В Ірані сотні тисяч людей беруть участь в антиізраїльських акціях

Сотні тисяч людей вийшли на вулиці Тегерана й інших міст Ірану, щоб взяти участь в організованих владою антиізраїльських демонстраціях з нагоди «дня Кудса» – Кудс є арабською назвою міста Єрусалима.

На демонстраціях палили прапори Ізраїлю, а також США, вигукували заклики «Смерть Ізраїлеві» та «Смерть США».

Демонстранти також вигукували гасла проти королівської родини Саудівської Аравії й екстремістського угруповання «Ісламська держава».

Виступаючи на акції в Тегерані, спікер парламенту Ірану Алі Ларіджані назвав Ізраїль «матір’ю тероризму» і заявив, що його дії призвели до переселення «мільйонів мусульман».

Президент Ірану Хасан Роугані під час ходи Тегераном розкритикував законопроект про санкції, схвалені Сенатом США раніше цього місяця.

«День Єрусалима» встановив в Ірані засновник ісламського режиму в цій країн аятола Руголла Хомейні. Цього дня відбуваються масові організовані державою виступи на підтримку палестинців і засудження Ізраїлю, якого Іран не визнає.

Цього року відзначення «Дня Єрусалима» відбувається після нападів у Тегерані, відповідальність за які взяло на себе угруповання «Ісламська держава». Крім того, демонстрації відбуваються на тлі загострення боротьби за вплив у регіоні між шиїтським Іраном і Саудівською Аравією, де керують суніти.

Представники керівництва й ісламських політичних кіл Ірану раніше не раз закликали «стерти Ізраїль із мапи світу». Антиізраїльської політики дотримується й підтримуваний шиїтським Іраном шиїтський войовничий рух «Хезболла» в Лівані, що має власну армію і вже влаштовував кілька локальних воєн проти Ізраїлю.

США і їхній союзник Ізраїль звинувачують Іран у підтримці тероризму і підбурюванні заворушень на Близькому Сході.

 

Hosting

Антикорупційний комітет Ради не зміг визначити правила затвердження аудитора НАБУ

Комітет Верховної Ради України не зміг визначити правила затвердження аудитора Національного антикорупційного бюро України (НАБУ) через відсутність кворуму. 

Наступне засідання заплановане на 10 липня. 

Серед кандидатів, які подали заявки для участі в конкурсі на посаду аудитора НАБУ, – громадянка США, адвокат Марта Берш, іспанський прокурор Карлос Кастресана. Їх обох рекомендує «Реанімаційний пакет реформ». Також заявку подав висунутий раніше фракцією «БПП» Найджел Браун, кандидатуру якого Верховна Рада вже відхиляла.

У 2017 році Національне антикорупційне бюро України проходитиме перший зовнішній аудит за два роки роботи. Негативний висновок цього аудиту – одна з небагатьох підстав для відставки директора бюро. До комісії, яка має здійснювати аудит НАБУ, по одному представнику делегують Верховна Рада, уряд та президент України. Поки що лише Кабмін обрав аудитора НАБУ за своєю квотою – професора кафедри міжнародного права Інституту міжнародних відносин Київського Національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка Михайла Буроменського.

Верховна Рада двічі не змогла обрати свого представника в групі з аудиту антикорупційного бюро – голосів бракувало і для американського юриста Роберта Сторча, якого комітет пропонував ще з грудня 2016 року, і для Найджела Брауна – англійського слідчого, якого несподівано висунули фракції «Блок Петра Порошенка» і «Народний фронт».

Hosting

Police: Deadly London Tower Blaze Began in Refrigerator

A fire that engulfed a London tower block killing at least 79 people started in a Hotpoint fridge freezer and cladding on the building failed all safety tests, London police said on Friday.

Police Detective Superintendent Fiona McCormack said the Hotpoint model, FF175BP, was not subject to recall and that the manufacturer was doing further tests.

“We now have expert evidence that the fire was not started deliberately,” McCormack said.

Police said both the insulation and tiles used in cladding at the 24-story Grenfell Tower block failed all post-fire safety tests.

“Preliminary tests show the insulation samples collected from Grenfell tower combusted soon after the test started,” McCormack said.

Such were their concerns after the tests that the information was immediately shared with government to disseminate more widely.

“Given the deaths of so many people we are considering manslaughter as well as criminal offences and breaches of legislation and regulations,” McCormack said.

The blaze, Britain’s worst since World War Two, has heaped pressure on Prime Minister Theresa May, already fighting for her political survival after her party lost its parliamentary majority in a snap election on June 8.

When speaking about the 79 people dead, presumed dead or missing, McCormack said: “I fear that there are more.”

Hosting

Гужву відправили до київського ізолятора тимчасового тримання – Лукаш

Затриманого напередодні в Києві головного редактора інтернет-видання «Страна.ua» Ігоря Гужву відправили до київського ізолятора тимчасового тримання (ІТТ), заявляє колишній міністр юстиції України, адвокат затриманого Олена Лукаш.

«Ігоря Гужву щойно відправили до ІТТ на Косогорний (провулок – ред.)», – написала вона на своїй сторінці в Facebook.

22 червня пізно ввечері правоохоронці затримали Гужву за підозрою у вимаганні. Сам Гужва повідомив, що обшук у редакції видання він пов’язує із критичними публікаціями на адресу депутата Верховної Ради від фракції Радикальної партії Дмитра Линька.

23 червня у ГПУ заявили, що наразі готується повідомлення про підозру Ігорю Гужві та його посередникові, готується клопотання про обрання їм запобіжних заходів.

Голова Національної спілки журналістів Сергій Томіленко заявив, що вважає надзвичайною ситуацією обшук у редакції інтернет-видання «Страна.ua» і затримання головного редактора Ігоря Гужви і чекає, що «силовики мають якомога швидше надати переконливі докази на підтвердження серйозності висунутих звинувачень».

Hosting

Укргідрометцентр прогнозує спеку наступного тижня

Український гідрометцентр прогнозує спеку наступного тижня – за сьогоднішніми даними, максимальна температура сягатиме 30-35 градусів тепла. 

Як повідомляє гідрометцентр, завтра, 24 червня, у південній частині, східних, Сумській, Полтавській та Дніпропетровській областях будуть короткочасні дощі, грози, подекуди сильний дощ, град та шквали 15-20 метрів за секунду, а на решті території – місцями невеликий короткочасний дощ.

За даними синоптиків, температура вдень 21-26 градусів тепла, вночі 13-18 градусів, на півдні країни вдень 25-30 градусів, вночі – 16-21.

В Укргідрометцентрі повідомляють, що у Києві завтра місцями буде невеликий короткочасний дощ, вдень 22-24 градусів тепла.

Hosting

Угруповання «Джамаат-уль-Ахрар» взяло відповідальність за вибух у Пакистані

Угруповання «Джамаат-уль-Ахрар», що відкололося від пакистанських талібів, взяло на себе відповідальність за потужний вибух на південному заході Пакистану, внаслідок якого загинули щонайменше 12 людей, 24 – поранені.

Вибух автомобіля у Кветті, столиці провінції Балуджистан, що пролунав 23 червня, було чути у цілому місті, повідомили в поліції.

«Наразі невідомо, чи був цей вибух скоєний смертником. Але ми не можемо цього відкидати. Це можливо. Ми на початковій стадії розслідування», – сказав Радіо Свобода представник влади провінції Акбар Гаріпал.

П’ятеро із загиблих – співробітники поліції. У місцевій лікарні повідомили, що дехто із поранених перебуває в критичному стані.

Провінція Балуджистан, яка межує з Афганістаном і Іраном, є однією з найбільш неспокійних у Пакистані. Тут владі протистоять як ісламістські бойовики, так і повстанці-сепаратисти. З 2004 року тут загинули тисячі людей.

Hosting

Поліція: причиною пожежі в Лондоні став несправний холодильник

Поліція Великої Британії заявляє, що пожежа у лондонській багатоповерхівці Ґренфелл-тауер виникла через несправний холодильник в одній із квартир.

У поліції 23 червня також зазначили, що теплоізоляція і облицювання будівлі не пройшли випробування на пожежну безпеку.

Поліція має вирішити, чи висувати звинувачення в ненавмисному вбивстві у справі про пожежу.

За останніми даними, загинули чи вважаються зниклими внаслідок пожежі 79 людей.

Висотний будинок Ґренфелл-тауер загорівся 14 червня. На боротьбу із вогнем виїжджали близько 200 пожежників. Британський прем’єр-міністр Тереза Мей призначила публічне розслідування пожежі.

Hosting

May: ‘Very Fair’ Offer for EU Citizens Living in Britain After Brexit

British Prime Minister Theresa May says the offer she has made on the rights of European Union citizens living in Britain after Britain leaves the EU is “very fair” and “very serious.”

May has offered to allow an estimated 3 million EU citizens living in the United Kingdom to remain in Britain post-Brexit.

Speaking Friday in Brussels on the second day of an EU summit, May said the government “will set out more detailed proposals on Monday.”

EU leaders are not convinced her proposals are adequate, saying many questions remain.

“We won’t be seeing families split apart,” May said before the start of Friday’s meeting. She said she wanted similar reassurances for British citizens living in EU countries.

Be pragmatic

On Thursday, the president of the European Parliament said Europe needs to be pragmatic in dealing with Britain following the country’s decision to leave the bloc, but urged cooperation in future dealings.

“The UK will leave the European Union not Europe. This is important to pave the way also for good relations after the separation,” Antonio Tajani, the EU Parliament’s president said.

EU leaders opened a two-day summit Thursday in Brussels to address everything from Britain’s planned exit, terrorism, migration and other issues facing Europe.

European Union chief Donald Tusk said the remaining 27 EU nations are ready to choose new locations for the Europe-wide agencies currently headquartered in Britain.

Refugees

French President Emmanuel Macron vowed to work with Germany to relaunch the European project as member-states argued over how to manage refugees after Britain leaves the union.

“Europe is not, to my mind, just an idea. It’s a project, an ambition,” he said, noting that France is working “hand-in-hand” with Germany to implement the refugee resettlement plan.

Tajani, in his opening remarks, called it “vital” that Europe devise a solution to the current migration crisis affecting Europe. He said Europe needs to do more to stem the tide of migrants traveling to Europe from sub-Saharan Africa through Libya.

“So we’ve got to strengthen the stability of Libya and help this country as the prime minister asked yesterday, but also act in Sub-Saharan Africa,” he said.

Hosting

Q&A: Putin Critic Weighs in on ‘Putin Interviews’ Series

As the dust from Oliver Stone’s politically explosive (or not, depending upon which American you ask) “Putin Interviews” begins to settle, Russian viewers were just finishing the concluding episode Thursday.

In the United States, where the controversial series — four hourlong episodes — was made available to Showtime subscribers June 12-15, critics largely panned it as blatantly hagiographic.

“Natural Born Buddies: The Shared Ideology of Oliver Stone and Vladimir Putin,” wrote the left-leaning New Republic; “Oliver Stone stinks” was the blunt summation of conservative Daily Caller blogger Jim Treacher, who described it as one of the only times he saw eye-to-eye with Stephen Colbert, whose nationally televised grilling of the legendary filmmaker for being overly deferential to Putin became a story unto itself.

In Russia, however, where the documentary held consecutive prime-time slots June 19-22 on state-run Channel One public access television, the response has been more muted. Putin supporters learned little new information, while detractors predictably took to the blogosphere to castigate Stone — whose son Sean works for RT, they repeated several times — as an instrument of the Kremlin’s PR machine.

Putin critic

Karen Dawisha is not known for putting softball questions to Russia’s leadership. Her 2014 book, Putin’s Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia, was dropped by Cambridge University Press when the London publisher announced it couldn’t afford the legal risk of putting it into circulation. The book, her sixth major published work on Russian policy and leadership since 1979, traces a deeply intertwined network of Russian secret police, Mafiosos and powerful oligarchs to the twilight of Soviet empire.

Dawisha spoke with VOA’s Oleg Sulkin about how to gauge the impact of Stone’s work.

Editor’s note: Whether language translation was the only editorial distinction between respective versions of the documentaries aired in the United States and Russia has yet to be confirmed. The following transcript has been edited for brevity and concision.

Q: You watched the entire series?

A: I did watch all four, although the third one, when Stone said that he wanted to have a lengthy discussion about Ukraine, and Putin said, “Well, for this, I need to start from the beginning…” That’s it. I immediately fell asleep. You tell me, did he say anything new or interesting about Ukraine?

Q: Nothing surprising, which seems to characterize the whole project. There were no challenging questions put to the statesman, and I wonder if you think it’s appropriate for an American filmmaker and observer to be so toothless in the face of such an unusual opportunity.

A: Well, look, Oliver Stone has a reputation for always, no matter what the circumstances, finding the United States as the villain. So it makes for not very interesting viewing, unless you’re someone like [she names a well-known U.S. scholar sometimes seen as being supportive of Putin], and then you are very excited that Oliver Stone has basically hit the United States with some big revelation. I watched it because I think people should watch these things. [Stone] got four nights on American television, and that’s not so bad. But, boy, he didn’t produce anything that was very earth-shattering at all.

Q: Stone has described softball questions as a strategically efficient way to deal with people like Putin. To start with soft, complimentary questions that get the subject to open up before setting in with more incisive questions. But do you think it worked?

A: Well, I mean certainly, in foresight, that day when he went again and again to the subject of the hacking of the election, it did seem that Stone had this approach. But he also didn’t push him, so I came away thinking, “It’s just the same thing, there’s no major revelations. … What did we learn about hacking that I couldn’t learn from reading The Washington Post?”

Q: But some people commend Stone for these Putin interviews for securing some new minor details about one of the most influential and dangerous people in the world. For example, it was the first time Russia found out that he is a grandfather, which sheds some new light on the dictator’s inner world.

A: But grandkids by whom? Which daughter?

Q: We don’t know. We learn only that he doesn’t have enough time to play with the grandkids.

A: Exactly. We learned this, and the Russian press is very happy for this small revelation. But this shows you how little we know about Putin. That he didn’t give us any revelations about any other aspect of his life. I reckon that I did find it interesting [to see] his physical surroundings. The pictures of him in Sochi, the picture of him in the Kremlin.

Q: But as an expert researcher, aren’t even small new details useful for composite assessments? More specifically, do you think it will help create a more favorable impression of Putin among American viewers?

A: Well, I haven’t seen any information about how many people turned it on. … But clearly there will be more people in Russia who watch [because it’s on public access television] than watched in America. But it shows you that, on the whole, Putin was very happy with the propaganda aspect of this series. And look, Stone is a very good filmmaker, so these four interviews were visually very pleasant. I mean, there are good shots; no one can complain that he doesn’t know how to make a film. But as we’re getting ready for [Russia’s] next presidential election, don’t you think this will be very helpful to Putin? To have Oliver Stone legitimize his rule? I think that it’s not bad for Putin.

Q: You feel it would have been more appropriate to feature people who could argue with Putin? Like the opposition leaders who could counter Putin’s statements about Russian freedom, such as his claims about the freedom of Russia’s press, and so on?

​A: Well, yeah. But would Putin have agreed to such terms? [Currently detained Russian lawyer, activist and presidential opposition candidate Alexei] Navalny is infinitely more interesting on television than Putin. But would Putin agree to interview on those terms? I don’t think so.

Q: And we can only speculate about whether there was some kind of a confidential deal that would allow Putin’s camp to have a hand in the final edits. Only four of 25 hours of footage is seen. Otherwise, would Stone have even been granted this level of access?

A: Exactly. I mean, they made a big deal of the fact that there was no limitation on what questions Stone could ask. But that doesn’t mean at all that there were no limitations of any kind. So, why did Putin agree at all to this? Certainly not because he wanted to debate Navalny and win against Navalny. I don’t think that would have for a second been possible, not for a second. He would never agree.

Q: Which touches on a very important question: Why did Putin agree in the first place?

A: Yeah. I mean, Stone doesn’t get this at all.

Q: But why would Putin even agree? What’s your personal assessment?

A: My own assessment is that Putin has a big problem with his image in the West. He has a huge problem with multiple rounds of sanctions, and now [very likely] a third set of sanctions. He needs to do something to get his sanctions lifted, because they are really hurting his economy. And what Stone said … [about] how well the Russian population is doing under Putin, that’s completely wrong. And of course Putin was thrilled that Stone should come up with these numbers, because they don’t reflect at all what Russia’s actual figures are. … Russia is doing much worse than [Stone’s] figures would suggest. And we saw that in the recently aired, annual call-in program. … the Russian population was very blunt and very forward in calling out Putin on how poorly they were doing in terms of wages and salaries, and saying things that were put up on the board behind him. Like a question: “Why is it that you are on the throne for 16 years? That’s too long!” … Stone talked about the overall figures for Russia’s wealth — $29,000 a year average income. But that doesn’t account for the fact that most Russians are earning way below $29,000. They’re earning more like $12,000. Teachers, health workers, all of these people who are at the lower end of the scheme. They earn poverty wages.

​Q: Regardless of whether that misinformation is deliberate or incidental, it inevitably advances an apologetic view of the Kremlin. So, for Stone, was it all a vanity play? To show he’s on friendly terms with the most powerful people in the world? Some would argue Stone used that same obsequious approach with Fidel Castro, Evo Morales, Hugo Chavez.

A: The thing that I noticed, especially in the first interview, was that Putin was constantly being polite, not saying anything very negative about the United States. After all, his No. 1 goal is to get the sanctions lifted. He’s not going to give a very robust criticism of the United States under these circumstances. But what did Stone do? He basically offered to Putin the anti-American answer, [saying], “It was the intelligence services of the United States, they’ve made this all up.” Stone was offering up a kind of leftist argument to Putin, and Putin is no leftist. He doesn’t have an interest in this kind of response, you know? He has an interest in getting Trump to open up his channel of communications between the United States and Russia.

Q: On NATO, Putin spoke about the dangerous course of politics they’re pursuing. Do you think it gives an idea of his real concerns or is it just a way to argue with the United States?

A: I think it’s his real concern. Look, he stated once that the Soviet Union collapsed [because of] American military spending. Basically, that was his point of view. Well, why might Russia collapse now? American military spending. He stated several times, and it’s true, that the United States spends more on its military than all other countries combined. So the essence [of Putin’s argument] is that NATO’s new military systems positioned close to the Russian border and its commitment to Article Five, are dangerous steps. Having said that, the Russians have behaved in a very reckless manner. You know, their behavior in Georgia, their behavior in Ukraine was reckless. Although, I will say Russia has a situation in which in both Georgia and Ukraine are now territorial problems, making it so that neither country would be qualified to join NATO, because they have active territorial disputes. So NATO creeping toward the Russian border is a huge issue for Russia.

Q: These hearings about Russian meddling in U.S. elections: What’s the bottom line? Are Stone’s interviews just a propaganda trick? Is Stone just following the Kremlin’s discourse?

A: There is a completely different training of world events in Moscow as compared to Washington. When I watched the fourth part, I understood very clearly that Moscow has its point of view, and it’s pretty much in accord with Stone’s point of view. … There are people in the West that agree with Putin … [including] specialists on Russia, like former [U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union] Jack Matlock and [the aforementioned U.S. scholar]. They really think that America is in the wrong, and that it is imperative that the United States improve its relations with Russia, and that there is no way that the United States is right. I listened to a Jack Matlock lecture on the radio here in Cincinnati yesterday, and one of the things he said was that the intelligence community of the United States was wrong. And I really couldn’t believe it. That the 17 intelligence services were all wrong and made this up. You have to have a very extreme point of view to think that 17 intelligence services are in collusion to make this up. But there are people in the United States who have this point of view.

This report originated in VOA’s Russian Service.

Hosting

UN to Advertisers: Go Beyond the Female Stereotypes

Demeaning images in advertising of women doing domestic chores or scantily clad act as stubborn obstacles to gender equality, the head of U.N. Women said Thursday, urging the global ad industry to become a weapon for good.

Advertising has the power to create positive portrayals of women and eliminate stereotypes, Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, executive director of the United Nations’ agency on women, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Mlambo-Ngcuka spoke from France, where she is calling on advertising leaders who are attending the industry’s annual Cannes Lions Festival of Creativity to eliminate stereotypes and commit to gender equality.

“People are more likely to see adverts in their lives than read books,” she said. “It’s a waste if we are not using this opportunity for good.”

​Stereotypes everywhere

Stereotypes of women permeate the globe, she said, be it in nations such as Iceland with high gender equality or those with very little in the way of equal rights, like Yemen.

“Of the many things that we’ve tried to do to obtain gender equality, we are not getting the kind of traction and success that we are looking for, because of the underlying stereotypes and social norms in existence in society,” she said.

“Adverts create a role model that people look up to, even mimic and try to be like,” said the veteran South African politician.

“If they see men in powerful positions most of the time and do not see women and people who look like them … then they think this is not for them.”

Research illustrates issue

Research by the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media illustrates the issue, said Philip Thomas, chief executive of the annual advertising event in Cannes, who also participated in the interview with the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

One in 10 female characters in advertising is shown in sexually revealing clothing, six times the number of male characters, he said.

Of characters portrayed as intelligent, such as doctors or scientists, men are 62 percent more likely than women to play those roles, he said. Women are 48 percent more likely to be shown in the kitchen, he said.

Creative teams at advertising agencies are predominantly male, and just 11 percent of creative directors around the world are female, he said.

The industry can make an effort to mentor women, employ and promote more female creative teams and reward work that promotes positive images, he said.

Mlambo-Ngcuka said she welcomed efforts such as one in Berlin, where the city’s ruling coalition has agreed on a ban on degrading or sexist advertising.

An expert committee will examine and prevent discriminatory advertising on both privately and publicly owned advertising billboards and hoardings.

Opposition parties in Berlin say such a ban infringes on free speech.

“When it’s so much that is against us, I think we are allowed sometimes to make some extreme measures even if there’s a controversy,” she said. “Let’s have the discussion.”

Hosting

Minnesota to Still Engage With Cuba Despite Trump Setback

Minnesota’s government and businesses will continue to engage with Cuba in the areas they can, like agricultural trade, despite U.S. President Donald Trump’s partial rollback of the detente, Lieutenant Governor Tina Smith said on Thursday.

The first U.S. state representative to make an official visit to Communist-run Cuba since Trump’s announcement on Friday, Smith said authorities there were worried about the setback to bilateral relations.

Leading a bipartisan trade delegation from Minnesota, she said she was therefore glad to carry the message that there was still plenty of support for continuing to normalize relations.

“There is no denying the actions Trump took last Friday are a real setback,” Smith, a Democrat, said in an interview in the gardens of Havana’s iconic Hotel Nacional. “But the important thing to me is that there is bipartisan support at the federal level for normalizing and modernizing our relationship.”

U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat, in May led a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers, including Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona, to introduce legislation to lift the U.S. trade embargo on Cuba.

Minnesota is one of the largest U.S. farming states, and Smith’s delegation included its agriculture commissioner and the head of its corn growers association. The delegation hopes to improve ties with and promote exports to Cuba.

U.S. farm groups have been particularly critical of the decision by Trump, a Republican, to retreat from Democratic predecessor Barack Obama’s opening toward Cuba, saying it could derail huge growth in agricultural exports that totaled $221 million last year.

U.S. law exempts food from a decades-old embargo on U.S. trade with Cuba, although cumbersome rules on executing transactions have made deals difficult and costly.

While Trump’s new Cuba policy does not directly target agriculture, it damages improved relations, the farm groups say.

Trump ordered tighter restrictions on Americans traveling to Cuba and a clampdown on U.S. business dealings with the island’s military, which manages much of the economy.

The Minnesota delegation met this week with officials of the Cuban ministries of foreign affairs and agriculture, while also visiting a cooperative and local food markets.

But the tour did not include the usual trip to the Mariel port and special development zone, which Cuba hopes will attract foreign investment and become a major shipping hub in the Caribbean. It is controlled by a military-affiliated company.

“In Minnesota we don’t have a lot of cocoa or coffee or pineapples, but we do have a lot of corn and beans,” Smith said. “We need each others’ products.”

Cuba invited the Minnesota delegation to a trade show later in the year, Smith said, while Minnesota invited Cuban officials to visit.

“I am very hopeful all of those things will lead us to a place where we can move forward.”

Hosting

Chile’s New Low-cost Airline JetSmart Plans to Sell $1.50 Tickets

JetSmart, a low-cost airline set to launch this year in Chile, said on Thursday it will offer one-way tickets for less than $2, as the nation’s passenger air market becomes increasingly competitive.

“We will have 30,000 tickets for 1,000 pesos ($1.50) per one-way trip plus taxes, to fly within Chile … in 2017,” JetSmart, owned by Indigo Partners, an airline-focused U.S. investment fund Indigo Partners, said on its website.

Indigo Partners has already carved out a niche in ultra-low-cost airlines and owns Mexican low-cost carrier Volaris and part of Denver-based Frontier Airlines.

Indigo is known for unbundled, or a la carte, fares that carry cheap base prices but charge additional fees for extras, such as carry-on bags too big to fit under the seat and advance seat assignments.

In February, Indigo announced that JetSmart would operate three Airbus A320s in Chile in 2017, and another six in 2018.

While the company will focus on domestic routes, it will eye opportunities for regional expansion once established in Chile, Indigo managing partner Bill Franke said at the time.

Chile’s airline market is dominated by LATAM Airlines, Latin America’s largest carrier, with a smaller share taken by established low-cost carrier Sky.

LATAM, which has been facing increasing pressure from low-cost airlines throughout the region, is rolling out a partial low-cost model this year.

Low-cost carrier Viva Air launched in Peru in May, low-cost airline Flybondi is set to launch later this year in Argentina, and Norwegian Air is set to launch long-haul, low-cost routes from Europe to Buenos Aires early next year.

Hosting