8 Mar 2017

The Big Lie About Health Care

Jeff Sher

So Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell stood up yesterday, in their latest act of unbridled arrogance and complete disregard for the American people, and said they are going to replace Obamacare with a plan that will increase choice for health care “consumers” and at the same time increase affordability. (Trump has promised that he would provide  “insurance for everybody”.)
Of course they were lying.
When you’re doing something truly despicable that will inflict needless suffering on countless millions of people, make sure you lie about it – the bigger the lie the better – so you confuse enough under-informed people (your victims) not only about what you are doing but about your true intent.
This strategy (let’s call it the Trump strategy, although he’s not smart enough to have invented it) requires that you remain blind to the actual ramifications of your actions so that 1) you can live with yourself and 2) you can pretend the consequences won’t come back to bite you.
What they actually propose to do will have exactly the opposite result from what they claim: their  Obamacare replacement plan will greatly reduce the choices of health plans that actually provide health care, and the choices will be reduced precisely because all the plans that actually cover expenses in any meaningful way will become strikingly more expensive and unaffordable.
They also claimed their plan would increase competition. I guess they meant among the four or five large insurance companies who dominate the health insurance market across the entire nation, several of whom are trying to merge with each other to further reduce the competition (which mergers will no doubt soon be approved by the new Republican non-regulators).
I’m going to make a wild-assed guess and predict that within not too many years this plan will make health care drastically worse for upwards of 150 million people in the USA. How’s that for making America great again?
Hyperbole? Let’s do the math. 70 million people on Medicaid who will quickly feel cuts in their benefits from the proposed changes in the Medicaid funding formula. 20 million on the exchanges – details are still vague, but I assume the exchange plan enrollees somehow will be dumped into the non-exchange individual insurance market- will see their premiums go through the roof and will be forced to drop coverage or settle for catastrophic coverage only, which of course will not include any coverage for preventive care as was mandated in Obamacare. I advise young people to drop their coverage as soon as you can. With your $10 an hour jobs you won’t be able to afford it anyway. You’ll still be able to buy it later if you get really sick, and the proposed 30% premium penalty you have to pay to re-start lapsed coverage will surely be less than the money you save by not paying premiums and far less than the medical bills the insurance companies will have to pay on your behalf. You can use your savings to pay your penalty if you ever need it, which is unlikely for most of you.
Once those 20 million people are thrown off the exchanges and all the young people drop or reduce coverage, the people who are already ill with the handful of chronic diseases that account for most health care costs will be the only ones left on the plans that actually cover anything, and the premiums for them will rise even faster, forcing more people to drop out, pushing up rates still faster. It’s called the Death Spiral in the insurance industry. In fact this plan is going to completely blow up all the individual insurance markets and seriously damage the group/employer markets, especially the markets for small employers who have to buy fully-insured plans because they don’t have enough employees to self-insure and at least partially escape the clutches of the insurance companies. Ryan and all his advisers know this. It was all thoroughly discussed in the process of foisting Obamacare on the American people. They just pretend it’s not going to happen. Or at least they want you to believe it’s not going to happen.
The reduced revenue from the federal subsidies combined with losses on their plans with spiraling premiums will force insurers to raise prices for all their other clients to preserve the profit margins they became accustomed to under the corporate give-away that Obamacare really was (when the only sensible choice was Medicare for everyone). And that in turn will induce employers to cut benefits even further than they already have and shift even more costs to employees.
So how many more tens of millions of people is that? I don’t know for sure. I guess about everyone who’s not on Medicare. So that’s at least 150 million people. I was just being conservative (pardon the expression) in my estimate.
But don’t worry, the Republicans say. You’ll still be able to afford coverage because we’ll give you tax credits instead of subsidies for the already ridiculously overpriced plans. Hahahaha. Tax credits for people who don’t have the money to pay for the insurance in the first place and don’t pay any federal income taxes anyway cause they’re so poor (45% of the population). Hahahahaha. And they actually expect people to believe this gibberish. People know the ridiculous prices they pay for insurance already. And even a rich person, who let’s say is paying $12,000 a year now for an insurance plan (if he or she is lucky), will get a tax credit of up to $4,000 a year. But when that premium quickly jumps to $18,000, and then $24,000, even the rich won’t be so happy with their new Trump-arranged deal.
Of course they also propose to eliminate all the taxes on individuals and industry that helped pay for Obamacare, so at least rich people and a few corporations will get a break. Sound like something you’ve heard from Republicans before. Charge the lower and middle classes more money so you can throw more money at the corporations and the miniscule number of rich people who own almost all of their stock.
This is not a serious attempt to solve the problem. It’s an ideological mishmash of ideas designed (ineptly) to achieve ideological goals that have nothing to do with the actual business of health insurance, and that directly contradict the well-known experience of the insurance industry itself. In fact, it is not possible for Republicans to replace Obamacare with anything that works better, because any of the possible improvements directly contradict the Republican ideology.
Let’s call this Republican replacement plan Abominablecare. Has a familiar ring to it, doesn’t it?
I strongly suggest that all you insurance companies and large employers who don’t want to be torpedoed by Abominablecare immediately contact your favorite bought and sold Republican legislators and tell them to scrap this nonsense post haste.
Tell them it’s only going to get in the way of the bigger agenda, which is giving you more undeserved tax breaks and regulatory relief. A health care plan is a small price to pay, after all, for the freedom to fleece the American public on every other product and service they have to buy from you to survive. Give them some doc visits so you can jack up the rents you charge for housing, phone, TV and internet service, gasoline, heating oil, public transportation (where it still exists), and education. And since you’re already paying them off to allow you to ramp up the pollution of our air, water and food by removing all the regulations that protect us, maybe it will keep your victims quiet if they at least can go to a hospital for treatment when they fall ill at increasingly early ages. O yeah. They’ll die sooner too, by the tens of thousands. Maybe that’s how the Republicans actually plan to bring down the cost of health care.

Syria’s Civil War Is Almost Over … And Assad Has Won

Patrick Cockburn

Winners and losers are emerging in what may be the final phase of the Syrian civil war as anti-Isis forces prepare for an attack aimed at capturing Raqqa, the de facto Isis capital in Syria. Kurdish-led Syrian fighters say they have seized part of the road south of Raqqa, cutting Isis off from other its territory further east.
Isis is confronting an array of enemies approaching Raqqa, but these are divided, with competing agendas and ambitions. The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), whose main fighting force is the Syrian Kurdish Popular Mobilisation Units (YPG), backed by the devastating firepower of the US-led air coalition, are now getting close to Raqqa and are likely to receive additional US support. The US currently has 500 Special Operations troops in north-east Syria and may move in American-operated heavy artillery to reinforce the attack on Raqqa.
This is bad news for Turkey, whose military foray into northern Syria called Operation Euphrates Shield began last August, as it is being squeezed from all sides. In particular, an elaborate political and military chess game is being played around the town of Manbij, captured by the SDF last year, with the aim of excluding Turkey, which had declared it to be its next target. The Turkish priority in Syria is to contain and if possible reduce or eliminate the power of Syrian Kurds whom Ankara sees as supporting the Kurdish insurrection in Turkey.
Turkey will find it very difficult to attack Manbij, which the SDF captured from Isis after ferocious fighting last year, because the SDF said on Sunday that it is now under the protection of the US-led coalition. Earlier last week, the Manbij Military Council appeared to have outmanoeuvred the Turks by handing over villages west of Manbij – beginning to come under attack from the Free Syrian Army (FSA) militia backed by Turkey – to the Syrian Army which is advancing from the south with Russian air support.
Isis looks as if it is coming under more military pressure than it can withstand as it faces attacks on every side though its fighters continue to resist strongly. It finally lost al-Bab, a strategically placed town north east of Aleppo, to the Turks on 23 February, but only after it had killed some 60 Turkish soldiers along with 469 FSA dead and 1,700 wounded. The long defence of al-Bab by Isis turned what had been planned as a show of strength by Turkey in northern Syria into a demonstration of weakness. The Turkish-backed FSA was unable to advance without direct support from the Turkish military and the fall of the town was so long delayed that Turkey could play only a limited role in the final battle for nearby east Aleppo in December.
Turkey had hoped that President Trump might abandon President Obama’s close cooperation with the Syrian Kurds as America’s main ally on the ground in Syria. There is little sign of this happening so far and pictures of US military vehicles entering Manbij from the east underline American determination to fend off a Turkish-Kurdish clash which would delay the offensive against Raqqa. The US has shown no objection to Syrian Army and Russian “humanitarian convoys” driving into Manbij from the south.
There are other signs that the traditional mix of rivalry and cooperation that has characterised relations between the US and Russia in Syria is shifting towards greater cooperation. The Syrian Army, with support from Russia and Hezbollah, recaptured Palmyra from Isis last Thursday with help from American air strikes. Previously, US aircraft had generally not attacked Isis when it was fighting Syrian government forces. Seizing Palmyra for the second time three months ago was the only significant advance by Isis since 2015.
Turkey could strike at Raqqa from the north, hoping to slice through Syrian Kurdish territory, but this would be a very risky venture likely to be resisted by YPG and opposed by the US and Russia. Otherwise, Turkey and the two other big supporters of the Syrian armed opposition, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, are seeing their influence over events in Syria swiftly diminish. Iran and Hezbollah of Lebanon, who were the main foreign support of President Bashar al-Assad before 2015, do not have quite same leverage in Damascus since Russian military intervention in that year.
American and British ambitions to see Mr Assad removed from power have been effectively abandoned and the Syrian government shows every sign of wanting to retake all of Syria. If Isis loses Mosul and Raqqa in the next few months there will be little left of the Caliphate declared in June 2014 as a territorial entity.
The remaining big issue still undecided in both Syria and Iraq is the future relations between the central governments in Baghdad and Damascus and their Kurdish minorities. These have become much more important as allies of the US than they were before the rise of Isis. But they may not be able to hold on to their expanded territories in post-Isis times – and in opposition to reinvigorated Syrian and Iraqi governments.

Why Europe Fails to Learn

Serge Halimi

As Benjamin Franklin remarked, ‘Experience keeps a dear school, yet fools learn in no other.’ He was brilliant enough to invent the lightning conductor but could not predict the formation of the European Union, where no one learns by experience.
When consulted directly, Europe’s peoples reject free trade, yet the European parliament has just approved a new free trade agreement, with Canada. Its principal measures will be applied right away, whether or not it is ratified by national parliaments. Even hardened fools should have been enlightened by the case of Greece: since May 2010 it has been bled almost dry by the drastic remedies prescribed by the Eurogroup, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund, and is close to yet another default.
Dirty syringes are being used to inject its bruised flesh, while the German right decides whether to throw Greece out of the eurozone hospital. And there is more. Welfare budgets are under pressure in several EU member states, which are trying to outdo each other in finding imaginative ways to pay the unemployed less and stop giving medical treatment to foreigners. Yet everyone seems to agree that defence spending should be increased in response to the ‘Russian threat’, though Russia’s defence budget is less than a tenth of the US’s.
Has the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, finally realised that these priorities are indefensible? Drawing inspiration from the wisdom of his friend, the French president François Hollande, he has announced that he will not be seeking a second term. On taking office three years ago, he warned that his presidency would be a ‘last chance’. Yet he is now spending ‘several hours a day planning the withdrawal of a member state’. We can understand why he said last month: ‘There’s no future in this job.’
Juncker, as candidate for the European right, was known chiefly for his defence of Luxembourg’s fiscal paradise before he became president of the Commission in 2014, thanks to the support of a majority of socialist MEPs. ‘I don’t know what makes us different,’ his Social Democrat rival Martin Schulz remarked; Juncker admitted that ‘Mr Schulz is largely in agreement with my ideas.’ The same ideological closeness explains the approval, on 15 February, of the free trade agreement with Canada (CETA): most social democrat MEPs voted with the liberals. And when it came to Greece, one of the biggest mistakes in 60 years of European policy, Germany’s refusal to discuss the amount of Greek debt though it was unsustainable, was backed by France’s Socialist government, and seconded with near-fanatical arrogance by the president of the Eurogroup, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, a Dutch Socialist.
Before elections, there is often talk of reorienting the EU. That sounds a laudable aim, but we should learn from experience… It allows us to identify who we can count on, and so avoid a fresh disappointment in an area on which nearly everything else depends.

Sri Lanka asks UN to delay human rights inquiry

W.A. Sunil

Sri Lankan foreign minister Mangala Samaraweera plans to present a resolution to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) requesting two years to prepare a “mechanism” to investigate war crimes and human rights violations during the military offensives against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
Samaraweera called on the US, the UK and Montenegro to support a joint motion to a UNHRC meeting at the end of this month. The Asian Mirror reported that the UK has already agreed to back the resolution.
This is another attempt by Colombo to suppress any investigation into serious allegations of abuses involving Sri Lankan security forces during the country’s 26-year communal war. According to UN estimates, more than 40,000 civilians were killed by the military during the final months of the conflict in 2009.
In October 2015, the US and Sri Lankan governments presented a resolution to the UNHRC calling for a “Sri Lankan judicial mechanism, including the Special Counsel’s Office, of Commonwealth and foreign judges” and other officials.
The US-initiated motion reflected Washington’s public support for the newly-elected president Maithripala Sirisena and a shift away from a resolution it presented in March 2014. That motion, which called for an international investigation into war crimes, was directed against former president Mahinda Rajapakse and aimed at pressuring his government to politically distance itself from Beijing.
After Sirisena was elected president in 2015, following a US-orchestrated regime-change operation, he and the new prime minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, shifted foreign policy in line with the Obama administration’s “pivot to Asia” against China.
The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government, which is facing an economic and political crisis, wants to delay even establishing any “judicial mechanism” to investigate the war crime allegations.
Addressing a UNHRC session on February 28, Samaraweera cynically declared that the government’s “resolve” to “bring justice to the victims of human rights violation” remained firm. Colombo, he added, was proceeding to “set our country on a transformative trajectory in terms of human rights, good governance, rule of law, justice, reconciliation and economic development.”
Samaraweera said the government, however, confronted “the forces of extremism and regression on both sides of the divide [which] are creating road blocks for narrow, short-term political gain.”
While Samaraweera did not name the “forces of extremism and regression,” former president Rajapakse, backed by various Sinhala chauvinist formations, is accusing the government of “betraying war heroes [the soldiers who fought in the war],” “giving federalism to separatists” and encouraging a “revival of LTTE separatists.”
Rajapakse, who hopes to return to power, is attempting to build a right-wing chauvinist movement by exploiting growing popular opposition to the government’s attack on living conditions and diverting it along communalist lines.
The government’s IMF-dictated austerity policies have sparked intensifying unrest among workers, students and the poor throughout Sri Lanka. In response, government politicians, led by Sirisena and Wickremesinghe, are also stepping up their communalist propaganda. They have assured the military that Colombo opposes any war crimes inquiry and is committed to defending its “war heroes.”
Sirisena told an executive committee meeting of his Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) last week he had the “backbone” to reject any foreign judicial investigation. “Two weeks ago the UN Human Rights High Commissioner in his report on Sri Lanka called for a probe by foreign judges. Within 24 hours, I rejected it saying I am not ready to bring foreign judges here,” he said.
Sirisena also told a meeting in Jaffna he would block any charges against the military. “I have clearly said that I am not prepared to serve charge sheets on our soldiers or to have foreign judges to try our security forces,” he said. “It is my duty to protect soldiers.”
Last Friday, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe told a Colombo law conference that the UNHRC demand was “not a practical proposal to set up a hybrid court. This demand came at a time when there was no international confidence in the local judiciary.”
Samaraweera’s posturing at the UNHRC about the government’s “resolve” to address disastrous conditions facing Tamils in the north and east is bogus. The military occupation in those areas continues, hundreds of political prisoners remain in jails, no action has been taken over 65,000 reported disappearances and only a small proportion of the land seized by military during the war has been returned to its owners.
At the UNHRC, Samaraweera presented proposals that the government claimed would promote “reconciliation and accountability.” They included legislation for a convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance; formulation of a policy and legal framework for the government’s proposed Counter Terrorism Act; establishment of a Permanent Office on Missing Persons; and the drafting of a new constitution.
In reality, the new counter-terrorism act will suppress basic democratic rights. Sirisena and Wickremesinghe have also assured their supporters that any new constitution will maintain the current communal discrimination, giving priority to Buddhism and the Sinhala language.
Last Friday, the UN Human Rights High Commissioner report, while voicing “satisfaction” for some improvements, criticised Sri Lanka’s “slow” progress in addressing war crimes. The UN’s criticisms are an attempt to pacify growing discontent over Colombo’s ongoing suppression of any inquiry into war crimes and the increasingly desperate plight of war victims.
Despite the continuing suppression of democratic rights, the major imperialist powers are still promoting the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe administration. US deputy assistant secretary of state for international organizations affairs Erin M. Barclay told the UNHRC meeting: “When the council works as it should, its successes are victories for human rights. For example, HRC action catalysed progress for reform and provided technical assistance to improve accountability for past violations in Sri Lanka.”
Like Obama’s White House, the new Trump administration has no interest in human rights in Sri Lanka or any other country. Trump is further ramping up the geo-strategic agenda already established by Washington in South Asia as part of its preparations for war against China.
The Tamil capitalist elite, which continues to support the pro-US Colombo government, has expressed its support for the appeal to the UNHRC. Tamil National Alliance (TNA) parliamentarian M.A. Sumanthiran told a February 27 press conference his organisation had told the UNHRC and its member countries that Sri Lanka “has to be given further time.”
The government’s cynical manoeuvring over war crimes and human rights violations, is a clear warning that it is preparing to unleash more brutal attacks against the democratic rights of the working class and poor—Tamil, Sinhala and Muslims alike—in an attempt to suppress opposition to its social austerity measures.

Waiting times worsen in Australian public hospitals

Margaret Rees

The Australian Medical Association (AMA) 2017 Public Hospital report card, issued last month, reveals dangerously lengthening waiting and treatment times in public hospital emergency departments, as well as for supposed “elective surgery,” which often involves painful and debilitating illnesses and injuries.
The report by the doctors’ organisation points to a worsening of waiting times over the past decade, as a result of the last Labor government’s cuts and restructuring, which have deepened since 2013 under the current Liberal-National Coalition government.
Based on Australian Institute of Health and Welfare statistics, the AMA report shows that during 2016, only 67 percent of emergency department patients classified as Category 3 or urgent were seen within the recommended 30 minutes, a decline since the previous year. Only 73 percent of all emergency department visits were completed in four hours or less, a percentage that has not improved over the past three years, and is well below the official target of 90 percent.
Waiting times for “elective surgery” have increased during the past 10 years, with the national median waiting time (the time within which 50 percent of all patients were admitted) increasing to 37 days. This is the longest waiting time reported since 2001–02, when the figure was 27 days.
Many of these patients are suffering potentially life-threatening conditions, including those who require coronary artery bypass operations, or are waiting in agony for procedures such as hernia operations, and knee or hip replacements.
Primary responsibility for this decline can be sheeted home to funding cuts initiated by the previous Labor government, from 2007 to 2013. The report notes that “the Commonwealth Government’s total health expenditure continues to reduce as a percentage of the total Commonwealth Budget. In the 2014-15 Commonwealth Budget, health was 16.13 percent of the total, down from 18.09 percent in 2006-07. It reduced to 15.97 percent in the 2015-16 Budget, and reduced further to 15.85 percent of the total Commonwealth Budget in 2016-17.”
AMA president Dr Michael Gannon said Australia’s public hospitals in every state and territory were in a constant “state of emergency.” He commented: “Our overstretched and over-stressed public hospitals are suffering because of inadequate and uncertain Commonwealth funding, which is choking public hospitals and their capacity to provide essential services.”
Under its 2011 National Health Reform Agreement, the Gillard Labor government instituted a “health care reform” agenda that removed block funding for hospitals and imposed “casemix” funding, based on each activity performed and according to nationally-set “efficiency” prices. This system is designed to continually drive down the funding allocated for each medical procedure.
In its 2014-15 budget, the Coalition government initially abandoned these arrangements to base funding instead on a Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustment and population growth. The difference in the two formulae amounted to a $57 billion funding cut over a decade.
Then, in April 2016, the Coalition government and the states and territories, which have frontline responsibility for public hospitals, agreed at a Council of Australian Governments (COAG) meeting to revert to the casemix system, but at lower rates of payment.
The AMA report notes: “At least until June 2020, Commonwealth funding will continue on an activity based funding approach, although at a lower rate than would have operated under the National Health Reform Agreement, and with a cap on growth.”
Announced in the lead-up to last July’s federal election, this cost-cutting was camouflaged by claims of a $2.9 billion boost to funding. The AMA states: “The additional Commonwealth funding announced at COAG in April 2016 of $2.9 billion over three years is welcome, but inadequate.
“Data published by the independent Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) shows that funding under the original National Health Reform Agreement would have delivered $7.9 billion in additional public hospital funding to June 2020 compared to funding by CPI indexation and population growth (as announced in the 2014-15 Budget).”
In other words, the “restoration” of $2.9 billion locked in $54 billion in cuts from a total that was insufficient in the first place. In line with demands from the corporate elite, the Labor Party dropped its previous promises to restore these cuts during the campaign for last July’s election. At the same time, there was bipartisan agreement on a massive increase in military spending, pouring an extra $195 billion into the acquisition of new war ships, planes and weapons systems over the next decade.
The years of cost-cutting under successive governments has adversely impacted on patient care, precisely when there is a growing demand for hospital services, driven by an increasing and ageing population, higher rates of chronic and complex disease and greater public awareness of health problems.
There is an especially high demand for the treatment of young people in emergency departments. For example, in Victoria over the past five years, children aged four or under accounted for the greatest number of emergency department presentations, followed by 20–24 year-olds.
The ongoing government freeze on Medicare rebates paid to general practitioners is forcing increasing numbers of the latter to eliminate bulk-billing, effectively ending the ability of patients to receive medical advice and treatment without paying upfront fees. This, plus sweeping cuts to pathology and diagnostic test rebates, is forcing more patients to seek emergency treatment in public hospitals.
The AMA report also details the “hidden waiting lists.” Elective surgery waiting list data hide the actual times that patients are waiting to be treated in the public hospital system. The time from when patients are referred by their general practitioner to when they finally see a specialist for assessment is not counted.
It is only after patients have seen a specialist that they are added to the official waiting lists. Some people wait longer for assessment by a specialist than they do for surgery.
As well as meeting the demands of the financial elite for ever-deeper social spending cuts, the hospital and Medicare cutbacks are intended to coerce more people into paying for their own care, via private health insurance, driving up the profits of private hospital and health care companies.
This health crisis facing millions of ordinary working people will intensify as the further cuts are implemented. Facing rising fees and longer waiting times, working class, poor and vulnerable patients will inevitably delay or avoid treatment and testing, preventing timely diagnoses and giving rise to more serious diseases, complications and, ultimately, unnecessary deaths.

PSA purchases Opel-Vauxhall from General Motors

Marianne Arens 

The takeover of Opel by PSA (Peugeot-Citroen) has been finalised. An announcement was made Monday by the chiefs of General Motors and PSA at a joint press conference in Paris. The merger could cost many thousands of autoworkers their jobs.
GM chief Mary Barra boasted of a “win-win situation for all involved” and Opel head Karl-Thomas Neumann referred to it as “a genuinely historic day.” Meanwhile, the troubling question confronting the 200,000 employees of Peugeot, Citroen, Opel and Vauxhall, as well as thousands more at their suppliers, is what will the takeover mean for their jobs and working conditions?
This question is more than justified. One only needs to look at what is happening in the US. Last Friday was the last day of work for 1,300 GM workers at the company’s Detroit-Hamtramck plant. Then on Monday, as Barra was boasting to investors that the spin-off of Opel would free up $2 billion for stock buybacks to further enrich its top shareholders, GM announced that 1,100 workers would be out of a job in mid-May when the third shift is phased out at its Lansing-Delta Township plant.
For these workers it is neither a “win-win situation” nor an “historic day.”
Workers at Opel's Rüsselsheim plant near Frankfurt, Germany
The Opel takeover is part of a major restructuring of the European auto market. The automakers are readying themselves for the trade war announced by US President Donald Trump with mergers and takeovers to eliminate “overcapacity” and tens of thousands of” jobs.
“It is difficult to see how PSA’s takeover of Opel,” the New York Times wrote Tuesday, “could succeed without major job cuts and, probably, shutting some factories. Opel has not been profitable since the 1990s, and both companies have more factories than they need.”
The newspaper added, “At a time when European unity is under threat, the sale of Opel to PSA could strain relations among Britain, France and Germany as they try to ensure that any pain is imposed on someone else’s backyard.”
In Paris, PSA chief Carlos Tavares said all that counted was the new company’s “performance,” meaning shareholder returns. In a thinly veiled threat, he said workers had the power “in their own hands” to determine whether the Opel and Vauxhall plants operated profitably within the next two years.
According to this, by the end of 2018, when the current jobs guarantee expires, the Opel and Vauxhall plants had to produce profitably. Losing money for a decade, according to Tavares, was, of course, a “problem” that had to be resolved. PSA plans to save €1.7 billion annually in purchasing, development and production. This means a major increase in speed-up and unpaid forced overtime, and in the longer-term an all-out jobs massacre.
To achieve this Tavares needs the unions to impose management’s dictates on workers. For years, the unions have proven to be reliable partners in suppressing the resistance of the working class defending the interests of capital.
PSA has destroyed 22,000 jobs in France over recent years with the assistance of the CGT and CFDT unions. In 2023, PSA closed its Aulnay-sous-Bois plant, eliminating the jobs of 3,000 workers, most of whom have still not found jobs in the economically hard-hit suburb of Paris.
In the United States, the United Auto Workers (UAW)—which has a 9.4 percent ownership stake in GM and a seat on its corporate board of directors—has collaborated in the destruction of hundreds of thousands of jobs since the 1980s and is now cheering on the ultra-right America First nationalism of the Trump administration.
At Opel and Vauxhall, workers have been repeatedly betrayed by the nationalist unions, which pit workers in different countries and even within different regions of the same country against each other in a fratricidal struggle for jobs. The Saab plant in Sweden and Opel plants in Antwerp, Belgium, Bochum, Germany and St. Petersburg, Russia were closed with the collaboration of IG Metall and other unions. From a total workforce of 70,000 ten years ago, only half of these jobs remain.
Tavares explicitly praised “employee representatives” and said the relationship with them was a “competitive advantage.” The chair of the Opel central works council, Wolfgang Schäfer-Klug, authored a joint statement with IG Metall union leader Jörg Hofmann, which applauded the “trusted cooperation” with the new management. “We were able to ensure that the existing comprehensive corporate co-determination remains fully intact after the sale,” the joint statement declared.
Schäfer-Klug told the press the restructuring of the German and European industry could be mastered “better than with the old company.” His predecessor, former central works council chair Klaus Franz, nicknamed “Mr. Opel,” said there was “no alternative” to the takeover by PSA.
At an employees’ meeting at the Rüsselsheim plant on Monday, the IG Metall-led works council demonstrated its loyalty to the new management, presenting the takeover as a fait accompli and leaving workers in the dark about the corporate offensive which is coming.
Central works council chair Schäfer-Klug shouted down any worker who dared to question the takeover, demanding they keep quiet. Whoever expressed opposition or even frustration during these conditions of uncertainty, Schäfer-Klug proclaimed, was “damaging Opel.” An IG Metall bureaucrat from the works council then denounced former Bochum Opel workers, who were moved to the Rüsselsheim after the closure of their plant, as “raiders” who wanted to profit from Opel.
During the first part of the meeting on Friday, March 3, the only speaker invited by Schäfer-Klug was Opel chairman of the board Neumann. He spent an hour praising the newly-founded “European auto champion with German-French roots,” before disappearing to Paris. The meeting was then halted without further discussion.
Workers then received a written invitation to the “continuation of the interrupted employees’ meeting” on Monday. The two largest rooms of the old factory were set up with video projectors on which the speeches, mainly from Schäfer-Klug and other IG Metall grandees, were broadcast. Everything was decided in advance.
“Zero information” had been presented by the works council, complained Opel workers as they left the employees’ meeting.
An older worker with 22 years on the assembly line told the World Socialist Web Site on his way home, “The works council is playing its cards close to its chest. No idea what we will face next. Obviously we should expect nothing good.”
Gerd, a middle-aged worker who is familiar with the WSWS Autoworker Newsletter, agreed. “We are getting no information, but we know that Peugeot also closed an entire plant in France three or four years ago.”
“Perhaps we have another two years here,” a female worker added. “It is true what you write. They want to cut thousands of jobs. They already closed Opel in Bochum and Antwerp.” Asked what she thought of IG Metall and the works council, she said, “They are all hiding under the same cover. Of course, they are telling us nothing about what is going on.”
“All lies, what they are telling us,” another worker intervened. He said he was only 51 years old but “I’m just hoping for a good pay-off.”
An older worker said he had been in the plant for 44 years and currently worked in the press plant. He could still recall how at one time 64,000 were employed in the plant. “Today we are just 15,000 workers, and many of us contract workers.” He continued, “At that time all auto parts were produced and fitted here in the plant. Today, the work is shifted here and there, there are hundreds of contract firms and the poor guys earn much less than us. All of that ought to be done away with.”
But the response of the works council and IG Metall had been “yes and amen” to everything.
From works council sources, this author learned that offers of pay-offs could be expected this year and not only in 2018. According to the source, major job cuts were unavoidable if PSA wants to save €1.7 billion per year. The Rüsselsheim development centre would also certainly be affected because PSA already has its own development centre.
The television programme WISO broadcast a segment Monday evening about the Opel takeover. A former Opel Bochum worker commented on the situation in front of the massive building site on which the once huge Bochum plant is being torn down. Mike Szczeblewski worked there until its closure in December 2014.
He was disgusted with IG Metall. Commenting on the supposed job guarantee until 2018, Szczeblewski said, “So from this summer they will begin making their inventory. Then each location will be played off against another—all in the interest of the company.”

Protests shake Egypt after cut to bread subsidies

Niles Niemuth

Hundreds of Egyptians in a number of cities, including Alexandria, Minya, Desouk and the working class Imbaba district of Cairo turned out on Tuesday to protest severe cuts to bread subsidies.
Videos posted on social media show hundreds of demonstrators in Alexandria chanting, “We want to eat! We want bread!” Protesters temporarily blocked railways in Alexandria and between Cairo and Minya as part of the demonstrations which were labeled on social media as the Intifada of Supplies.
Minister of Supplies Ali Mosehly announced on Monday that the number of subsidized loaves of bread each ration card holder is allowed to buy per day would be slashed by two-fifths, from five to three. Mosehly, who took over the post following a cabinet shakeup last month after a sever sugar shortage, had complained that, at $28 million a month, the bread subsidy program was too costly.
Following Monday’s announcement, bakeries began refusing paper subsidy cards, instead insisting that they would only provide bread to those with plastic SMART cards which are difficult for the poor to obtain. Additionally, the number of subsidized loaves available at each location was slashed from 1,500 to just 500 a day.
“Most of the families in poor areas have paper cards. We have been trying for years to get the electronic card, but you have to bribe the employees to follow up,” protester Montaser Awad told Middle East Eye.
Saed, an employee at the Monera al Gharbya government supplies office, explained to Middle East Eye that distributors had been ordered by the government to stop selling bread to those with paper cards: “These types of cards are called the golden cards, which include the paper cards and the poor who don’t have any cards.
“The reason why the government is doing this is because they saw that the amount of bread consumed by these golden cards are huge. They decided to cut it.”
Saed also expressed his sympathies for those protesting, “There were about a hundred, men and women. I cannot blame them. But we are just servants at the government. We face the same problems at our houses.”
Egypt’s bread subsidy program feeds tens of millions of the country’s poor and working class. The amount of wheat required to maintain the program has made Egypt the world’s largest importer of wheat products.
The protests came just five days after former dictator Hosni Mubarak was acquitted of any responsibility for the murder of the hundreds of protesters that his security forces gunned down in the street as he fruitlessly sought to hold on to power during the 2011 revolution. The ruling by the country’s top appeals court last week cleared Mubarak for release from detention at the Maadi Military Hospital where he has been held for the last six years.
Mubarak had been sentenced to life in prison for the killings in 2012, but an appeals court overturned the ruling and ordered a retrial where Mubarak was subsequently acquitted. That ruling handed down in 2014 was upheld on Tuesday.
Three-year prison terms for Mubarak and his two sons Alaa and Gamal over corruption charges were upheld in January of 2016. With time served, Alaa and Gamal walked out of prison in 2015. With the upholding of Mubarak’s acquittal, no one from the brutal military regime remains behind bars.
Egyptian society is a ticking time bomb six years after the revolution which brought down the Mubarak regime and four years after the military coup which ousted the country’s first democratically elected president, Muhamed Morsi, and brought to power the current dictator, Adbel Fattah el Sisi.
While protests have been brutally suppressed by the military, and 60,000 of those who rose up in 2011 remain behind bars, the Sisi dictatorship has proven incapable of extinguishing the basic social demands of the revolution: “Bread, freedom and social justice.”
Social pressures are also being exacerbated as Egypt suffers its deepest economic crisis in more than a decade; inflation in January reached nearly 30 percent, five percentage points higher than at the end of 2016.
Prices for essential food items, medicine, transit and housing surged after the Egyptian pound lost half its value after being floated by the government in November. The pressure on working class and poor Egyptians has been further exacerbated by cuts to fuel subsidies and the implementation of a new value added tax.
The Egyptian government has begun enforcing this latest raft of economic shock therapy in order to guarantee the release of $12 billion in loans from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), part of an agreement signed in November.
Tuesday’s protests recalled the much larger bread riots which broke out in January 1977 after President Anwar Sadat eliminated subsidies on flour, rice and cooking oil as a condition of receiving loans from the World Bank and IMF, causing food prices to increase by 50 percent. The army stepped in to quell the protests as hundreds of thousands Egyptian workers flooded the streets resulting in 80 deaths, 800 injuries and thousands of people in prison.

As US deploys anti-missile system, China warns of nuclear arms race

Peter Symonds

The US has begun the installation of its Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) anti-ballistic missile system in South Korea, provoking an angry reaction from China, which warned that it could trigger a nuclear arms race in the region. The provocative move will heighten the already tense situation on the Korean Peninsula as the US and South Korea engage in huge annual war games.
Two trucks, each mounted with a THAAD launch pad, were landed aboard a C-17 cargo plane at the US military’s Osan Air Base, south of Seoul, on Monday night. According to South Korean military officials, more equipment and personnel will arrive in the coming weeks. The THAAD battery installation is likely to be completed as early as May or June.
US officials exploited North Korea’s test launch of four ballistic missiles on Monday morning as the pretext for commencing the THAAD installation. However, the final go-ahead for the THAAD deployment, which was agreed by South Korea last July, occurred last week when the South Korean government acquired the planned site in a land swap deal with the conglomerate Lotte.
Washington also insists that the THAAD placement is purely defensive and needed to counter North Korea’s nuclear arsenal. In reality, the THAAD system is offensive in character. It is an important component of an expanding US anti-ballistic missile system in Asia that is primarily aimed at preparing for nuclear war against China, not North Korea.
US imperialism, which has an estimated 4,000 nuclear warheads, has never ruled out a first nuclear strike and is spending $1 trillion to upgrade its nuclear weapons and delivery systems. Its anti-ballistic missile systems are designed to neutralise the ability of any enemy to retaliate in the event of a US nuclear attack. The Federation of American Scientists estimated that China had about 260 nuclear warheads as of 2015.
The THAAD system is designed to intercept incoming ballistic missiles at high altitude. It consists of a powerful X-band radar system to track missiles at long range, linked to truck-mounted interceptors designed to destroy a hostile missile in flight. In the event of war with China, the THAAD system would not only protect key US military bases in South Korea and Japan. Its X-band radar could detect and track missile launches deep inside the Chinese mainland.
Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang yesterday reiterated Beijing’s opposition to the THAAD deployment. Geng warned that China would “take necessary measures to defend our security interests and the consequences will be shouldered by the United States and South Korea.”
Russia also condemned the THAAD installation. Victor Ozerov, who chairs Russia’s Federal Defense and Security Committee, branded the deployment as “another provocation against Russia” aimed, if not at encircling Russia, “then at least to besiege it from the west and the east.”
The Chinese government has already taken retaliatory moves against South Korea, closing more than 20 stores owned by Lotte in China on the pretext of safety violations, and has advised travel agents not to sell South Korean packages to Chinese tourists. The state-owned media has suggested a wider boycott of South Korean goods and even the severing of diplomatic relations with Seoul.
A commentary in the official Xinhua news agency warned that the THAAD deployment “will bring an arms race in the region.” Hinting that China would enlarge its nuclear arsenal to counter the US anti-ballistic missile systems, it declared: “More missile shields on one side inevitably bring more nuclear missiles of the opposing side that can break through the missile shield.”
The suggestion that China could expand its nuclear arsenal only underscores the reactionary character of the Chinese regime’s response to the escalating economic and military threats by the Trump administration. The Chinese Communist Party represents the interests of an ultra-rich oligarchy, not Chinese workers and the poor. Its military build-up and whipping up of Chinese nationalism heightens the danger of war and divides the working class.
A nuclear arms race between China and the United States would be profoundly destabilising in Asia and the world. An expansion of the Chinese nuclear arsenal could prompt South Korea and Japan to develop their own nuclear weapons, and encourage India to enlarge its nuclear arsenal, exacerbating tensions throughout South Asia, particularly with Pakistan.
The Trump administration has targeted China, warning of trade war measures, threatening military action against Chinese-controlled islets in the South China Sea and suggesting it could tear up the “One China” policy that forms the bedrock of US-China relations.
Trump has repeatedly accused China of not imposing crippling sanctions on its ally North Korea to force it to abandon its nuclear weapons and missiles. The White House is currently engaged in a review of US strategy toward North Korea, details of which have been leaked to the media, including proposals for pre-emptive military strikes on North Korea and regime-change operations.
North Korea provides a convenient pretext for the US military build-up in North East Asia against China. The New York Times reported that one option under consideration is the return of tactical nuclear weapons to South Korea—adjacent not only to North Korea, but also China.
Trump has already outlined a huge expansion of the US military and has tweeted that the US has “to greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capacity.” Moreover, the US strategy is shifting from the use of nuclear weapons as a last resort to the active consideration of a limited nuclear war.
North Korea is rapidly emerging as a dangerous global flashpoint. A small incident, either accidental or calculated, has the potential to trigger a catastrophic conflict on the Korean Peninsula that would draw in nuclear-armed powers such as China and Russia.
The only social force capable of halting the drive to world war is the international working class, through building a unified anti-war movement based on socialist principles to put an end to capitalism and its outmoded nation-state system, which is the source of war.

WikiLeaks reveals vast CIA spying, cyberwar operation

Bill Van Auken

The bitter internecine struggle within the US state apparatus and ruling political establishment, featuring unsubstantiated Democratic claims of Russian hacking in support of Trump, on the one hand, and Trump’s own charge that his campaign was bugged by Obama, on the other, was overshadowed Tuesday by a massive release of CIA documents by WikiLeaks.
The 8,761 documents contained in what WikiLeaks has described as “the largest intelligence publication in history” have begun to lay bare a vast system of surveillance, hacking and cyberwarfare directed against the people of the United States and the entire planet.
The anti-secrecy organization called the first document trove “Year Zero” and said that further CIA data dumps are still to come under a larger project dubbed “Vault 7.”
The files were taken from the CIA’s Center for Cyber Intelligence, a huge and little-known command that includes some 5,000 hackers, both CIA agents and private contractors. Much as in the case of Edward Snowden’s leaking of secret documents exposing the global spying operation of the National Security Agency (NSA) in 2013, the CIA documents have apparently come from a former agency hacker or contractor concerned about the scope and purpose of the agency’s cyberwar operations.
The programs described in the documents indicate that the CIA, according to WikiLeaks, has developed “more than a thousand hacking systems, trojans, viruses and other ‘weaponized’ malware” allowing it to seize control of devices, including Apple iPhones, Google’s Android operating system (used by 85 percent of smart phones) and devices running Microsoft Windows. By hacking these devices, the CIA is also able to intercept information before it is encrypted on social media platforms such as WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman.
The agency has apparently stockpiled so-called weaponized “zero-day” threats that can be used to exploit unidentified vulnerabilities in a wide range of devices before their manufacturer is able to detect the flaw and correct it. Under the Obama administration, the White House had supposedly established a “Vulnerabilities Equities Process,” under which the intelligence agencies would inform manufacturers of most software vulnerabilities while keeping some to itself for exploitation. In part, this was designed to prevent US companies from losing market share overseas. The vast character of the CIA arsenal establishes that this program was a sham from the outset.
One of the programs developed by the CIA, codenamed “Weeping Angel,” turns Samsung smart televisions into the kind of technology envisioned by George Orwell in 1984, in which “thought police” monitored “telescreens” that served as both televisions, broadcasting the speeches of “Big Brother,” and security cameras, monitoring every word and action of the viewer. This surveillance technique places targeted TVs in a “fake off” mode, transmitting conversations in a room over the Internet to a covert CIA server.
WikiLeaks reported that a large amount of information had been redacted from the leaked documents, including computer codes for actual cyberweapons as well as the identities of “tens of thousands of CIA targets and attack machines throughout Latin America, Europe and the United States.”
That “targets” exist in the US indicates that the agency is engaged in wholesale domestic spying in violation of its charter.
The documents also establish that the CIA has developed these programs in collaboration with MI5, the British intelligence agency, and that it operates a covert cyberwarfare center out of the US Consulate in Frankfurt, Germany.
One chilling revelation provided by the documents, according to WikiLeaks, is that, “As of October 2014 the CIA was also looking at infecting the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks.” WikiLeaks notes that “The purpose of such control is not specified, but it would permit the CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations.”
While WikiLeaks does not specifically mention it, this was the scenario suggested by many in the 2013 fatal single-car accident in Los Angeles that claimed the life of journalist Michael Hastings. At the time of his death, Hastings, who had previously written an article that led to the removal of Gen. Stanley McChrystal as the top US commander in Afghanistan, was working on a profile of Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan. Before the accident, Hastings had informed colleagues that he was under government surveillance and had asked a neighbor to lend him her car, saying he feared his own vehicle had been tampered with.
One other politically significant element of the revelations contained in the WikiLeaks documents concerns a CIA program known as “Umbrage,” which consists of a sizable “library” of malware and cyberattack techniques developed in other countries, including Russia. The agency is able to exploit these “stolen” tools to mask its own attacks and misdirect attribution to their originators. The existence of such a program underscores the lack of any foundation for the hysterical campaign alleging Russia’s responsibility for the hacking and leaking of Democratic Party emails.
While the Democrats continue to center their fire against Trump on the question of alleged ties to Russia—rather than the reactionary policies his administration has unleashed against immigrants and the working class as a whole—the WikiLeaks revelations about the CIA are being dismissed by sections of the media as another Moscow plot.
Along similar lines, the New York Times Monday published a lengthy article mocking alleged “signs of a White House preoccupation with a ‘deep state’ working to thwart the Trump presidency” following Trump’s charge that he had been bugged during the presidential campaign.
Such a term might be appropriate for countries like Egypt, Turkey or Pakistan, the Times argued, but could not be applied to the US because it “suggests an undemocratic nation where legal and moral norms are ignored.”
The reality is that the “deep state” in the US is more massive and powerful than anywhere in the world and is the patron of similar military-intelligence complexes in countries like Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan. As for “legal and moral norms,” the latest revelations about the CIA, an organization long ago dubbed Murder, Inc., offer a glimpse of the real methods of the American state.
That the Times attempts to dismiss concerns about the activities and influence of the military-intelligence apparatus only establishes its own role as a propaganda organ and ideological instrument of this “deep state,” with the most intimate ties to the CIA, the Pentagon and other agencies.
The documents released by WikiLeaks cover the period of 2013 to 2016, the last years of the Obama administration, which presided over the continuation and spread of the wars begun under Bush, a sweeping expansion of the power the US intelligence apparatus and a corresponding assault on democratic rights. This included the organization of an international drone assassination program under which the White House claimed the authority to order the extrajudicial murder of American citizens.
This vast apparatus of war, repression and mass surveillance has now been handed over to the administration of Donald Trump, a government of billionaires, generals and outright fascists that is determined to escalate war abroad and carry out unprecedented attacks on the working class at home.
While the Democratic Party is calling for a special prosecutor over alleged Russian “meddling” in the US election—a demand aimed at sustaining the US war drive against Russia and diverting the mass opposition to Trump into reactionary channels—and Trump is calling for a probe of the alleged bugging of his communications, neither side has called for investigation of the CIA spying operation. Both Democrats and Republicans are agreed that such police-state measures are required to defend the crisis-ridden capitalist system against the threat of a social revolution by the working class.

7 Mar 2017

University of Queensland Science Scholarship for International Students 2017/2018

Application Deadlines: 
  • 1st June 2017
  • 1st December 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): Australia
About the Award: Two different scholarships are available:
* The Full Degree Scholarship is awarded to students enrolling in year one of a UQ Faculty of Science full degree program and is a single payment of AU$10,000
* The Advanced Standing Scholarship is awarded to students enrolling in a UQ Faculty of Science program with advanced standing (credit articulation), for example on the basis of previous study at a Polytechnic, and is a single payment of AU$3,000.
Type: 
Undergraduate
Postgraduate
Eligibility: To be eligible for a UQ Science International Scholarship, you must:
  • Be classified as an international student in Australia
  • Have an unconditional or a conditional offer (with all conditions met by the scholarship closing date) from UQ
  • For undergraduate programs, have completed senior high school and obtained an entry score that equates to a Queensland Tertiary Education rank of 96 or higher
  • For postgraduate programs, have completed an undergraduate degree and obtained a GPA (Grade Point Average) of 6 or higher on a 7-point scale
  • Not have already commenced your studies at UQ, even if you seek a change of program
  • Not simultaneously hold another scholarship
Selection Criteria: Following the closing date, UQ will select winners based on a competitive, merit-based process, based on:
  • Candidates’ academic performance as demonstrated by their Grade Point Averages (GPA)
  • Candidates’ potential to contribute to science, assessed on the basis of their personal statements
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: AU$3,000 or AU$10,000 depending on the award
How to Apply: For either the Full Degree Scholarship or the Advanced Standing Scholarship:
  1. Lodge an official UQ undergraduate or postgraduate application form for international students for entry into one of the eligible Science programs either directly to UQ or through your agent.
  2. Receive a UQ Student ID Number and an unconditional offer (or a conditional offer providing that all conditions are to be met by the scholarship closing date).
  3. Complete and submit the Science International Scholarship online application form.
Award Provider: UQ