16 Aug 2017

General Electric Africa NYSC Intern for Graduate Nigerian Students 2017

Application Timeline: 
  • Opening: 14th August 2017
  • Closing: Ongoing
Eligible Countries: Nigeria
To Be Taken At (Country): Lagos; Nigeria
About the Award: The program designed to give graduates, NYSC challenging work assignments, developmental feedback, and exposure to leadership. The duration of the internship program spans a period of 12 months, and combines hands-on experience with formal performance feedback to help participants transition from a collegial environment to the workplace.
As a valuable member of our team, GE Africa interns will receive many benefits including:
  • Challenging work assignments
  • Exposure to a multinational company
  • Developmental feedback
  • Opportunities to network with Leaders and other interns
Type: Internship
Eligibility: 
  • Graduate with an Accounting degree
  • Authorized to work in your country full-time and without restriction
  • Must have an advanced to fluent level of English
  • Ability to work in a fast-paced, changing environment
  • Demonstrated team player
  • Confident self-starter who has demonstrated drive
  • Excellent organization skills, ability to independently prioritize multiple tasks and work to deadlines
  • A valid NYSC discharge or exemption certificate will be required (please indicate clearly on your resume)
  • Must have valid authorization to work full-time without any restriction in Nigeria
Selection Criteria: 
  • Demonstrated leadership ability
  • High performer with a passion to achieve positive business results
  • Curiosity and desire to learn and expand skill set
  • Flexible, adaptable, and open to change
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: GE offers a great work environment, professional development, challenging careers, and competitive compensation. 
Duration of Program: 12 months
How to Apply: APPLY NOW
Award Providers: GE
Important Notes: GE is an Equal Opportunity Employer.  Employment decisions are made without regard to race, color, religion, national or ethnic origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, disability, protected veteran status or other characteristics protected by law.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) Internship Program 2017 – Abuja, Nigeria

Application Deadline:  21st August 2017
To Be Taken At (Country): Abuja, Nigeria
About the Award: Interns work five days per week (40 hours) under the supervision of the Representative and in cooperation with the Communications Officer.
Type: Internship
Eligibility: To qualify for an internship with the United Nations Internship Programme, applicants must meet one of the following requirements:
(a)be enrolled in a graduate school programme (second university degree or equivalent, or higher);
(b)be enrolled in the final academic year of a first university degree programme (minimum Bachelor’s level or equivalent); or
(c)have graduated with a university degree (as defined above) and, if selected, must commence the internship within a one year period of graduation (OFFICIAL PROOF FROM THE UNIVERSITY TO SUPPORT ONE OF THE ABOVE OPTIONS HAS TO BE ATTACHED TO THE INSPIRA APPLICATION).
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: The internship is UNPAID and full-time.
Duration of Program: The internship in UNODC’s Country Office in Nigeria is for two months with an opportunity for extension, dependent upon the needs of the department.
How to Apply: A completed online application (Cover Note and Personal History Profile) is required. Incomplete applications will not be reviewed.
Award Providers: UNODC

The Global Controversiality of Surrogacy

Ezra Kronfeld

As an inhabitant of this planet, you realize very early in life that there are certain things around you that are utterly profane. Things like rape, murder, corruption, and the like are rightfully-hated acts, which should certainly be outlawed and eliminated in a developed society, but pregnancy by surrogacy is certainly not one of them. When I started to research this topic extensively, I found a rather troubling pattern. It was not just the countries like Saudi Arabia that we generally view as backward who have implemented strict and regressive anti-surrogacy laws, but also countries like France and the United Kingdom.
These laws vary based on, among other things, the types of surrogacy they ban. In some countries, both altruistic surrogacy (wherein there is no monetary gain for the woman carrying the child) and gainful surrogacy (wherein there is monetary gain for the woman carrying the child) are both banned, and in some countries, only the latter is banned. There are also, of course, countries that only ban surrogacy for same-sex couples.
The core of most of these laws centers around the idea that surrogacy is nothing more than the renting of human bodies. This notion ignores the fact that adoption remains legal, and surrogacy is nothing more than the adoption of a child before the child is born. The rights of gay people and the sterile are at stake here.
In America, couples seeking a surrogate have to go through heaps of legal mishigas, and regulations vary wildly state-by-state. While my home state of Maryland is known to be rather surrogacy-friendly, surrogacy is outright banned in Arizona.
According to AGAR (Asociación de Gestación Asistida Reproductiva), most of America’s surrogacy law remains uncertain, and though couples can still manage to find surrogates in large parts of the country, this spells a whole lot of logistical confusion for them. This issue has mostly fallen under the radar for most of the populace, or at least for the people who haven’t had to deal with this kind of thing for themselves.
We in the West have this idea that we are more progressive than the primal autocracies and theocracies, and this notion is often accurate. But this is one issue where we really don’t have much to brag about in terms of the way we do things. We’ve let the groanings and moanings of all the bible-thumping moral busybodies get in the way of human rights. Aren’t these the same people that go on and on about the importance of the American family? Clearly they only wish to talk up their families, and dismiss anyone who falls outside of the extremely tight circle they’ve drawn.
Of course there are complex aspects of surrogacy, and the legality of these things should be discussed. What if the surrogate refuses to give up the child? What if the adopting parents reject the child after birth due to unforeseen complications? All of these issues should be figured out with the rights of the surrogate, the child, and the adopting parents in mind. But simply outlawing surrogacy or making it unnecessarily difficult for people to participate in surrogacy is just not the right way to go about this.

A Plague on Parliament: Australia’s Citizenship Crisis

Binoy Kampmark

“You know, when you nominate for Parliament, there is actually a question, you’ve got to address that section 44 question.”
Australian Deputy Prime Minister, Barnaby Joyce
It is proving to be a toxic gift that continues to give with increasing regularity.  The latest potential victim of section 44 of the Australian Constitution, one barring a member of parliament from having an allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign country, is the Australian Deputy Prime Minister, Barnaby Joyce.
On Monday, the same politician who made world headlines threatening to place the undeclared dogs of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard on death row after entering Australia, had his own moment of unrelished revelation: he was a New Zealand citizen.
This inconvenient fact came to Joyce’s attention on Thursday via advice received from the NZ High Commissioner, Chris Seed.  The punch in the advice was even greater, given the Deputy PM’s string of previous announcements that he could not possibly have a citizenship connection with the country where his father was born.
While previous politicians leapt over the ridge on discovering their ineligibility (the Greens Senators Scott Ludlam and Larissa Waters being the debutants in this bloodletting), others have been attempting to clog the High Court of Australia.  Perhaps the two Senators had been too hasty.
One government Senator and now resigned cabinet member, Matt Canavan, smells a whiff of potential legal victory before the bench of the High Court, using the “blame my mother” defence in acquiring, unwittingly, Italian citizenship, or what is deemed Italian residency abroad.
But Joyce’s case provides far less room to manoeuvre, one that looks more like the cases of Ludlam and Waters. Both of those cases involved a misreading, or misperception, about the respective laws of New Zealand and Canada on nationals.
No matter, claims the government Solicitor-General, Stephen Donaghue, deciding that sun filled hope mattered over worn legal experience. Joyce could remain not only as Deputy PM but as the Member for New England while the High Court considers the case. There would be no glorious immolation, no sacrifice to the sacred text of constitutional law.  Furthermore, there would be no risk, at least for the moment, that this minority government might be extinguished by a textual nicety, given the government’s one seat majority.
Desperate to repel this political doomsday scenario, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has been edging close to a dangerous declaration in parliament: that the High Court will find in favour of the government and hold that Joyce can remain.
This is very much high in the wishful stakes.  What the government is banking upon, along with One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts, is a modern interpretation of section 44, one that moves away from the fact that mere entitlement to a foreign power’s good graces would disqualify.
As for the Solicitor-General’s advice, Joyce satisfies all four contrived tests, though this banks on an updated reading of the section that clips its very broad wings. The Deputy PM was not, for instance, born overseas. Nor was he on a list of citizens of another state. He never applied for the citizenship of another country nor swore, at any point, any oath or allegiance to the other country.
Sensible points, in of themselves, but the law is not alien to absurdity.  If, suggests Sydney  University Law School’s Anne Twomey, a distinction can be drawn between citizenship by descent and other forms, Joyce may well survive. “Or [the High Court] could say the purpose of the provision is to prevent dual allegiance – and if you didn’t know [you were a foreign citizen] you were not breaching the purpose.”
The opposition attorney-general, Mark Dreyfus, suggested that Turnbull might have been skirting against the separation of powers, coming “perilously close to directing the High Court.” Not so, shot back Senator George Brandis. Turnbull, he explained on Radio National, knows a thing or two about the High Court, having presented cases before them.
Ambushed yet again, the government’s latest tactic smacks of a retro approach, those bad old days when major parties would purposely use the disqualifying provisions of section 44 to eliminate an independent politician or a member of a minor party.  Show us, ventures the coalition, the paperwork of Justine Keay, Susan Lamb, Brendan O’Connor, Maria Vamvakinou and Tony Zappia.
All those Labor MPs are said to have renounced their foreign allegiances, though the party has, as yet, to move on producing any relevant paperwork.  Labor’s own response is a line so standard as to be worrying.  In refusing an offer from Turnbull that their own dubious cases be bundled up in the same government package for the High Court, Bill Shorten climbed the mountain of confidence.
“The Labor Party,” penned Shorten in his note of refusal to the PM, “has the strictest procedures in place to ensure all candidates are compliant with the Constitution prior to their nomination for election. Therefore, I politely decline your offer.” More fun, it seems, for the constitutional diggers.
Time and again since this constitutional crisis unfolded, the concept of strict procedures has itself been challenged.  The application of due diligence, these episodes show, is an entirely relative matter, one often giving way to pure hope.  But ignorance, in these cases, is proving far from blissful.  Politically, it is even proving fatal.

Gambling With The Lives Of US Citizens

Gene Watson

In November 2016, a casino owner and reality show host was somehow elected President with 63 million votes. The USA is now a casino. You get what you vote for (or at least what you allowed the deep state to vote for).
A war of words accompanied by hostile fly bys and war “games” seems to be escalating toward a Korean War. Again. One’s just not enough for some people. This time around, North Korea has nuclear bombs, long range ICBM missiles, EMP weapons on a couple satellites circling the USA (like hungry eagles ready to feast). And more.
The EMP weapons would wipe out machines in much of the USA. No more cars. No more phones. No more internet. No more water. No more power. Just hundreds of millions of Americans foraging for food. In the dark nuclear winter. Without cell phones.
What would be targeted in the USA in the event of nuclear strikes?
It’s estimated that North Korea has 60 nuclear bombs (as of the summer of ’17). The USA’s THAAD defenses are about 75% effective, which means if North Korea shoots 4 missiles at each target, then one nuke will get through to each target.
(Just one slingshot from David brought down Goliath. For good.)
Anchorage is the main city in Alaska and the closest city in the 50 states to Korea. About half of the oil and gas in the USA originates in Alaska. Nuking Anchorage would lead to oil, gasoline and heating oil shortages worse than those experienced in the 1973 oil embargo and 1979 oil embargo combined. $25 for a gallon of gas anyone? How about odd even rationing, again?
Seattle is home to Amazon, Boeing and Microsoft – 3 large corporations critical to the US economy. And 2 of the 3 richest billionaires in the world. (Vancouver would no doubt be effected. Perhaps China can insist on Trudeau talking to Trump about this.)
The San Francisco – San Jose corridor is Silicon Valley, the technology heart of the US. Even if the precision of North Korean nukes is a little off, a hit anywhere in Silicon Valley would wipe out America’s tech mecca.
Los Angeles is the media mecca of the USA (and propaganda capital for much of the world). It also hosts a metro area of 23,000,000 Americans. Being so sprawling, a land strike anywhere within 100 km (60 miles) of downtown LA. would devastate the LA Metro Area. And the “entertainment” groin of America (vulgar, lewd and violent hollywood movies, TV, music, etc.).
Chicago, 4th largest American city, has a mercantile exchange which makes the Windy City the de facto food distribution center for much of the USA and a likely target. Without Chicago, tens of millions of Americans in the USA will starve to death.
Houston, America’s third largest city, is the hub for energy distribution in the USA. A strike against Houston would all but guarantee that oil, gas, heating oil, energy would no longer get distributed to much of the USA. Lights out and all tanks on M-T in the USA. Would make for fascinating nighttime satellite imagery.
Honolulu has been described as being like Chicago with palm trees. This island paradise for rich Americans can be converted into an American island hell within the next 20 minutes. Don’t look at the flash or the fireball.
New York City is the financial bulls-eye of the capitalist empire and epicenter of a Metro Area of 25,000,000 Americans. The Almighty Dollar would become worthless – utterly worthless – upon impact (within 60 minutes of launch).
The Washington DC metro area is the den of both politics and the deep state in America. Some say the beating heart of NoAm (North America) and all of its districts and colonies.
And then there’s Guam. Poor tiny little Guam, as bankrupt as the Northern Mariana Islands, US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Detroit, Hartford, Chicago, the State of Illinois, etc. etc. And as bankrupt as the entire USA will become within an hour with even just a couple mushroom clouds arising over a couple cities in the Continental 48.
Some days it feels like we are just a tweet away from Armageddon. Kingdom come. Samson’s weakness – as we discovered just before the golden bowl shattered and Samson brought the entire temple down from above him, Masada style – was his hair. In the end, will it turn out Trump’s weakness was his temper or his twitter account. Or none of the above.
And the leaders of the earth who committed bad things with the United States government and lived with her in shameless luxury will weep and beat themselves in grief over her when they see the smoke of her burning. They will stand at a distance because of their fear of her torment and say too bad too bad you great nation, USA, you strong nation because in an hour your judgment (doom) has arrived.
And the merchants of the earth will weep and mourn over the US, because there is no one to buy their full cargo anymore. The merchants cried out, weeping and mourning, and said too bad too bad, the great USA, in which all who had ships at sea became rich from her wealth, because in one hour she has been ruined.
Uncle Sam aka the whore of babylon will vanish. In a poof.
Many (many) Americans actually don’t like Los Angeles, New York City or Washington DC. We don’t know yet if North Korea is strategizing to try to win such hearts and minds by limiting strikes to LA., NY and DC. Like reading tea leaves, maps with circles in the background in some news reports from Korea are seen in the news once in a blue moon.
Then, there’s Seoul and Tokyo. Blasts to both would kill millions and decimate the economies of both South Korea and Japan. How terribly sad it would be to see the rich Japanese and South Korean survivors foraging for food the day after.
An American strike or counterstrike on the Korean peninsula raises the question of which cities would be targeted. And which way would the wind be blowing that day. Japan no doubt doesn’t want radioactive clouds flitting over Japan. Again. And should said clouds flutter to China or Russia, what then. Would there be thousands of casualties or millions of casualties in neighboring countries.
Then too there have been US government assassination threats. In the 21st Century, that includes bird drones (drones that look like birds) dropping off fly drones (drones that look like flies or mosquitoes or …) filled with poison. Fly drones that can ‘sting’ poison or drugs into victims. Who would have thought protection for presidents would have to include screen doors and insect screens in windows, etc.
Then again, catch these little drones and billions of dollars in US government R & D can be reverse engineered for a fraction of Uncle Sam’s cost. And then the improved upon. Then, the tables turn.
Perhaps peace is a better path.
President Trump’s military attack threats (fire and fury, locked and loaded, etc.) against the DPRK appear to have been hasty and we all know what haste makes.
China’s declaration that if North Korea is attacked first, then China will help North Korea and if the USA is attacked first then China will remain neutral – seems to have helped both the DPRK and the USA to dial back the threats. For a little while at least
It is also possible that the Commander In Chief just can’t take the heat of the incessant seemingly endless media grilling (about Russiagate, etc.). Oh and that nagging and lingering FBI investigation (into Russiagate, etc.) and he simply wants to get those two pesky flying monkeys off his back. With a war. With Korea. Or Iran. Or Venezuela. Or fill-in-the-blank.
(Some candidates for US President actually don’t consider that they will become the most criticized person in the world if elected.)
Uncle Sam has over $50,000,000,000,000 in debts that it can’t pay (pensions, US Treasury bonds, etc.) Endless war (against Afghanistan (Graveyard of the Empires and heroin capital of our planet), Iraq, Syria, Yugoslavia, Libya, Yemen, etc. etc.) and the seemingly ever expanding global surveillance state has been quite expensive. Too expensive.
In the meantime, before the USA’s next financial collapse, the more war, the more surveillance, the more money for the Military Industrial Intelligence Complex (MIC). And their bankers.
The day is soon coming when – one way or another – someone will have to announce that Uncle Sam is broke, dead broke and cannot pay its bills anymore and that lenders who lent money to the US treasury will not get paid back, no pensions for retirees in the US. No more money for endless war. No more money for the global surveillance state either.
And – what a coincidence – we now have a casino owner in the White House who has experience with not just one, but 4 (count ‘em 4) bankruptcies. Who better to say so sorry Charlie than … Trump is in the right place at the right time to use his extensive bankruptcy experience to declare bankruptcy for the government of the United States of America.
What better way to distract from major problems (like major financial problems or major news media problems or major FBI investigation problems) than wars. Big devastating wars. The bigger and the more devastating the war the more distracting it will be from other problems.
6 of the 7 largest Banks in the world are now forecasting that an imminent financial collapse in the USA will commence within the next 18 months (forecasts range from October 2017 to February 2019). Perhaps, the deep state wants us staring and squinting at North Korea while they are up to other things. Like getting ready for the final countdown to the final financial collapse of the American Empire. Coming soon.

Breaking The Seal: Child Abuse And The Confessional

Binoy Kampmark 

The only surprise was that it did not come sooner. Australia’s Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse has gotten on with the gruesome task of making 85 recommended changes to the law that will provide some measure of future protection for victims of child abuse.
The notable words that should be highlighted and even shouted from every pulpit are those that insist that “no excuse, protection nor privilege” will cover priests who fail to inform the authorities on instances of such violations, even if obtained in the sacred confines of the confession.
“We are satisfied that confession is a forum where Catholic children have disclosed their sexual abuse and where clergy have disclosed their abusive behaviour in order to deal with their own guilt.”
The report acknowledges an orthodox dilemma arising in other professions where confidentiality exists alongside the assessment of breach.  “We acknowledge that if this recommendation is implemented then clergy hearing confession may have to decide between complying with the civil law obligation to report and complying with a duty in their role as a confessor.”
The historical precedent marshalled in favour of the law of the seal of confession is hefty.  As Gratian noted in his 1151 compilation of principles of Church law, including various council edicts, Deponatur sacerdos qui peccata penitentis publicare presumit (roughly, “Let the priest who dares to make known the sins of his penitent be deposed”).  Those breaching this would be duly subjected to opprobrium and a lengthy period of disgrace.  Among other additional notes come the stern words of Canon 21 of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), which insist on secrecy and punishment of perpetual penitence should that injunction be violated.
These musty injunctions explain, in part, the militant reaction by Australia’s clergy to the Royal Commission’s note on the subject of the seal.  Melbourne Archbishop Denis Hart, as president of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference, felt that the confessional was sacred and irreducible, an immutable institution.
How Hart went about his case was bound to jar the defenders of secular, temporal justice.  “Confession in the Catholic Church is a spiritual encounter with God through the priest.” To override that particular “spiritual encounter” would be a grave breach of freedom of religion, notwithstanding its harm to children.  The confession was a fundamental canon in that regard, “recognised in the law of Australia and many other countries.”
Nor did progressive priests, known for their flag waving for various social causes in Australia, disagree with Hart.  Frank Brennan SJ was certainly in agreement, showing a lack of comprehension about how disturbing the seal was merely analogous to the necessary reporting obligations other professions might have when being informed of an abuse.  The seal of confession remained sacrosanct and exceptional.
A questioning Brennan wondered whether the confession had necessarily aided a culture of abuse and its corollary, the all-smothering cover-up. “I don’t think it has, and that’s why I will continue to honour the seal of the confessional.”
Other reasons had less than sufficient ballast.  One considered the fact that pursuing such laws would drive the offender away.  Penitents would be reluctant to come forth.  “Common sense tells me that a sex abuser would be even less likely to present for confession if he knew that the confessional seal did not apply.”
Another was frequency – the sacrament of confession was rarely used by Catholics these days, which meant that it could go on undisturbed.  Over the course of 32 years, reflected Brennan, not a single person had “confessed the sin of child sexual abuse to me.”  Personal experience, it seemed, took the precedence over institutional realities.
Hart furthered his own interpretation of institutional reality: the Catholic Church had been given a dusting reform, and such laws were needlessly intrusive.  Nothing of the order of child abuse on that scale, he claimed “would ever happen” today.  It was adequate, claimed Hart, to persuade a penitent to tell another individual or body outside the profession.  To that voice could also be added Brennan’s.
An old, stubborn defiance against the state, that all-secular nasty beast that jousted with Papal power for centuries, seemed to resurface.  A mandatory reporting rule to report abuse was far less important than the seal of confession, the breaking of which would be tantamount to spitting in the face of the divine.
While the mandatory reporting requirements would merely bring the clergy in line with other relationships of a fiduciary nature, traditional reservations about such rules remain.  Would it, for instance, do less for the victims than intended?
People With Disability Australia, for instance, suggest a consensual element to the disclosure, though this, in a seedy sort of way, sounds much like the rape victim’s lament on not reporting a crime out of fear.  Consent, it would seem to follow, would be indispensable for exposing the offence, an unfortunate weakening of any reporting requirement.
Care Leavers Australasia Network offers a necessary demurral.  “Unfortunately, sometimes the only way to ensure the right thing is done is through the threat of a penalty of punishment.” The state and the Catholic Church (for some, the only Church), have renewed an ancient battle, with the divine enlisted as alibi and sacred protector.  The priests, as they have done before, will be its militant vanguard.  As with any political struggle, the victims risk being forgotten – again.

Saudi Arabia Wants Out Of Yemen War: Mid East Eye

Abdus Sattar Ghazali

Saudi Arabia’s crown prince has told two former US officials that he “wants out” of the two-year war he started in Yemen, and that he is not against US rapprochement with Iran, Al Jazeera reported Tuesday (August 15) quoting leaked emails published by Middle East Eye.
The revelation sheds light on the thinking of Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, the 31-year-old heir to the Saudi throne, also known as MBS, Al Jazeera said adding: The leaks pertain to discussions he held on the Middle East with Martin Indyk, a former US ambassador to Israel, and Steven Hadley, who served as US national security adviser during George W Bush’s presidency.
The conversation took place at least one month before Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt severed diplomatic and economic ties with Qatar, accusing it of trying to undermine their war in Yemen and for having friendly relations with Iran.
The details of the meeting between MBS and the former American officials were revealed in an email exchange between Indyk and Yousef al-Otaiba, the UAE’s ambassador in Washington, DC. The email exchange was obtained by the GlobalLeaks campaign group, according to Middle East Eye.
The conflict in Yemen has escalated dramatically since March 2015, when Saudi-led forces launched a military operation against the Houthi fighters who toppled the government of President Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi in September 2014.
Casualties
Since the conflict began, more than 10,000 people have been killed, and millions have been driven from their homes.
The Saudi-led operation has been blamed for the spread of cholera in Yemen, where an estimated 500,000 have reportedly been afflicted.
The war has also left the country on the brink of a famine, with millions of people displaced, and an estimated  seven million people going hungry, according to a UN report.
In Sanaa, Emma O’Leary of the Norwegian Refugee Council, told Al Jazeera that the needs of the civilians are “enormous” and “difficult to describe”.
“We are doing our best to respond to the crisis, but the reality is that this is an extremely difficult environment for all of us,” O’Leary said.
“Security issues, such as the air strikes and the ground fighting, as well as bureaucratic constraints” are a real concern, and that the warring parties must return to the negotiating table, she said.
Yemen crisis ‘an absolute shame on humanity’
International human rights organization CARE has denounced the humanitarian crisis in war-torn Yemen, which is also suffering from a cholera epidemic, as “an absolute shame on humanity”.
Wolfgang Jamann, the head of the CARE, told a news conference after a five-day visit to the impoverished Arabian Peninsula country last month:  “We are now in the 21st century and the current situation is an absolute shame on humanity.”
“Thousands of civilians have died since the start of the conflict and millions more have been displaced inside the country,” he said adding: “60 percent of the country is food insecure and over half the population is unable to access safe drinking water. Many areas in Yemen are just one step away from a famine situation,” he said, and urged the international community to “end the suffering”.
The situation in the country of some 27 million has been worsened by a massive outbreak of the bacterial infection cholera.  More than 600,000 people are expected to contract cholera in Yemen this year, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) warned recently.
Yemen’s war is actually a multifaceted predicament
According to Sultan Barakat, a senior fellow in the Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, Yemen’s war is actually a multifaceted predicament.
“Mistakenly viewed by many observers as a two-sided conflict between the Saudi-led coalition and the Houthi rebels, Yemen’s war is actually a multifaceted predicament involving a volatile combination of local, regional, and international actors, all of them armed and having major and competing interests in the country’s future. The political transition process set out by the Gulf Cooperation Council back in 2011 failed to incorporate key sections of Yemeni society into the decision-making process, such as the southern separatist Hirak movement, the Houthis, and Yemeni youth and women.”
“As a result, Hadi’s transitional government was increasingly viewed as illegitimate and unrepresentative of the demands and concerns of the Yemeni people. Constructing a truly all-inclusive decision-making process to pick up where the National Dialogue Conference left off will be key to reaching any power-sharing agreement,” he concluded.
Several rounds of UN-mediated peace talks in Switzerland and in Kuwait have failed to produce an agreement.
The Houthis and the General People’s Congress (GPC) party of former President Ali Abdullah Saleh are demanding an agreement on a new administration comprising all parties to run the country until new elections, while Hadi supporters say that the Houthis must hand over their weapons and quit the cities they have seized since 2014.
President Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi  was removed after Houthi forces took control of Sanaa in September 2014. His forces have regained territory since the intervention began, but the rebels still control Sanaa and ports on the southern coast.

India-Nepal Relations: Mixed Fortunes

Pramod Jaiswal


Narendra Modi’s electoral victory in May 2014 generated positive vibes throughout the region. His invitation to the heads of governments of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) member-states to his swearing-in ceremony, and making  Bhutan and Nepal his first official foreign visits clearly highlighted his prioritisation of India’s neighbourhood. In this context, this article assesses India’s relations with Nepal during the past three years.
 
Continuity and Change
As Prime Minister, Modi’s first public statement on foreign affairs was about Nepal, on Twitter, where he said that he was committed to strengthening relations. Unlike his predecessor, Dr Manmohan Singh, who failed to visit Nepal even once in his decade-long tenure, Modi visited Nepal twice - in August 2014 and in November 2014 - becoming the first Indian prime minister to visit the country in 17 years. He enchanted the Nepalese people with a rousing address in Nepal’s parliament, which was the first such address by a foreign leader. Like in the past, Modi also assured India’s commitment to Nepal’s economic development. He announced a soft loan of US$1 billion and assistance in several infrastructure development projects of Nepal.

During this visit, Modi also agreed to review, adjust, and update the 1950 Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship, which has been deemed ‘unequal’ by generations of Nepalese leaders, and other bilateral agreements. He called to form an Eminent Persons Group from both countries for this task. He also reactivated, after a hiatus of 23 years, the Joint Commission that was formed in 1987 at the Foreign Ministers’ level with a view to strengthening, understanding and promoting cooperation between the two countries for mutual benefit in the economic, trade, transit and the multiple uses of water resources.

Within a few months, Modi visited Nepal again to attend the 18th SAARC Summit. He inaugurated an Indian-built 200-bed trauma centre, provided a helicopter to the Nepal Army and a mobile soil-testing laboratory. 

As a friendly neighbour, India was quick in its response towards Nepal during the devastating 7.9 magnitude earthquake in April 2015 that caused massive destruction and claimed thousands of lives. Within hours of the calamity, Modi spoke to the then Nepalese Prime Minister Sushil Koirala and the then Nepalese President Ram Baran Yadav assuring them of India’s assistance. Within six hours, India dispatched a team of the National Disaster Response Force along with relief material. India’s total relief assistance amounted to US$67 million, and it committed another US$1 billion (one-fourth as a grant). 

Despite such increased engagement and assistance, Nepal continued to blame India for interference in its domestic affairs. Nepal’s claim to an equal share over a disputed tri-junction, Lipu-Lekh Pass, also caused controversy. Lipu-Lekh was mentioned in the China-India joint statement during Modi’s visit to China in May 2015. The joint statement read, “The two sides agree to hold negotiation on augmenting the list of traded commodities, and expand border trade at Nathu La, Qiangla/Lipu-Lekh Pass and Shipki La.” Nepal, under pressure from its media, civil society and political opposition, demanded that China and India remove the mention of Lipu-Lekh from their joint statement, arguing that it threatened Nepal’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. However, Indian experts counter-argued that both China and India have been referring to Lipu-Lekh Pass as one of their border trading points since 1954. Indian experts have pointed to Nepal’s position on Kalapani and Lipu-Lekh Pass as being politically motivated, especially given how ultra-nationalist groups have been involved in spreading anti-India sentiment and demanding a ‘Greater Nepal’ to gain political mileage. 

Unrest in Madhes, a region bordering the Indo-Nepal border, which propelled anti-India sentiment among the ruling elites, led to a severe deterioration in bilateral relations. The Madhesis waged a 135 days long ‘non-cooperation movement’ along the border, which halted the entry of fuel and other essential supplies to Nepal from India. Kathmandu’s ruling elite claimed that the ‘blockade’ was imposed with Indian support as India did not welcome the new non-inclusive Nepalese constitution, which had triggered the Madhesi protest. Despite denials of this allegation by both Madhesi leaders and New Delhi, the dramatic end of the ‘blockade’ before the visit of the then Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli to Delhi clearly lent fuel to such allegations. 

Though Modi began his tenure concentrating on India’s neighbours, he got engrossed with building relations with bigger powers. Although Dr Singh had failed to visit Nepal even once, his government spent considerable time following the political developments in Nepal. Dr Singh’s two governments played a great role in ensuring a smooth political transition in Nepal. However, the Modi government was not able to take control over the situation in time and intervened at the last hours, when it was too late. He sent the foreign secretary as the Prime Minister’s Special Envoy, but he failed to deliver positive results. 

Modi subsequently tried to control the damage. He invited Oli for a six-day visit to India before his scheduled China visit. However, Modi was unable to convince Oli to address the demands of the Madhesis. Rather, in few weeks, Oli visited China and tried to challenge the Indian monopoly by signing an agreement on trade and transit with Beijing. This has been one of the major failures of the Indian government under Modi, which will have long-term implications on India. However, India was successful in toppling the Oli-led government, forging an alliance between the Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Center). Sher Bahadur Deuba and Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’, the respective heads of the two parties agreed to serve the remaining tenure of 18 months on a rotational basis. 

India-Nepal relations were normalised after Prachanda was elected as the prime minister for the second time. India's then President Pranab Mukherjee and Nepalese President Bidya Devi Bhandari exchanged state level visits. During Prachanda’s tenure, India accelerated the pace of development projects in Nepal and provided additional power supply to meet Nepal’s severe power crisis. With this, Nepal's growth rate Nepal was raised from a mere 0.8 percent to 7.5 percent, the highest in 13 years.

Conclusion
India-Nepal relations during Modi’s tenure have had mixed fortunes so far. While he was successful in enchanting the minds of Nepalese during his first visit, he got trapped in controversies later. He was appreciated for his support to the people of Nepal during the massive earthquake, but criticised on the issues of Lipu-Lekh. He received high appreciation from Madhesis for supporting their demands for an inclusive constitution and standing for democracy and social justice, but could not deliver the desired results. With the rise of Modi and the thumping victory of Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) in Uttar Pradesh, there were apprehensions that India might impose ‘Hinduism’ on secular Nepal or might attempt to revive the Hindu monarchy there. However, such fears turned out to be unfounded. 
 
India has tremendous leverage in Nepal. It is still Nepal’s largest trading partner and contributes significantly towards the country’s development. New Delhi has played a crucial role in Nepal’s major political transitions, be it the overthrow of the autocratic Rana regime; restoration of democracy in 1990; abolition of Monarchy; or the mainstreaming of the Maoists. It should play its role to bring stability and development in Nepal, which will eventually serve India’s prime interest, which is security. It also needs to manage the Nepalese media and public perception in Nepal to contain the rise of anti-India propaganda.

Sri Lankan foreign minister resigns amid intensifying government crisis

W.A. Sunil 

The forced resignation of Foreign Minister Ravi Karunanayake last week is a clear sign of the intensifying political crisis facing the government of President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe.
The immediate reason for Karunanayake’s resignation was to avoid a no-confidence motion presented to the parliamentary speaker by the self-named joint opposition—a group of MPs led by former President Mahinda Rajapakse.
Karunanayake was swept up in a corruption scandal last week after it was revealed that he had financial dealings with the main accused in a Central Bank bond scam, involving several billion rupees and under investigation by an ongoing Presidential Commission of Inquiry.
The joint opposition, which is a dissident faction of Sirisena’s Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), saw Karunanakaye’s alleged involvement in the scandal as another opportunity to exploit growing popular discontent with the government. Many MPs from Sirisena’s faction of the SLFP had indicated their intention to vote for the no-confidence motion, compounding the government’s crisis.
Facing a possible defeat, the government first attempted to prevent a parliamentary debate on the grounds it would be sub judice because the Commission of Inquiry was still investigating the bond scam. The attorney-general, however, dismissed that argument, saying the commission was not a judicial court.
Karunanayake flatly denied any wrongdoing and tried to cling to his ministerial post. But under pressure from his cabinet colleagues, then the president and prime minister, Karunanayake was compelled to resign. The government sacrificed Karunanayake in a desperate bid to cling onto power.
The Sunday Times editorial on August 13 noted: “Unfortunately, Mr. Karunanayake took the correct decision to step down from his post after some deliberation and some coaxing. By the end of last week, it appeared that he had to be dragged out of his ministry kicking and screaming... He argued somewhat justifiably why he had to be the fall guy-sacrificing lamb for doing his duty by the party.”
The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government was formed after the January 2015 presidential election, in which Sirisena ousted Rajapakse via what amounted to a US-backed regime-change operation. Sirisena exploited the widespread hostility to the Rajapakse government over its rampant corruption, austerity policies and attacks on democratic rights.
The trade unions, professional and civil society groups and pseudo-left organisations immediately rallied around Sirisena and Wickremesinghe, promoting their phony slogans of good governance and democracy, and promises of punitive action against corrupt members of the Rajapakse government.
The SLFP-United National Party unity government was quickly caught up in a bond scam that took place under the newly-appointed Central Bank governor, Arjuna Mahendran, a confidante of Wickremesinghe. Mahendran’s son-in-law, Arjun Aloysius, was the principal director of Perpetual Treasuries, a regular bidder at bond auctions. In February 2015, the company had acquired bonds worth 5 billion rupees, at an inflated interest rate, in the biddings initially worth only 1 billion rupees.
Aloysius was accused of getting inside help, including information about the bond launch, particularly through the Central Bank governor, who was removed in April last year.
When all attempts at cover up failed, President Sirisena appointed the Commission of Inquiry, which exposed the role played by the government and especially Karunanayake. Amid growing criticism about his connection with Aloysius, Karunanayake was removed as finance minister and appointed foreign minister.
The inquiry further brought to light an undated letter from Karunanayake to the Central Bank governor requesting the raising of 70 billion rupees through bonds.
It also revealed that Aloysius had rented out a luxury apartment to Karunanayake in the immediate aftermath of the bond scam and paid 1.45 million rupees a month on the lease. The Karunanayake family later purchased the apartment for 165 million rupees. Karunanayake claimed he knew nothing about the transaction, which took place via a company controlled by his wife.
Last week Wickremesinghe cynically claimed that the foreign minister’s resignation demonstrated the government’s commitment to good governance. “We have created a new tradition” by allowing impartial investigations to operate, he told parliament.
Sirisena and Wickremesinghe yesterday appointed Thilak Marapana as the new foreign minister. Marapana was also forced to resign from a ministerial post over a similar conflict of interest only a year ago. He was accused of defending Avant Guard, a company engaged in providing maritime security for commercial ships, which was accused of massive financial fraud.
These scandals not only expose the fraud of the government’s commitment to “good governance” and “democracy, but the complete rottenness of the entire political establishment in Colombo.
R. Sambandan, the leader of the official opposition and the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), backed the government and attempted to extricate it from the crisis. He hailed Karunanayake’s resignation as a “bold step,” saying Karunanayake had acted “in the interest of good governance and the people.”
The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), another opposition party, praised Karunanayake’s resignation in a similar vein, adding only that corruption must be eliminated. In the 2015 presidential election, the JVP backed Sirisena.
The pseudo-left Nava Sama Samaja Party (NSSP), Purawesi Balaya (Citizen’s Power), Movement for Social Justice and several other groups have attempted to turn the spotlight back onto the corruption of the Rajapakse government. At a meeting yesterday, they called on the government to set up “special courts” to charge and convict members of the previous government.
This anti-democratic proposal, which could violate the constitution, was supported by Health Minister Rajitha Senaratne, and deputy minister Ajith Perera spoke at the meeting. If instituted, such special courts could be used to arrest and imprison anyone who posed a threat to the government. Above all, such measures will be used to suppress any opposition from the working class to the government’s austerity agenda.
Working people and youth should take serious note of the warning made by President Sirisena immediately after the suppression of last month’s petroleum workers’ strike that he “would not allow anyone to topple the government.” This is not mere rhetoric. The government will stop at nothing, including police-state measures, to cling onto power and implement its austerity program.

Kenyan police violently quell opposition to disputed election

Eddie Haywood 

Twenty-four people have been killed in post-election protests by police forces since Friday’s announcement declaring President Uhuru Kenyatta the winner over his challenger, Raila Odinga. The majority killed are from the cities of Kisumu and Nairobi.
During the public announcement declaring Kenyatta the winner, supporters of Odinga in Nairobi and Kisumu numbering in the thousands immediately gathered in the streets, attempting to block main thoroughfares, and were met by police forces that fired tear gas and live rounds into the crowds. In addition to the 24 killed, an estimated 150 were injured and hospitalised.
Nine-year-old Stephanie Mokaya from Mathare, a slum in Nairobi that saw a large convergence of the protesters, was killed by a stray bullet after police indiscriminately fired into the crowd.
Two reporters from the Kenyan Standard were arrested while covering the protests and detained before being released a few hours later.
Illustrating starkly the state of siege gripping the country, particularly in Nairobi, the week of the poll saw a virtual shutdown of day-to-day activities, with many Kenyans not reporting to their places of work. Buses and other modes of transportation were curbed, and many businesses shuttered their doors in fear of a crackdown.
Displaying their contempt for the Kenyan population, the Kenyatta government denied that police fired live rounds into crowds and claimed that the protests were unlawful and consisted largely of criminals.
Acting Interior Minister Fred Matiang’i told the media, “There are no demonstrations. They are looters, and looters are criminals who ought to be arrested.”
After the final poll result was released Friday, Odinga traveled to Kibera and Mathare, two of the largest slums in Nairobi and home to a significant base of his support, and told the assembled crowds to reject the result. He reiterated his claim that the election was fraudulent and declared that Kenyatta and his ruling government were criminals who stole the election.
Odinga told the crowd not to go to work Monday to register their dissatisfaction. “There is no work until Tuesday, when we will announce the next step.”
He reiterated calls for an investigation into the vote tally, requesting that the United Nations provide an analysis of the poll.
By Sunday morning, tensions appeared to have eased, and Odinga’s call for a strike was largely a failure as most residents returned to work Monday morning and businesses resumed operations.
Several suspicious developments seem to lend credibility to the claim of electoral fraud that have fueled the wave of popular outrage directed at the Kenyatta government. Considering the increasingly authoritarian actions against the Kenyan population, it is understandable that so many would believe that the election was rigged to Kenyatta’s benefit.
First, there was an attempted hack into the elections system set up by the Independent Elections and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), the official body charged with counting the vote. The IEBC has said the hack was not successful, and after a preliminary investigation of the intrusion, the commission released its finding as “inconclusive” as to the identity of the person or persons involved and their motive.
Even more suspicious is last month’s grisly discovery of the body of a senior official employed with the IEBC. Christopher Musando was murdered, and his body bore evidence that he was severely beaten and tortured before being killed. As of this writing, no one has been arrested for the murder.
Additionally, just days after the discovery of Musando’s body, two foreigners working for the Odinga campaign as political consultants were seized and detained by Kenyan police dressed in plainclothes.
The two men, John Aristotle Phillips and Andreas Katsouris from the US and Canada, respectively, worked for Aristotle Inc., a political consulting firm owned by Phillips specialising in campaign software and voter data analysis.
They were employed by the Odinga campaign for two months when they were accosted and seized by the men who later identified themselves as police. The two men were held in a room at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport for several hours before being forced on a plane and ordered to leave the country.
Once back in Canada, Katsouris related to CBC Toronto the circumstances of their arrest, relating that they demanded to see lawyers and officials from their embassies, requests that were refused by their captors. “They were getting angry at this point. After a few minutes of this, they seemed to get tired of our little resistance and they handcuffed John and one of them grabbed me by my arm and pulled my glasses off my face, and pulled out a pair of handcuffs.”
On Saturday, Orenge Nyabicha, an official with the IEBC, was found dead in his home, of an apparent suicide. Police stated that the man had died from self-imposed carbon monoxide poisoning from a stove. Suspiciously, a suicide note left by Nyabicha stated that he was frustrated with “IEBC’s failure to deliver a credible, free and fair election.”
A building housing the offices of Odinga’s political party, National Super Alliance (NASA), was broken into and equipment was stolen. Computers, laptops, cameras, documents identifying the party’s membership, and various other documents related to party strategy were taken. NASA officials accused the police of the break-in. The Kenyan National Police Service denied involvement.
The Kenyatta government has moved to suppress any investigation into these highly suspicious circumstances. Two Kenyan human rights organisations, Kenyan Human Rights Commission (KHCR) and African Centre for Open Governance (AfriCOG), were threatened by the government with closure and were informed they were being investigated for tax evasion and other dubious charges, after the two organisations stated their intention to file a case to the Kenyan Supreme Court over the irregularities of the poll.
These developments, taken together, point to the completely anti-democratic character of the Kenyan ruling class.
The chorus of congratulatory applause for Uhuru Kenyatta on his re-election from Washington and Europe is a clear indication of Western capitalism’s approval and support for the ruling clique in Nairobi. A number of Western election observers certified the August 8 poll to be “free and fair”, including the European Union’s election observer mission in Kenya. The African Union has also concurred with this assessment.
The Trump administration said in a statement, “The United States congratulates the people of Kenya on the successful conclusion of elections, and President Uhuru Kenyatta on his re-election.”
Former US Secretary of State John Kerry, who led the Carter Centre’s observer team examining Kenya’s election, stated that while his team observed “aberrations here and there,” the election’s integrity was intact.
The New York Times, functioning in its role as the mouthpiece for the US foreign policy establishment, published an editorial Sunday chastising Odinga for his refusal to concede defeat, calling him a “perennial loser,” a reference to his previous electoral defeats in 2007 and 2013, going on to dismiss his claims of electoral fraud.
As if coming straight from the US State Department, the Times praised the Kenyatta government for what the editorial says are “admirable changes” to the Kenyan constitution, claiming these reforms afford a more democratic process in Kenya.
In consideration of the extremely suspicious developments hanging over the poll, which bring serious questions into the credibility of the election, it must be stated that there is no democratic content to be found in the campaign of Odinga calling for protests against the poll. Odinga, if elected to the presidency, would utilise the apparatus of state repression against the Kenyan masses just as ruthlessly as the ruling Kenyatta government.
Odinga, a millionaire scion and representative of the Kenyan ruling class, is no less a defender of capitalism and Kenya’s entrenched layer of Western banking and corporate parasites vying for claim to Kenya’s profits than Kenyatta.
As for Kenyatta, the millionaire president presides over a society wracked by acute social antagonism and social deterioration. The social misery experienced by the Kenyan masses coincides with the widespread disillusionment with the political establishment. The prospect of the restive masses entering into open class struggle against the establishment is utterly terrifying to the ruling clique in Nairobi.
The blatant intimidation and anti-democratic actions directed against the population by the Kenyatta government is an expression that the Kenyan ruling class is turning towards more dictatorial forms of rule to in order to suppress opposition. The anti-democratic character of the Kenyatta government makes clear that it is unwilling and completely incapable of providing relief for the social misery experienced by the Kenyan masses.

European contaminated eggs scandal broadens

Anna Rombach

The Fipronil scandal is broadening. Eggs contaminated with the toxic insecticide have now been found in many European countries and in Hong Kong. The European Union (EU) has announced a crisis meeting on the issue but has failed to set a specific date.
Fipronil is a highly powerful toxic insecticide produced by the BASF chemical company. The insecticide is approved for use in Europe to combat fleas, lice and ticks in animals. The chemical attacks the central nervous system and vital functions of the insects.
In tests on rats, neurological damage has been observed, and humans using the chemical are warned that in high doses Fipronil can cause nausea, vomiting and headache, as well as damage to the liver, kidneys and thyroid gland. Its use for animals used in food production is therefore strictly prohibited.
It now appears that a Belgian manufacturer added Fipronil to a harmless disinfectant and cleansing agent and sold the resulting product to hen factories in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands. The mixture was also due to be exported to Great Britain, France, Poland and other countries.
The trace of Fipronil was uncovered when a Belgian processing company checked eggs in its laboratory and reported the findings. An entire month passed, however, before the authorities informed the public.
In the meantime, the scandal has spread to the whole of Europe, via the sale of detergents and the export of eggs. Fipronil has been detected not only in eggs, but also in chicken meat.
The European market is closely linked, and the Netherlands produces about half of all eggs for export across the continent. More than 11 million Fipronil-infected eggs have been delivered to Germany. In addition, Fipronil-contaminated eggs have turned up in the UK, Austria, Denmark, Luxembourg, Sweden and Switzerland. They are also alleged to have been exported to Hong Kong.
The authorities have reacted by ordering the closures of plants and the destruction of entire batches of eggs. The prosecutor’s office has initiated investigations into the producers of the chemical, suppliers and farmers in a number of countries. In Germany, supermarkets such as REWE and Lidl have removed entire batches of eggs in which contamination was found. ALDI removed all eggs from its shelves for one week.
Now, the governments of Belgium, Holland and Germany are accusing each other of responsibility and seeking to protect their own farms. On August 9, the Belgian farm manager Ducarme said that Fipronil-infected eggs had first been discovered in the Netherlands in November 2016. However, this was reported only internally.
In Belgium, the contamination of eggs by Fipronil was reported at the beginning of June, but the Belgian supervisory authority did not report the findings to the EU Commission until July 20, after consumers had already consumed the toxic eggs for six weeks, mainly in Belgium, Holland and Germany. On July 22, Holland halted the export of eggs to Germany and ordered the closure of six hen factories on the same day. By August 7, 138 of the approximately 1,000 Dutch chicken farms had ceased operation.
The Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) sought to undertake damage limitation alleging that the risk from contaminated eggs was low. An adult with a body weight of 65 kg could safely eat seven Fipronil-contaminated eggs every day without danger, BfR representatives declared in their test report.
The authors added, however, that “at the present time,” there is no research regarding lifetime consumption of Fipronil residues via chicken eggs or chicken meat. The declaration makes clear that no attention has been paid to the long-term consequence of Fipronil over the years.
The BfR is not considered to be truly independent. Founded in 2002, the institute has been criticised on several occasions due to conflicts of interest between members of the advisory BfR expert commissions. Some commissioners were linked to ISLI, a lobby organisation in the food industry. Members of the BfR commission “Plant Protection Products and their Residues” were even employed by pesticide manufacturers.
Fipronil had already hit the headlines. Since 2004, the use of the substance in Europe has been repeatedly linked to a decline in bee populations. In 2008, the European Court of Justice dismissed a case lodged by several beekeepers against the authorisation of Fipronil. Since March 2014, seeds treated with the chemical can no longer be marketed or used because of the risk to bees. In France, plant protection products containing Fipronil are prohibited completely.
The victims of the scandal, first and foremost European consumers, have been left completely in the dark and have no way of checking whether they have consumed harmful eggs, possibly over a long period.
In its reports on the scandal, the media have failed to provide any real information about the extent of the danger and its causes. There has been little discussion about the appalling conditions prevailing in large chicken farms where the cramped conditions provide the ideal breeding grounds for parasites to attack the already weakened animals.
Poultry and egg producers are clearly not interested in coming to grips with the scandal. The chairman of the Dutch poultry producers, Hennie de Haan, warned of a catastrophe resulting from an “overreaction”: “If it remains limited in time, it is still possible to catch up. But if it goes on for a longer period, the entire Dutch poultry and laying hens sector, including traders, will go bankrupt. One cannot just find a market for 4.5 billion eggs a year.”
This is not the first such food scandal. Similar crises have already occurred several times in recent years. Whether it’s dioxin or glyphosate, salmonella or antibiotics, rotten meat, BSE or Fipronil, the food scandals follow a similar pattern.
The crisis will dominate the media for some time until various culprits, so-called black sheep, are found and punished. Large amounts of contaminated food will be destroyed. Meanwhile, politicians and “experts” declare that the danger to consumers is low. In the end, responsibility is placed with consumers, who are accused of buying “cheap” food.
In reality, the agricultural policy of the EU is dominated by the demands of the capitalist system. The EU’s main task is not to protect the health of persons and animals, but rather to defend the competitiveness and export capacity of European agricultural concerns. In addition, the trimming of “bureaucracy” Europe-wide has reduced the capacity of authorities to control and test products on the market. State control authorities lack sufficient personnel to work effectively.
The latest egg scandal is systemic. Five years ago, at the height of the dioxin contamination scandal, the World Socialist Web Site wrote: “The transition between ‘normal’ capitalist production methods and market conditions to criminal practices is fluid. As long as the food industry is devoted to increasing the profit of shareholders, companies and the banks, food scandals such as the latest one in Germany are inevitable.”