up For Online Training](https://academy.bytescout.com/)

## ON-DEMAND REST WEB API

[Get your API key](https://pdf.co/documentation/api?utm_source=github-readme)
[Explore Web API Documentation](https://pdf.co/documentation/api?utm_source=github-readme)
[Explore Web API Samples](https://github.com/bytescout/ByteScout-SDK-SourceCode/tree/master/PDF.co%20Web%20API)

## VIDEO REVIEW

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdsQ0EAqwGQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdsQ0EAqwGQ)

<!-- code block begin -->

##### ****LaunchAction.NETCore.csproj:**

```
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Project Sdk="Microsoft.NET.Sdk">
  <PropertyGroup>
    <OutputType>Exe</OutputType>
    <TargetFramework>netcoreapp2.0</TargetFramework>
    <EnableDefaultCompileItems>false</EnableDefaultCompileItems>
    <GenerateAssemblyCompanyAttribute>false</GenerateAssemblyCompanyAttribute>
    <GenerateAssemblyConfigurationAttribute>false</GenerateAssemblyConfigurationAttribute>
    <GenerateAssemblyFileVersionAttribute>false</GenerateAssemblyFileVersionAttribute>
    <GenerateAssemblyInformationalVersionAttribute>false</GenerateAssemblyInformationalVersionAttribute>
    <GenerateAssemblyProductAttribute>false</GenerateAssemblyProductAttribute>
    <GenerateAssemblyTitleAttribute>false</GenerateAssemblyTitleAttribute>
    <GenerateAssemblyVersionAttribute>false</GenerateAssemblyVersionAttribute>
    <GenerateAssemblyCopyrightAttribute>false</GenerateAssemblyCopyrightAttribute>
    <GenerateAssemblyTrademarkAttribute>false</GenerateAssemblyTrademarkAttribute>
    <GenerateAssemblyCultureAttribute>false</GenerateAssemblyCultureAttribute>
    <GenerateAssemblyDescriptionAttribute>false</GenerateAssemblyDescriptionAttribute>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Compile Include="Program.cs" />
    <Compile Include="Properties\AssemblyInfo.cs" />
    <None Include="sample.txt">
      <CopyToOutputDirectory>Always</CopyToOutputDirectory>
    </None>
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <PackageReference Include="Microsoft.Windows.Compatibility" Version="2.0.0" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Reference Include="Bytescout.PDF">
      <SpecificVersion>False</SpecificVersion>
      <HintPath>c:\Program Files\Bytescout PDF SDK\netcoreapp2.0\Bytescout.PDF.dll</HintPath>
    </Reference>
  </ItemGroup>
</Project>
```

<!-- code block end -->

<!-- code block begin -->

##### ****LaunchAction.VS2005.csproj:**

```
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Project DefaultTargets="Build" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003">
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props" Condition="Exists('$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props')" />
  <PropertyGroup>
    <Configuration Condition=" '$(Configuration)' == '' ">Debug</Configuration>
    <Platform Condition=" '$(Platform)' == '' ">AnyCPU</Platform>
    <ProjectGuid>{474F52FF-3928-44EA-8F6F-379E9DAA23FF}</ProjectGuid>
    <OutputType>Exe</OutputType>
    <AppDesignerFolder>Properties</AppDesignerFolder>
    <RootNamespace>LaunchActionExample</RootNamespace>
    <AssemblyName>LaunchActionExample</AssemblyName>
    <FileAlignment>512</FileAlignment>
    <ProductVersion>8.0.50727</ProductVersion>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Debug|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugSymbols>true</DebugSymbols>
    <DebugType>full</DebugType>
    <Optimize>false</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Debug\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>DEBUG;TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Release|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugType>pdbonly</DebugType>
    <Optimize>true</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Release\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Reference Include="Bytescout.PDF, Version=1.0.0.15, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=f7dd1bd9d40a50eb, processorArchitecture=MSIL">
      <SpecificVersion>False</SpecificVersion>
    </Reference>
    <Reference Include="System" />
    <Reference Include="System.Data" />
    <Reference Include="System.Drawing" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Compile Include="Program.cs" />
    <Compile Include="Properties\AssemblyInfo.cs" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Content Include="sample.txt">
      <CopyToOutputDirectory>Always</CopyToOutputDirectory>
    </Content>
  </ItemGroup>
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildBinPath)\Microsoft.CSharp.targets" />
  <!-- To modify your build process, add your task inside one of the targets below and uncomment it.
       Other similar extension points exist, see Microsoft.Common.targets.
  <Target Name="BeforeBuild">
  </Target>
  <Target Name="AfterBuild">
  </Target>
  -->
</Project>
```

<!-- code block end -->

<!-- code block begin -->

##### ****LaunchAction.VS2008.csproj:**

```
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Project ToolsVersion="3.5" DefaultTargets="Build" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003">
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props" Condition="Exists('$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props')" />
  <PropertyGroup>
    <Configuration Condition=" '$(Configuration)' == '' ">Debug</Configuration>
    <Platform Condition=" '$(Platform)' == '' ">AnyCPU</Platform>
    <ProjectGuid>{474F52FF-3928-44EA-8F6F-379E9DAA23FF}</ProjectGuid>
    <OutputType>Exe</OutputType>
    <AppDesignerFolder>Properties</AppDesignerFolder>
    <RootNamespace>LaunchActionExample</RootNamespace>
    <AssemblyName>LaunchActionExample</AssemblyName>
    <TargetFrameworkVersion>v2.0</TargetFrameworkVersion>
    <FileAlignment>512</FileAlignment>
    <ProductVersion>9.0.30729</ProductVersion>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Debug|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugSymbols>true</DebugSymbols>
    <DebugType>full</DebugType>
    <Optimize>false</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Debug\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>DEBUG;TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Release|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugType>pdbonly</DebugType>
    <Optimize>true</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Release\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Reference Include="Bytescout.PDF, Version=1.0.0.15, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=f7dd1bd9d40a50eb, processorArchitecture=MSIL">
      <SpecificVersion>False</SpecificVersion>
    </Reference>
    <Reference Include="System" />
    <Reference Include="System.Data" />
    <Reference Include="System.Drawing" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Compile Include="Program.cs" />
    <Compile Include="Properties\AssemblyInfo.cs" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Content Include="sample.txt">
      <CopyToOutputDirectory>Always</CopyToOutputDirectory>
    </Content>
  </ItemGroup>
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildToolsPath)\Microsoft.CSharp.targets" />
  <!-- To modify your build process, add your task inside one of the targets below and uncomment it.
       Other similar extension points exist, see Microsoft.Common.targets.
  <Target Name="BeforeBuild">
  </Target>
  <Target Name="AfterBuild">
  </Target>
  -->
</Project>
```

<!-- code block end -->

<!-- code block begin -->

##### ****LaunchAction.VS2010.csproj:**

```
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Project ToolsVersion="4.0" DefaultTargets="Build" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003">
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props" Condition="Exists('$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props')" />
  <PropertyGroup>
    <Configuration Condition=" '$(Configuration)' == '' ">Debug</Configuration>
    <Platform Condition=" '$(Platform)' == '' ">AnyCPU</Platform>
    <ProjectGuid>{474F52FF-3928-44EA-8F6F-379E9DAA23FF}</ProjectGuid>
    <OutputType>Exe</OutputType>
    <AppDesignerFolder>Properties</AppDesignerFolder>
    <RootNamespace>LaunchActionExample</RootNamespace>
    <AssemblyName>LaunchActionExample</AssemblyName>
    <TargetFrameworkVersion>v2.0</TargetFrameworkVersion>
    <FileAlignment>512</FileAlignment>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Debug|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugSymbols>true</DebugSymbols>
    <DebugType>full</DebugType>
    <Optimize>false</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Debug\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>DEBUG;TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Release|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugType>pdbonly</DebugType>
    <Optimize>true</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Release\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Reference Include="Bytescout.PDF, Version=1.0.0.15, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=f7dd1bd9d40a50eb, processorArchitecture=MSIL">
      <SpecificVersion>False</SpecificVersion>
    </Reference>
    <Reference Include="System" />
    <Reference Include="System.Data" />
    <Reference Include="System.Drawing" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Compile Include="Program.cs" />
    <Compile Include="Properties\AssemblyInfo.cs" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Content Include="sample.txt">
      <CopyToOutputDirectory>Always</CopyToOutputDirectory>
    </Content>
  </ItemGroup>
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildToolsPath)\Microsoft.CSharp.targets" />
  <!-- To modify your build process, add your task inside one of the targets below and uncomment it.
       Other similar extension points exist, see Microsoft.Common.targets.
  <Target Name="BeforeBuild">
  </Target>
  <Target Name="AfterBuild">
  </Target>
  -->
</Project>
```

<!-- code block end -->

<!-- code block begin -->

##### ****LaunchAction.VS2012.csproj:**

```
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Project ToolsVersion="4.0" DefaultTargets="Build" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003">
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props" Condition="Exists('$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props')" />
  <PropertyGroup>
    <Configuration Condition=" '$(Configuration)' == '' ">Debug</Configuration>
    <Platform Condition=" '$(Platform)' == '' ">AnyCPU</Platform>
    <ProjectGuid>{474F52FF-3928-44EA-8F6F-379E9DAA23FF}</ProjectGuid>
    <OutputType>Exe</OutputType>
    <AppDesignerFolder>Properties</AppDesignerFolder>
    <RootNamespace>LaunchActionExample</RootNamespace>
    <AssemblyName>LaunchActionExample</AssemblyName>
    <TargetFrameworkVersion>v2.0</TargetFrameworkVersion>
    <FileAlignment>512</FileAlignment>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Debug|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugSymbols>true</DebugSymbols>
    <DebugType>full</DebugType>
    <Optimize>false</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Debug\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>DEBUG;TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Release|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugType>pdbonly</DebugType>
    <Optimize>true</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Release\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Reference Include="Bytescout.PDF, Version=1.0.0.15, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=f7dd1bd9d40a50eb, processorArchitecture=MSIL">
      <SpecificVersion>False</SpecificVersion>
    </Reference>
    <Reference Include="System" />
    <Reference Include="System.Data" />
    <Reference Include="System.Drawing" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Compile Include="Program.cs" />
    <Compile Include="Properties\AssemblyInfo.cs" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Content Include="sample.txt">
      <CopyToOutputDirectory>Always</CopyToOutputDirectory>
    </Content>
  </ItemGroup>
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildToolsPath)\Microsoft.CSharp.targets" />
  <!-- To modify your build process, add your task inside one of the targets below and uncomment it.
       Other similar extension points exist, see Microsoft.Common.targets.
  <Target Name="BeforeBuild">
  </Target>
  <Target Name="AfterBuild">
  </Target>
  -->
</Project>
```

<!-- code block end -->

<!-- code block begin -->

##### ****LaunchAction.VS2013.csproj:**

```
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Project ToolsVersion="12.0" DefaultTargets="Build" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003">
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props" Condition="Exists('$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props')" />
  <PropertyGroup>
    <Configuration Condition=" '$(Configuration)' == '' ">Debug</Configuration>
    <Platform Condition=" '$(Platform)' == '' ">AnyCPU</Platform>
    <ProjectGuid>{474F52FF-3928-44EA-8F6F-379E9DAA23FF}</ProjectGuid>
    <OutputType>Exe</OutputType>
    <AppDesignerFolder>Properties</AppDesignerFolder>
    <RootNamespace>LaunchActionExample</RootNamespace>
    <AssemblyName>LaunchActionExample</AssemblyName>
    <TargetFrameworkVersion>v2.0</TargetFrameworkVersion>
    <FileAlignment>512</FileAlignment>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Debug|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugSymbols>true</DebugSymbols>
    <DebugType>full</DebugType>
    <Optimize>false</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Debug\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>DEBUG;TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Release|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugType>pdbonly</DebugType>
    <Optimize>true</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Release\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Reference Include="Bytescout.PDF, Version=1.0.0.15, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=f7dd1bd9d40a50eb, processorArchitecture=MSIL">
      <SpecificVersion>False</SpecificVersion>
    </Reference>
    <Reference Include="System" />
    <Reference Include="System.Data" />
    <Reference Include="System.Drawing" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Compile Include="Program.cs" />
    <Compile Include="Properties\AssemblyInfo.cs" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Content Include="sample.txt">
      <CopyToOutputDirectory>Always</CopyToOutputDirectory>
    </Content>
  </ItemGroup>
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildToolsPath)\Microsoft.CSharp.targets" />
  <!-- To modify your build process, add your task inside one of the targets below and uncomment it.
       Other similar extension points exist, see Microsoft.Common.targets.
  <Target Name="BeforeBuild">
  </Target>
  <Target Name="AfterBuild">
  </Target>
  -->
</Project>
```

<!-- code block end -->

<!-- code block begin -->

##### ****LaunchAction.VS2015.csproj:**

```
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Project ToolsVersion="14.0" DefaultTargets="Build" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003">
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props" Condition="Exists('$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)\$(MSBuildToolsVersion)\Microsoft.Common.props')" />
  <PropertyGroup>
    <Configuration Condition=" '$(Configuration)' == '' ">Debug</Configuration>
    <Platform Condition=" '$(Platform)' == '' ">AnyCPU</Platform>
    <ProjectGuid>{474F52FF-3928-44EA-8F6F-379E9DAA23FF}</ProjectGuid>
    <OutputType>Exe</OutputType>
    <AppDesignerFolder>Properties</AppDesignerFolder>
    <RootNamespace>LaunchActionExample</RootNamespace>
    <AssemblyName>LaunchActionExample</AssemblyName>
    <TargetFrameworkVersion>v2.0</TargetFrameworkVersion>
    <FileAlignment>512</FileAlignment>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Debug|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugSymbols>true</DebugSymbols>
    <DebugType>full</DebugType>
    <Optimize>false</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Debug\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>DEBUG;TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)|$(Platform)' == 'Release|AnyCPU' ">
    <PlatformTarget>AnyCPU</PlatformTarget>
    <DebugType>pdbonly</DebugType>
    <Optimize>true</Optimize>
    <OutputPath>bin\Release\</OutputPath>
    <DefineConstants>TRACE</DefineConstants>
    <ErrorReport>prompt</ErrorReport>
    <WarningLevel>4</WarningLevel>
  </PropertyGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Reference Include="Bytescout.PDF, Version=1.0.0.15, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=f7dd1bd9d40a50eb, processorArchitecture=MSIL">
      <SpecificVersion>False</SpecificVersion>
    </Reference>
    <Reference Include="System" />
    <Reference Include="System.Data" />
    <Reference Include="System.Drawing" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Compile Include="Program.cs" />
    <Compile Include="Properties\AssemblyInfo.cs" />
  </ItemGroup>
  <ItemGroup>
    <Content Include="sample.txt">
      <CopyToOutputDirectory>Always</CopyToOutputDirectory>
    </Content>
  </ItemGroup>
  <Import Project="$(MSBuildToolsPath)\Microsoft.CSharp.targets" />
  <!-- To modify your build process, add your task inside one of the targets below and uncomment it.
       Other similar extension points exist, see Microsoft.Common.targets.
  <Target Name="BeforeBuild">
  </Target>
  <Target Name="AfterBuild">
  </Target>
  -->
</Project>
```

<!-- code block end -->

<!-- code block begin -->

##### ****Program.cs:**

```
using System.Diagnostics;
using Bytescout.PDF;

namespace LaunchActionExample
{
    /// <summary>
    /// This example demonstrates how to create a button that launches an external resource.
    /// </summary>
    class Program
    {
        static void Main()
        {
            // Create new document
            Document pdfDocument = new Document();
            pdfDocument.RegistrationName = "demo";
            pdfDocument.RegistrationKey = "demo";
            // Add page
            Page page = new Page(PaperFormat.A4);
            pdfDocument.Pages.Add(page);

            // Create button
            PushButton button = new PushButton(20, 20, 120, 25, "button1");
            button.Caption = "Launch sample.txt";
            // Create action that opens an external file
            LaunchAction launchAction = new LaunchAction(System.IO.Path.GetFullPath("sample.txt"));
            button.OnActivated = launchAction;
            page.Annotations.Add(button);

            // Save document to file
            pdfDocument.Save("result.pdf");

            // Cleanup
            pdfDocument.Dispose();

            // Open result document in default associated application (for demo purpose)
            ProcessStartInfo processStartInfo = new ProcessStartInfo("result.pdf");
            processStartInfo.UseShellExecute = true;
            Process.Start(processStartInfo);
        }
    }
}

```

<!-- code block end -->

<!-- code block begin -->

##### ****sample.txt:**

```
sample.txt

1234567890
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
```

<!-- code block end -->

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


I don't know about you, but as soon as spring rolls around, Peeps seem to mysteriously show up in nearly every aisle in the grocery store. So this week I finally gave in and bought a few of the famous colorful boxes — but of course, decided to gussy them up a bit.
My lollipop sticks have been calling my name lately. So I turned the Peeps into "pops", melted a batch of white and dark chocolate, pulled out some of my sprinkles collection (this is a perfect way to use them up!) and went to dipping! I also ground up some graham crackers to make a Peeps version of my favorite s'mores pops. Sure enough, these were totally simple (and took about 10% of the time it takes to make cake pops!!). Perfect for making with kids, or for letting the "kid" come out in your friends and family as they enjoy these!


© 2012 Meghan Little. All rights reserved.
Egg nog is a Christmas-time tradition, so we've made this Paleo Egg Nog to keep that tradition alive and well! This recipe takes a little more effort to make it the way I've always done it, but if you want to go easy, you could theoretically combine everything in a blender and just hit the go button. Would it turn out the same? For the flavor? Probably, but the texture would be different and that's enough to make me do it the slightly more effort way…Up to you, Merry Christmas!
Well, its December 20th, 2012 and I'm finally in the holiday spirit. The tree is FINALLY up! It only fell 100 times and we had to bolt it to the wall with wire…and I'm not joking, it is literally bolted to the wall. And hopefully, the Mayans were wrong and the world will not end tomorrow. Who knows though, right? Haha, we certainly are not the type hoarding canned peaches and water, so I hope that civilization doesn't collapse! And if it does, at least we'll be good and drunk off this Paleo Egg Nog!
Once the eggs are at room temperature (and they need to be, so don't think you can hurry that up), separate the yolks from the whites – and 2 of those whites need to be separated from the other = 3 bowls total (make sure NO yolks make it in the whites. If this happens, start over, it will effect the way you beat the whites). With a hand mixer, mix the yolks with the coconut crystals until smooth.
In a separate bowl, beat 2 of the egg whites into soft peaks. Now here's something important to take note of – everything you use here has to be clean and dry. The beaters? Must be clean and dry. The bowl? Clean and dry. Once soft peaks form when you pull the beaters out, fold the whites into the egg yolk mixture – lightly, fluffily, and as little as possible on the folding.
Once your eggs are folded together, whisk in the vanilla, coconut milk, almond milk, sea salt, and allspice.
Cover and refrigerate for at least 4 hours or overnight. Just before serving, beat the last egg white (at room temperature) into stiff peaks (= when you pull the beaters out, peaks stay. This will take a few minutes.). Then fold into the mixture and sprinkle a little cinnamon or nutmeg over the top. NOTE: this will make the nog very frothy and light. If you like more liquidy, beat the egg into soft peaks instead of stiff.
Or try our Puerto Rican version – Paleo Coquito!
For even more recipes not featured on this site, check out our book!


Welcome to the Park Central New York - your home away from home in the world's greatest city, just steps from the rolling paths of Central Park, the sights of Rockefeller Center, and the thriving streets of Times Square. A spectacular $65 million renovation has placed the Park Central at the top of the list of Midtown Manhattan hotels for business and leisure travel. Surround yourself with the classic attractions of the Big Apple, from shopping to museums, dining, and beyond. With spacious rooms and suites and hallmark service, this first-class Midtown New York City hotel invites you to discover the convenience of our landmark setting.
The Park Central New York hotel is conveniently located right above the 57th Street subway stop, providing easy access to the N, Q, R, W lines. We are also within 5 blocks of several other routes. Learn more about the location of our New York hotel near subway.
Find attractions near our Central Park Manhattan hotel.


The 8123 Podcast is hosted by Pat Kirch and Garrett Nickelsen of The Maine. The guys will be sitting down with friends, fans, and musical guests to talk about music and life.
Chat with out longtime friend Derek from Mayday Parade. Can't wait to be on the Sad Summer tour with them all summer!!!
A few days away from the release of our new album You Are Ok we sat down with Jason Tate to preview the album and talk about the music scene and much more!!! Hope you all enjoy this one.
There are no lists that include "The 8123 Podcast". You can add this podcast to a new or existing list.


text:
My Greatest Find
Bobs Train Box
Trucks Toy Trains
Classic Toy Trains Magazine
Home / Beginners / Ask Trains / Why three rails, not two?
Why three rails, not two?
Q: Why are so many toy trains manufactured to use three rails? It seems to me that regardless of whether a train uses AC or DC, two rails are all that would ever be needed to deliver electricity to the locomotive. HO does just fine on two rails, as do some types of larger scales.
A: You're absolutely right, Ernest, and in the toy train world, American Flyer S gauge was also a two-rail system. Actually, the first 27/8-inch gauge Lionel trains ran on two rails 100 years ago. The company changed to three-rail track about 1906, when Standard gauge was introduced. O gauge followed in 1915.
Perhaps the biggest consideration in switching to a three-rail system was doing away with the need for troublesome, expensive axle insulation, which was crude back then (remember, this was an age before plastics). There were some electrical advantages to three rails too, lying mainly in simplified accessory control and in the wiring of certain track plans.
Interestingly, a three-rail system was quite prototypical and state-of-the-art at the time. Many real railroads were switching to electric locomotives, utilizing a third rail for power, particularly in the densely populated East. Most Lionel locomotives sold before about 1930 were modeled after prototype electrics. Of course, American Flyer and Ives were also in the competition, with similar engines and compatible three-rail track.
In this day of quantum leaps toward forced obsolescence, it is hard to imagine that nobody was in a hurry to change anything drastically in those days. Literally millions of three-rail trains were in use. Extra cars, track and accessories were selling well. "Evolution rather than revolution" was key among the train makers.
The idea of converting to a new two-rail system was out of the question, in spite of pressure from some hobbyists who were trying to build realistic model railroads using a combination of toy and the more-or-less scale O gauge equipment that was entering the marketplace. By the end of World War II, the pressure was off, as many model railroaders switched to the smaller scales. O was again almost exclusively a toy train gauge.
When the nostalgia-driven train collecting hobby picked up speed in the 1970s and '80s, the collectibles of choice were mainly three-rail relics, because that's where all the good memories were. Many of these collectors were in the vanguard of today's toy train operators, because they began building realistic-looking layouts as backgrounds on which to display their treasures. That idea caught on big-time! Now we have a half-dozen manufacturers of three-rail equipment to keep up with the demand. Sure, two-rail is more prototypical. But, the people who build and operate three-rail layouts frankly don't care.
There is evidence that Lionel considered going to a two-rail system at least four times in its 100-year history – the early 1930s, the middle'40s, the middle '50s and for a short time in the '70s. Each time the decision was voted down and a more realistic three-rail system was introduced instead. Solid T-rail O-72 track was the 1930s compromise. The Super-O track of the'50s carried things a step further with many more crossties. The Tru-Track system of the '70s, however, never really got off the ground. The only time Lionel didn't respond this way was in the 1940s, when A.C. Gilbert trumped Lionel with two-rail S gauge.
So, Ernest, this is why we still have a three-rail system for our toys, in spite of the fact that two-rail technology has been around for a century. It isn't ignorance or inertia, it's simply a conscious, proactive choice on the part of the vast majority of the people who buy the trains.
One thought on "Why three rails, not two?"
GREGORY O CHILDS says:
I am wondering why this same article is repeated from a year earlier, last appearing in May, 2009?
10 (or 11) ways to blow up a decoder
Am I modeling the wrong industries and locomotives?
DCC locomotive won't move under DC
Spotting EMD vs GE diesels
Toy Train Layouts for Small Spaces
Get 20 articles about compact layouts and how to build them.
Lionel® Trains Pocket Price Guide 1901-2022
An Essential Guide for Toy Train Enthusiasts!
Classic Toy Trains 5-Year Collection 2015-2019 DVD-ROM
5 years of Classic Toy Trains at your fingertips!

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Phils make the pitches, but Expos get the win
MONTREAL – Dallas Green watched his bullpen make a whole lot of good pitches yesterday. And Dallas Green would much rather watch his bullpen make good pitches than hang 18 sliders, no question about it.
But, as has been well-established, Dallas Green is not easy. All the good pitches and all the fine intentions on Earth are not in themselves enough to make Dallas Green a happy manager.
"You've got to look at the bottom line," Green said after all those good pitches still turned into a painful 7-6 loss for the Phillies. "And the bottom line is, they didn't come out too well."
First, Green watched Lerrin LaGrow power one over the outside corner on Montreal's Ellis Valentine in the seventh. And he watched Valentine dump an end-of-the-bat RBI single into left that ate up what was left of a two-run Phillies lead.
Then Green watched Tug McGraw jam Ron LeFlore an inning later. And he watched LeFlore punch a single to center that erased another Phillies lead.
Then in the ninth, he watched McGraw bore one inside on Larry Parrish. And Parrish looped another single that set up a game-winning Gary Carter sacrifice fly one pitch later.
"They didn't hit the ball too gang-damned hard those last couple innings," Green said, sympathetically.
It was, however, about the only thing Green said sympathetically.
"Cripes, we've got to be able to hold a lead," Green muttered. "The gul-damned offense is doing everything it knows how to do, for cripe's sakes. Cripes, there's only so many times you can come back.
"Our offense is doing everything we've asked it. We've played the game right. We've bunted when we had to bunt. We've played the way we've had to play. We're doing everything you've got to do to score runs.
"The pitchers just have to take responsibility for what's going on on this team. We all said pitching's going to be the key. I've said the pitching doesn't worry me. But they've got to start doing it between the white lines."
The Phillies ground back on Bill Lee yesterday, which is never one of their more fun things to do. They were down, 3-1, in the first, after Randy Lerch was ripped for three runs and five two-out hits (including back-to-back homers by Andre Dawson and Valentine).
But they caught up in the fifth on a two-run triple by Bake McBride. McBride is 6-for-10 with nine RBIs with men in scoring position.
Then Greg Luzinski made it 4-3 with a homer in the sixth. And Garry Maddox made it 5-3 with a two-out RBI double in the seventh.
But Lerch gave up singles to Tony Bernazard and LeFlore starting the seventh. So Green went to LaGrow after Rodney Scott bunted the runners over.
LaGrow got Dawson on a chopper to third for the second out, Bernazard scoring. But Valentine plunked his end-of-the-bat job into left to tie it.
The Phillies regained the lead in the eighth, set up by Chris Speier's wild throw on Luzinski's leadoff grounder. Then Bob Boone singled. Larry Bowa bunted them to second and third. And Luis Aguayo lined a sacrifice fly to Ron LeFlore, the No-Armed Man.
But Warren Cromartie (14-for-his-last-23) opened the eighth with a looping single to center. Speier tried to bunt him to second, and dumped a weak one in front of the plate. It started spinning toward the first-base line, but Boone grabbed it, slipped to his knees and had no choice but to go to first.
"I should have let it go," Boone said. "You've got to keep the guy off second. But it was close enough for me to get to it and have a play on the guy at second. That's what I was looking for. But as soon as I started going down, I had to go to first. I just figured, well, we got an out anyway."
McGraw then came back and fanned Bernazard with a fastball for the second out. But LeFlore tied it with his hit. And McGraw had to battle back from 3-and-O on Jerry White to strike him out and get to the ninth.
The Phils went down 1-2-3 to Elias Sosa. Then McGraw got off to a rocky start in the ninth by walking Dawson, the leadoff hitter.
"You can't walk anybody, not in game-winning situations. Tug knows that," Green said. "He didn't want to walk him. You've just got to pitch better. You can't walk people. In fairness to Tug, he hadn't been out in eight or nine days. But he's a professional. He's paid to do a job."
McGraw came back and struck out Valentine with an out-of-the-strike-zone fastball. But Parrish stroked a flare to center. Maddox charged it, hoping to hold Dawson at second. But he couldn't make a clean pickup on a very tough short hop, and Dawson cruised into third. The play originally was scored an error on Maddox, then changed.
"If I stay back, the guy goes to third automatically," Maddox said. "The only way he holds at second is if I catch it or if he thinks I'm going to catch it. So all you can try and do is short-hop it."
Carter followed with a fly to medium-deep left. Luzinski had no chance at the plate, so the Phils were stuck with a loss that, come Sept. 1, might be pretty excruciating to remember.
NOTES: Manny Trillo (sprained right ankle) is expected to be out about a week. . . . Lerch allowed only four singles after the first: "He was just overthrowing the bail' in the first," Green said. "He tried to throw the ball through a brick wall. Once he got loose, he flipped the ball and he got the good tail on it again."