18 Oct 2017

Thousands continue to suffer in the wake of Mexico’s earthquakes

Don Knowland 

On Friday, the death toll from the September 7 and 19 earthquakes that devastated southern Mexico and Mexico City had officially reached 471. That same day another earthquake, 5.5 in magnitude, struck Mexico off the coast of the state of Oaxaca, near the epicenter of the huge 8.1 September 7 temblor.
Speaking from the National Palace on Friday—the International Day for Disaster Reduction—Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto said that due to the loss of human lives and damage from the September temblors, “Mexico is now a much stronger country, with greater social awareness and a sense of community.” He called on Mexicans to “recognize and put above” the damage and suffering the “unity of Mexicans, their solidarity” and the “love for Mexico [that] is the passion of all Mexicans … and the great strength of Mexico.”
Peña Nieto claimed that “at this moment we have the integrity, the full capacity, the institutional strength to face this challenge and to support the population that was damaged”; that Mexico today has “a society with greater awareness of civil protection and [earthquake] prevention … with greater capacity of the institutions of the Mexican State at all its levels … to work at preventive tasks.”
In the same vein, Interior Minister Miguel Ángel Osorio Chong added that the earthquake disasters gave Mexicans the “opportunity to realize the potential that we have when we work together, the opportunity to meet again in the solidarity that distinguishes us.”
What empty blather, smuggled in under the guise of an imaginary classless national interest! The reality of Mexico is that of a divided, horribly unequal society in which a small layer at the top lords over the mass of the population. This is the capitalist reality that precludes working together on a mass scale to meet critical human needs.
The truth is that the corrupt Mexican government, which operates as the instrument of international capital and the Mexican oligarchy, had more than ample “opportunity,” especially in the wake of the 1985 earthquake that killed tens of thousands and displaced hundreds of thousands, to anticipate or take serious measures to reduce the extent of the damage. It failed miserably to do so. Nor has the government made serious efforts to aid those devastated by the September earthquakes.
It was instead the immediate efforts of the Mexican working class—those thousands of civilians who volunteered long hours to help those affected—that for the first couple of weeks provided the critical response in terms of food, water, supplies, equipment, medical aid, psychological counseling, and searching for victims in collapsed buildings.
Peña Nieto had to acknowledge the efforts of those civilian volunteers, but cynically used them to push his fairy tale that all Mexicans had learned from the earthquakes to work together regardless of their status or circumstances. He heaped praise on the Mexican Army, the Navy and the Federal Police, forces that, as usual, were slow to respond with emergency relief, and focused their immediate concerns on forestalling any threat of civil unrest.
On Friday, Oxfam Mexico also issued a statement of its findings as to the response to the earthquakes, presenting the real state of affairs.

Government failure to prepare for earthquakes

The emergency caused by the September earthquakes, it reported, showed the authorities’ “ignorance about the mechanisms and rules for responding to a humanitarian crisis, both those established by the country and international minimum standards.”
The statement went on: “In the three entities mentioned, problems of coordination between the government, civil society and affected people were detected. The response of civil society surpassed the capacity of government institutions to channel the donated aid.”
Another important shortcoming, according to Alejandra d’Hyver, coordinator of the Reduction of Risks of Disasters and humanitarian aid for the charitable organization, was that “the authorities have not made an adequate census of the damage and of the people affected, and the limited information available is not disaggregated by sex or age group, which makes it difficult to address the specific needs of children, women, the elderly and people with disabilities.” D’Hyver noted that the evaluation of the Oxfam Mexico field team showed that the most affected population is comprised of low-income people, and especially women, a much higher percentage of whom work from home, and who have seen increased workloads in terms of care (in part due to school closings), lost income and jobs.
That is, once again, the working class and poor have borne the brunt of the damage from the failure of the government to adequately prepare and plan for major earthquakes.
As to replacement shelters, “although shelters were set up, many people only come to receive help (water, food, sanitation and hygiene), but refuse to stay because the facilities do not have adequate physical conditions or for fear of belongings they have left in their homes being stolen, which indicates the urgent need for housing reconstruction.”
“We must combat the structural vulnerabilities evidenced by recent earthquakes and prevent them from reproducing during the recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction stages, in order to prevent loss of lives and livelihoods in future earthquakes,” concluded d’Hyver.
These findings made a mockery of Peña Nieto’s claim on Friday that “the most important” effort of the government at the moment “is to ensure that families who lost their homes may very soon have a new space to return to live.”

Urgent housing need

About 40 buildings in Mexico City completely collapsed during the 7.1 magnitude September 19 earthquake. But upwards of 4,000 were so badly damaged that the structures have been or will be deemed uninhabitable. Many housed hundreds of residents, so those without lodging number in the thousands.
An example is a building that collapsed in the Tlaplan delegation (borough) in southern Mexico City that was the subject of dramatic television coverage, as teams of rescuers pulled nine bodies from the rubble of the collapsed six-story structure, as well as 18 who survived. That building was one of 10 damaged in a complex that housed 500 apartments and more than 1,500 people.
Residents of the complex provided a snapshot of the city’s working and lower “middle” classes, including teachers, small businessmen, pensioners, public-sector employees and office workers. Many are now without housing, shelter or significant financial resources. As for some who were able to purchase apartments through social security subsidies, that was their only significant asset.
Many of those displaced by the earthquakes lived on fixed incomes such as small pensions, and most lacked insurance. Many are forced to double up with relatives, friends or in public shelters. Others must resort to temporary structures to find refuge.
Many await word from inspectors as to whether their buildings will be safe enough to return to. As one retired employee with a wife and two children from the Tlapan complex told the Los Angele s Times last week, “No one tells us anything. We don’t know when we can go back to our homes. It could be months.”
Doctors Without Borders reported last week, based on assessments made by teams in the field, that there are also “high levels of anxiety, fear, and hyperalertness” among those displaced.
Miguel Ángel Mancera Espinosa, the mayor of Mexico City, warned at a Friday press conference that his government will not permit improvised housing. The mayor cited a group in the Iztapalapa delegation that tried to convince neighbors to settle in camps of structures made with poles and sheets. Mancera Espinosa emphasized that such “people’s camps,” camps that lasted “forever” following the 1985 earthquake, would be dismantled, but his government thus far has not taken serious steps to provide alternative shelter.
His government only recently started a program to cover interim rent payments and provide low-interest housing loans and grants. This Mexico City Rebuilding, Recovery and Transformation Plan adopted at the end of September allocates the paltry sum of $2.8 million to restore over 10,000 buildings affected by the earthquake.
People are rightly skeptical as they fill out the aid forms. The government does not say when it is going to provide aid, and the amount surely will not be enough to resettle.
On Friday, Mancera Espinosa directed most of his attention to new building regulations he said would be in place within three weeks, which would focus on rules for new buildings and a regulatory framework for restructuring the buildings that were severely damaged by the September 19 earthquake.
This is an old and discredited song. After the 1985 earthquake, regulations were adopted as to new building, and reinforcement of existing damaged structures. The regulations were either inadequate or largely unenforced.
A high number of the buildings that suffered substantial damage in the September 19 earthquake were new or recently remodeled buildings. Many were the subject of citizen complaints about safety, according to an investigation and report by the Guardian newspaper.

Thousands of construction violations

Since 2012, Mexico City residents lodged on the order of 6,000 complaints about construction project violations. In 2016 alone, residents filed 1,271 complaints with the Environmental and Zoning Prosecutor’s Office as to violations of zoning or land use ordinances. Residents and advocacy organizations say the city government did not act on the vast majority of complaints, which were often made in response to visual damage following earthquakes, or that there is no public record of a response. When city reviews were done as to what repairs were required, they often were not communicated. When complaints were reviewed and passed on to the City Urban Development and Housing Secretariat (Seduvi) to act on, usually nothing happened.
Developers easily circumvented the regulations due to lax city enforcement, or outright corruption.
“I have not seen a single sanction,” Josefina MacGregor of Suma Urbana, a group of neighborhood associations in Mexico City, told the Guardian. “Facing pressure from citizens, the government will sometimes say that they are going to sanction the developers [for building violations]. But it’s not true.”
After the 1985 earthquake many residents abandoned Mexico City’s center. But city government incentives led to massive development over the last decade. Despite warnings from civil engineers that tall new developments were shifting and drying out soil, increasing earthquake risks, and of massive construction projects weakening the foundations of neighboring buildings, such development in the city’s center proceeded at a breakneck pace.
A reform after the 1985 earthquake required hiring a licensed “Director Responsible for Construction” (DRO in Spanish) to oversee meeting compliance with earthquake prevention requirements as to new building construction. DROs were routinely bribed. Yet in 2016, Mancera Espinosa’s office suspended legislation that permitted city departments to sanction DROs.
The law required that the city conduct a review of the structures of schools, hospitals and housing built following the massive 8.1 September 7 Oaxaca earthquake, which was felt in Mexico City. None was performed.
Despite massive casualties and damage from the 1985 earthquake, during the ensuing three decades the entire Mexico City development regime served the interests of developers and their profits, not the safety of its residents. The results are there for all to see. Nothing the Mexican president or government officials say about preparedness and solidarity can paper over this naked reality.

Iraqi forces seize back more Kurdish-held territory

James Cogan

The US-backed Iraqi government of Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is expanding military operations to take back territory being held by US- and German-trained and armed “peshmerga” militia loyal to the autonomous Kurdish Regional Government (KRG). Washington, Germany and other powers are applying immense diplomatic pressure on the KRG to submit.
Since early Monday morning, Iraqi government army, police and militia units have dislodged Kurdish forces from much of Kirkuk province, including the city of Kirkuk itself, its airport, nearby towns and, most significantly, some of northern Iraq’s largest oilfields.
Kurdish General Command issued a statement declaring Baghdad’s actions a “clear declaration of war against the people of the Kurdistan Region.” Apart from isolated incidents, however, reports indicate that the peshmerga have generally withdrawn without offering resistance.
Throughout yesterday, Iraqi forces in Nineveh province moved from the provincial capital Mosul into areas they did not control. A government-backed ethnic Yazadi-based militia occupied the strategic town of Sinjar on the Iraq-Syria border.
Reports indicate that as government troops advance, peshmerga are retreating from Khanaqin, a district in Diyala province that borders Iran to the south of the three provinces that formally comprise the KRG.
The KRG has long claimed that the areas now coming back under Baghdad’s control should be incorporated into its territory. KRG president and nationalist leader Masoud Barzani seized the opportunity to order peshmerga to occupy the disputed regions after the June 2014 offensive by Islamic State (ISIS) and the wholesale retreat of government forces from Mosul and large swathes of northern Iraq.
The KRG hailed the peshmerga taking of Kirkuk as a milestone for the Kurdish nationalist movement. The province sits above substantial oil reserves and is considered crucial to the economic viability of any separate Kurdish state. Much of its Kurdish population was driven out by the former Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein, leaving a legacy of ethnic tensions and animosities.
The status of the KRG, along with Kirkuk and other disputed territory, was never resolved under the post-2003 US occupation regime and its puppet government—in which the Kurdish nationalists played a particularly venal role. As a pay-off for Kurdish support, Washington pressured the Arab-based parties in Baghdad to agree to hold a referendum on Kurdish independence in 2007, but it was repeatedly postponed and ultimately never conducted.
Since the ISIS uprising, the US-backed factions in Iraq have been preoccupied with seeking to recapture the country’s north. With ISIS now largely destroyed, however, control of the disputed territories, and especially the oilfields of Kirkuk, has emerged as the focus of bitter conflict between the rival ruling cliques in Baghdad and the KRG.
The deployment of government forces was prompted by a September 25 independence referendum in the KRG and the disputed territory under its control.
The Baghdad government declared the referendum illegal. The vote was furiously opposed by Turkey, which has spent decades brutally suppressing separatist movements among its own large Kurdish population. Iran, which exerts major influence over the Shiite-based parties that dominate the Iraqi government, also denounced the ballot.
The Trump administration backed Baghdad and opposed the referendum. Germany, which has used financial and military backing for the KRG to establish a political foothold in the Middle East, condemned the vote as provocative and destabilising.
The referendum also brought to the surface longstanding tensions between the main bourgeois nationalist parties in Iraq’s Kurdish region—the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) headed by Barzani, and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) previously headed by the recently deceased Jalal Talibani. The two factions fought a bloody civil war in the 1990s, with the KDP collaborating with Saddam Hussein’s regime against the Iranian-backed PUK.
The opposition of the imperialist powers and regional powers led the PUK to publicly call for the referendum’s postponement. Barzani refused to do so. The vote reportedly resulted in a 93 percent majority in favour of independence.
The Trump administration gave the green light for the Iraqi military operations against the Kurdish nationalists. On September 30, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson declared that the referendum and its result “lack legitimacy” and the US supported a unified Iraq. Two weeks later, columns of tanks and troops converged on Kirkuk.
Barzani and the KDP have accused the PUK-linked peshmerga of assisting the Iraqi forces by withdrawing and allowing them to occupy key facilities. Barzani asserted yesterday that Kirkuk was lost only because of “certain individuals in certain parties.” A KDP military commander accused the PUK of “treason.” The PUK denied the allegations and insisted its fighters were the only ones to suffer casualties.
A hospital in Suleimaniyah, the PUK’s stronghold in the KRG, told Associated Press it received the bodies of 25 peshmerga killed in Kirkuk and is treating another 44 wounded.
US Army spokesperson Colonel Ryan Dillon told journalists in Washington the only casualties were the result of a “miscommunication” early Monday morning and there had been “no further reports of armed combat or conflict between the two groups.” He alleged that the entry of government forces was “supposed to be a coordinated movement” and a “peaceful handover of areas around Kirkuk.”
Unconfirmed reports, denied by the Iraqi government and the US military, indicate that sectarian Shiite-based militias and Iranian advisors are accompanying army and police units. In Kirkuk, Kurdish flags have been torn down and images of Barzani defaced. The KDP-linked Rudaw news agency alleged there was looting, homes burned and peshmerga fighters captured and beheaded.
Thousands of ethnic Kurd civilians initially fled the city, fearing violence. Reports indicate many are already returning to their homes.
In highly charged and confused conditions, major clashes may yet break out between Iraqi and Kurdish forces, or between the rival Kurdish factions.
In Baghdad, Abadi gloated yesterday that the retaking of Kirkuk and the disputed territories meant the referendum on Kurdish separation was “finished and has become a thing of the past.” Barzani responded by declaring the vote “would not be in vain” and he would continue to pursue “the independence of Kurdistan.”

The conspiracy to censor the Internet

Andre Damon & Joseph Kishore

The political representatives of the American ruling class are engaged in a conspiracy to suppress free speech. Under the guise of combating “trolls” and “fake news” supposedly controlled by Russia, the most basic constitutional rights enumerated in the First Amendment are under direct attack.
The leading political force in this campaign is the Democratic Party, working in collaboration with sections of the Republican Party, the mass media and the military-intelligence establishment.
The Trump administration is threatening nuclear war against North Korea, escalating the assault on health care, demanding new tax cuts for the rich, waging war on immigrant workers, and eviscerating corporate and environmental regulations. This reactionary agenda is not, however, the focus of the Democratic Party. It is concentrating instead on increasingly hysterical claims that Russia is “sowing divisions” within the United States.
In the media, one report follows another, each more ludicrous than the last. The claim that Russia shifted the US election by means of $100,000 in advertisements on Facebook and Twitter has been followed by breathless reports of the Putin government’s manipulation of other forms of communication.
An “exclusive” report from CNN last week proclaimed that one organization, “Don’t Shoot Us,” which it alleges without substantiation is connected to Russia, sought to “exploit racial tensions and sow discord” on Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, Tumblr and even Pokémon Go, a reality game played on cell phones.
Another report in CNN on Monday asserted that a Russian “troll factory” was involved in posting comments critical of Hillary Clinton as “part of President Vladimir Putin’s campaign to influence the 2016 election.” All of the negative commentary in news media and other publications directed at Clinton, it implied, were the product of Russian agents or people duped by Russian agents.
As during the period of Cold War McCarthyism, the absurdity of the charges goes unchallenged. They are picked up and repeated by other media outlets and by politicians to demonstrate just how far-reaching the actions of the nefarious “foreign enemy” really are.
While one aim has been to continue and escalate an anti-Russia foreign policy, the more basic purpose is emerging ever more clearly: to criminalize political dissent within the United States.
The most direct expression to date of this conspiracy against free speech was given by the anticommunist ideologue Anne Applebaum in a column published Monday in the Washington Pos t, “If Russia can create fake ‘Black Lives Matter’ accounts, who will next?”
Her answer: the American people. “I can imagine multiple groups, many of them proudly American, who might well want to manipulate a range of fake accounts during a riot or disaster to increase anxiety or fear,” she writes. She warns that “political groups—on the left, the right, you name it—will quickly figure out” how to use social media to spread “disinformation” and “demoralization.”
Applebaum rails against all those who seek to hide their identity online. “There is a better case than ever against anonymity, at least against anonymity in the public forums of social media and comment sections,” she writes. She continues: “The right to free speech is something that is granted to humans, not bits of computer code.” Her target, however, is not “bots” operating “fake accounts,” but anyone who seeks, fearing state repression or unjust punishment by his or her employer, to make an anonymous statement online. And that is only the opening shot in a drive to silence political dissent.
Applebaum is closely connected to the highest echelons of the capitalist state. She is a member of key foreign policy think tanks and sits on the board of directors of the CIA-linked National Endowment for Democracy. Married to the former foreign minister of Poland, she is a ferocious war hawk. Following the Russian annexation of Crimea, she authored a column in the Washington Postin which she called for “total war” against nuclear-armed Russia. She embodies the connection between militarism and political repression.
The implications of Applebaum’s arguments are made clear in an extraordinary article published on the front page of Tuesday’s New York Times, “As US Confronts Internet’s Disruptions, China Feels Vindicated,” which takes a favorable view of China’s aggressive censorship of the Internet and implies that the United States is moving toward just such a regime.
“For years, the United States and others saw” China’s “heavy-handed censorship as a sign of political vulnerability and a barrier to China’s economic development,” the Times writes. “But as countries in the West discuss potential Internet restrictions and wring their hands over fake news, hacking and foreign meddling, some in China see a powerful affirmation of the country’s vision for the internet.”
The article goes on to assert that while “few would argue that China’s Internet control serves as a model for democratic societies… At the same time, China anticipated many of the questions now flummoxing governments from the United States to Germany to Indonesia.”
Glaringly absent from the Times article, Applebaum’s commentary and all of the endless demands for a crackdown on social media is any reference to democratic rights, free speech or the First Amendment.
The First Amendment, which asserts that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech,” is the broadest amendment in the US Constitution. Contrary to Applebaum, there is no caveat exempting anonymous speech from Constitutional protection. It is a historical fact that leaders of the American Revolution and drafters of the Constitution wrote articles under pseudonyms to avoid repression by the British authorities.
The Constitution does not give the government or powerful corporations the right to proclaim what is “fake” and what is not, what is a “conspiracy theory” and what is “authoritative.” The same arguments now being employed to crack down on social media could just as well have been used to suppress books and mass circulation newspapers that emerged with the development of the printing press.
The drive toward Internet censorship in the United States is already far advanced. Since Google announced plans to bury “alternative viewpoints” in search results earlier this year, leading left-wing sites have seen their search traffic plunge by more than 50 percent. The World Socialist Web Site’s search traffic from Google has fallen by 75 percent.
Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms have introduced similar measures. The campaign being whipped up over Russian online activity will be used to justify even more far-reaching measures.
This is taking place as universities implement policies to give police the authority to vet campus events. There are ongoing efforts to abolish “net neutrality” so as to give giant corporations the ability to regulate Internet traffic. The intelligence agencies have demanded the ability to circumvent encryption after having been exposed for illegally monitoring the phone communications and Internet activity of the entire population.
In one “democratic” country after another governments are turning to police-state forms of rule, from France, with its permanent state of emergency, to Germany, which last month shut down a subsidiary of the left-wing political site Indymedia, to Spain, with its violent crackdown on the separatist referendum in Catalonia and arrest of separatist leaders.
The destruction of democratic rights is the political response of the corporate and financial aristocracy to the growth of working-class discontent bound up with record levels of social inequality. It is intimately linked to preparations for a major escalation of imperialist violence around the world. The greatest concern of the ruling elite is the emergence of an independent movement of the working class, and the state is taking actions to prevent it.

Australian bank hearing reveals growing danger of interest-only housing loans

Nick Beams

Disturbing evidence of the vulnerability of the Australian housing market and its major banks to a sudden shift in financial conditions and any rise in interest rates emerged in the hearings before a parliamentary committee last week.
Testimony given by Westpac chief executive Brian Hartzer revealed that half the bank’s $400 billion of outstanding home loans consists of interest-only mortgages. The figure for other three of the “big four” of Australian banks—ANZ, NAB and CBA—is 40 percent interest-only.
In an article for The Conversation, reposted by the Australian ABC, University of New South Wales economics professor Richard Holden wrote that while he was not normally a fan of parliament hauling in private sector executives and asking them questions, last Wednesday’s proceedings were “both useful and instructive.”
“And, to be perfectly frank, terrifying,” he added. Commenting on what he called the “startling level” of interest-only loans—that is, loans in which the borrower does not pay back any principal for a period up to five years—Holden noted what he called the “banal response” of the Westpac chief.
Questioned on the figure, Hartzer had told the House of Representatives standing committee on economics: “We don’t lend money to people who can’t pay it back. It doesn’t make sense for us to do so.”
But as Holden remarked: “Did it make sense for all those American mortgage lenders to lend to people on adjustable rates, low-doc loans, no-doc loans etc. before the global financial crisis?”
Holden also made a scathing comment on the testimony of the ANZ CEO, Shayne Elliott, who took the same line as his Westpac counterpart, insisting that ANZ did not lend money to people who could not repay.
Holden commented: “Recall this is the man who on ABC’s ‘Four Corners’ said that home loans weren’t risky because they were all uncorrelated risks (the chances that one loan defaults does not affect the chances of others defaulting). That is a comment that is either staggeringly stupid or completely disingenuous.”
The point is that while home loan defaults may be uncorrelated, the same factors that cause one mortgagee to default—a rise in interest rates or a significant downturn in the economy causing unemployment to rise or some other factor—will impact on others in the same way.
Hartzer and Elliott “must all take us for suckers,” Holden wrote. He estimated there are about $1 trillion of interest-only loans on the books of Australian banks, under conditions where, according to the Reserve Bank of Australia, about one-third of borrowers do not have a month’s repayment buffer.
The crunch would come when interest rates began to rise, recalling the US mortgage meltdown when borrowers had to refinance. “When the market couldn’t bear that refinancing, defaults went up,” Holden wrote. “Then the collapse of US investment bank Bear Stearns, then Lehman, then Armageddon.”
Holden warned that Australia’s large proportion of interest-only loans, “turbo-charged” by an “out-of-control” negative-gearing regime (in which investor-borrowers can write-off interest payments against tax), “looks spookily similar.”
“It’s one thing for borrowers to do silly things. When it becomes dangerous is when lenders not only facilitate that stupidity, but encourage it. That seems to be happening in Australia.”
Last April, the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority (APRA) stipulated that interest-only loans should comprise only 30 percent of any bank’s mortgage holdings. But Holden warned that may be “far too little, way too late.”
Questioning by committee members on Westpac’s compliance with the APRA stipulation centred mainly not on the level of systemic risk posed by the high proportion of interest-only loans but how the bank sought to take the most profitable route to bring down the proportion.
Rather than simply refuse new applications once the 30 percent limit on new borrowings was reached, Westpac sought to change the mix of its holdings through what Hartzer called the “pricing mechanism.” The bank raised rates on interest-only loans and reduced them slightly on loans requiring the repayment of principal—the most beneficial approach for its bottom line.
Hartzer insisted that the changes were a response to the APRA requirement. But the committee’s chair, Liberal MP David Coleman, noted: “It does appear that what you have described as a response to the regulator had, from your perspective, the happy coincidence of a meaningful increase in your earnings.”
While the exchanges during the committee hearing on this question revealed the absolute concern for the banks to gouge every last cent of profit, the overriding issue is the stability of financial system as a whole given the banks’ dependence on housing.
Nationals MP Kevin Hogan asked Hartzer why Westpac’s “lending to housing, in relative terms to small business, has become completely skewed? Why has lending to housing taken over and dominated your lending relative to small business?”
Hartzer replied that the demand for housing was high, interest rates were falling and the price of houses was rising. This had pushed up the demand for housing lending to meet the price. He could have shortened his answer by stating simply: “Because that’s where the money is.”
At the same time, Holden said the bank did not constrain its lending to small business—a claim that many businesses, facing tightening financial constrictions, would no doubt dispute.
A key feature of the Australian banking system is its dependence on the flow of foreign funds to finance essentially parasitic activities, under conditions where the creation of an inflated housing market has led the International Monetary Fund and other international organisations to warn of a bubble.
In September 2008, the Australian banks were not directly affected through the purchase of “toxic assets” issued by US finance houses because they are borrowers from, rather than investors in, global markets. But after the world financial crisis broke, they were rapidly impacted because loans to fund their activities dried up virtually overnight in October. Had the situation continued, they would have suffered a major liquidity crisis and potentially bankruptcy, a breakdown averted only when the Rudd Labor government stepped in as their guarantor.
Since the 2008 crisis, the banks have lessened their dependence somewhat on volatile international short-term funding. But they still rely on the flow of money from global markets.
In January this year, a Morgan Stanley analysis found that while new regulations had forced the banks to increase their use of customers’ deposits, the banks also had increased the issuance of longer-term bonds.
Last year the big four issued $148 billion in long-term debt, up from $109 billion in 2015, with a further $142 billion to be issued this year.
Low interest rates in international markets have created favourable conditions for such borrowing, but Morgan Stanley warned the situation could change. One of the key issues will be further interest rate rises by the US Fed.
On the one hand, the Reserve Bank of Australia would need to lift interest rates in order to keep funds flowing into the Australian banking and financial system. On the other, rising interest rates could impact on the interest-only loans of investors and on homebuyers whose finances have been stretched to the limit by soaring house prices.
A survey conducted by global banking giant UBS last month found that of the people who took out a home loan in 2017, only 67 percent gave a “completely and factual” account to the bank of their financial situation, down from 72 percent from last year. UBS said the survey, which involved 900 people, would tend to underestimate the level of mortgage misrepresentation because people would be reluctant to admit it, even anonymously.
UBS has estimated that about $500 billion of the $1.7 trillion of mortgages outstanding in Australia could contain misstatements about incomes, assets, existing debts and expenses.
So far the international low-interest rate regime has allowed the housing bubble to continue, with ordinary homebuyers and investors still able to meet their debts. Only a small shift, however, would rapidly bring to the surface a major social and financial crisis, reaching into the banking system itself.

Hurricane Ophelia’s tail hits Ireland and UK

Margot Miller 

The Republic of Ireland and large parts of the UK was battered by the remnants of Hurricane Ophelia Monday.
Strong winds led to extensive damage and three fatalities. While Ireland was the worst affected, the storm also hit West Wales, Scotland, south west England and the north of England.
A woman in her fifties died when a tree landed on her car in West Waterford, while her companion, a woman in her seventies, was hospitalised. A downed tree crushed a car, claiming the male driver, in Ravensdale, Dundalk. A 30-year-old man died in a chainsaw accident in Cahir, Co Tipperary, while attempting to remove a tree felled by the storm. Another man narrowly escaped with his life when a tree fell on his car in Midleton.
As the storm made its way northeast, winds left 360,000 homes and businesses without power in the Republic of Ireland. Power was also lost to thousands of homes in Northern Ireland—18,000 affected—and Wales. Tens of thousands remained without electricity during Monday evening. Full power for all is not expected to be restored for all for at least ten days.
Winds reached 95 mph in many places and up to 109 mph in Fastnet Rock.
Waves as high as 27 feet were reported at sea in the south of Ireland. Winds ripped the roofs off many buildings and uprooted trees. A gust tore the roof from Douglas Community School, while the soccer stadium in nearby Cork, which was hit by gusts of up to 105 mph, had its roof blown off and was badly damaged.
The Guardai (Irish Police) advised people to stay indoors and refrain from travelling for their own safety. The Fine-Gael minority government ordered 1,000 troops on standby.
During the evening, police in Carrickfergus had to evacuate residents, who were at risk of flooding, due to tidal surges. They were taken to a local council hall to stay the night.
Met Eireann issued a “status red alert” ahead of the ex-Hurricane’s landing, which despite being downgraded to a post-tropical cyclone was potentially life threatening due to flying roof tiles and debris, falling trees and high seas, with waves pounding the coastline.
The Met Office, the UK’s national weather service, warned that the storm, which originated in the Atlantic as a Category 1 hurricane, was a potential danger to life. It issued a yellow warning of extreme winds in the West of Scotland, the North of England and Wales.
In west Wales, winds reached 90 mph in Aberdaron. Four thousand properties were without power in Camarthenshire, Pembrokeshire, Ceredigion and Powys.
Southwest Scotland was hit by winds of 80 mph during Monday evening and the heavily populated central belt, including Glasgow, faced 60 mph gusts. The Scottish Environment Protection Agency issued a series of flood alerts, while parts of England also braced themselves for flooding, with three flood warnings issued.
All schools and colleges in the Republic of Ireland closed their doors Monday and will remain closed Tuesday until the worst of the storm is over. Some head teachers berated the authorities for not informing them earlier about the closures—many had to contact parents and pupils late on Sunday night.
As a precaution, 80 schools in West Wales were shut, as well as all 48 on the Isle of Anglesey.
Due to the severe weather, all trains, ferries, buses and trams stopped running in Ireland, while Ryanair, Aer Lingus, British Airways, Qatar Airlines, Air France, City Jet, Emirates and KLM grounded flights in and out of Dublin airport. Passengers were told to check their flights from Belfast airport while Manchester airport in northwest England cancelled 20 flights. Edinburgh Airport cancelled all flights to Ireland.
Former US President Bill Clinton was forced to cancel his planned visit to the Northern Ireland Assembly at Stormont, to discuss the ongoing crisis in which there has been no functioning devolved government for nine months. Stormont suffered a power outage due to the storm.
The famous Peace Bridge across the River Foyle in Londonderry was closed as a precaution.
Debris strewn everywhere is expected to cause major public safety problems for days to come. According to Travelwatch NI, by 6 p.m., 179 trees/branches had fallen, causing chaos on roads. Several trees were brought down near to each other making roads impassable.
Five flights to UK airports were forced to make emergency landings, reporting mysterious “smoke smells” in cockpits that were thought to be linked to the remnants of the hurricane.
Many parts of the UK experienced eerie sepia light. Other areas reported “sunset at midday” as the sun glowed red in the sky due to particles of dust from the Sahara and debris from the wildfires in Portugal and Spain sucked over by Hurricane Ophelia.
Hurricane Ophelia was the worst storm to hit Ireland in 50 years. Extreme weather is hitting more parts of the world, with increasing frequency and ferocity, due to global warming. At least 27 people have been killed this week in the hundreds of wildfires in Portugal, leading to a state of emergency being declared in an area amounting to half of the country.
As with the hurricanes which have devastated large parts of the United States and Caribbean in recent months, evidence points to the fact that the Irish government did little to ensure public safety and prepare for what was known well in advance to be a massive storm.
Eugene Murphy, the flood relief spokesman of Ireland’s other main party, Fianna Fáil, seeking to score political points, noted that the National Emergency Coordination Committee met on Sunday. But all local authorities, civil defence and emergency services “were not put on stand-by. ... Hurricane Ophelia is due to be the worst storm to hit this country in over a decade, but we have less than 24 hours to prepare for it.”
According to Dr. Dann Mitchell of the School of Geographical Sciences at the University of Bristol, “There is evidence that hurricane-force storms hitting the UK, like Ophelia, will be enhanced in the future due to human-induced climate change.
“While tropical hurricanes lose strength when they travel north, they can re-intensify due to the nature of the atmospheric circulation at UK latitudes. It is the rise in temperatures over most of the Atlantic that is a primary driver of this, a clear signature of human-induced climate change.”
Writing in the Guardian, Environment Editor Damian Carrington said, “An increase in hurricane-force winds wreaking havoc across the Britain and Ireland is entirely consistent with global warming, according to scientists.” Higher temperatures create “more energy in the climate system, especially in the oceans, which is where big storms derive their energy from.”
A report commissioned in May by the Association of British Insurers (ABI)—carried out by the Consultancy firm Air Worldwide in conjunction with the UK Met Office—warned of the disastrous consequences of even a minimal increase in global warming by 1.5º C. The ABI called for action to reinforce buildings to withstand damage from wind destruction, which the report projects would likely increase by over 50 percent across the UK.
A 2,000-page report produced over three years by 80 experts for the Committee on Climate Change found the UK completely unprepared for the effects of global warming—which could see deadly heatwaves with temperatures in the high 30º C and up to 48º C in London, more flooding and water shortages.
The indifference of the ruling elite to the safety and wellbeing of the population was demonstrated by Theresa May on becoming prime minster last year. One of her first acts was the abolition of the Department of Energy and Climate Change.

Chinese Communist Party congress meets amid gathering crises

Peter Symonds

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) national congress, due to begin tomorrow, will seek to consolidate the position of President Xi Jinping as China’s pre-eminent leader for the next five years, and possibly beyond.
Despite concerted efforts to project the image of a stable, unified leadership, the promotion and glorification of Xi signals the opposite. He is being elevated to the status of supreme leader in a bid to contain factional infighting as the regime confronts a slowing economy and rising social tensions at home, and the growing US threat of trade war and war abroad.
Xi was elevated to CCP chairman in November 2012 and took over the post of Chinese president in March 2013, as part of the once-in-a-decade generational change that has now become the convention. His installation was accompanied by the ousting and trial of potential rival Bo Xilai, party boss in the major city of Chongqing, on trumped-up corruption charges.
Over the past five years, Xi has carried out a widespread anti-corruption drive that, above all, has been aimed at purging potential rivals and silencing opposition to his policies. In July, Sung Zhengcai, who was regarded as a contender for a top leadership role in five years’ time, was removed as Chongqing party secretary and could face corruption charges.
After a plenary meeting of the party’s central committee last week, the CCP announced that 12 central committee members, including Sung, had been expelled from the party. In all, some 40 members or alternate members of the central committee have been punished for alleged corruption over the past five years. As of 2016, an estimated one million party members had been investigated.
The corruption drive has been one means Xi has used to concentrate power in his hands. He also has carried out an extensive restructuring of the military or People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and consolidated control in the Central Military Commission that he chairs, rather than regional commands. In March 2017, the state-owned news agency Xinhua reported that a total of 4,885 PLA officers had been punished for graft, including a number of top generals.
Xi has tightened his grip over the party and the military as the regime confronts a growing economic and social crisis. The economy has slowed markedly to a projected 6.5 percent growth rate this year and is burdened by high levels of debt. The regime is under pressure from international finance to slash debt, implement austerity measures and further open up the economy to foreign investors. Last month, the international credit rating agency Standard & Poor’s downgraded China’s sovereign debt rating for the first time in 18 years.
The ousting of Bo Xilai five years ago was a repudiation of the politics he advocated—the protection and boosting of state-owned enterprises as national champions that could compete internationally, along with a more concerted push-back against US efforts to undermine and contain China, if need be through war.
However, while Xi and Premier Li Leqiang have pursued the pro-market agenda demanded by the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, they have done so cautiously, fearing that rising unemployment would lead to widespread social unrest. An estimated 5 to 6 million workers are losing their jobs as the government seeks to restructure or shut down so-called zombie state-owned enterprises—those kept solvent by state bank loans—in the steel and coal industries.
While no official figures have been released, the annual number of protests and strikes by workers has reportedly increased by 30 percent over the 2010 figure of 210,000. The widening gulf between rich and poor is also fueling hostility and alienation from the CCP leadership, which represents the interests of the super-wealthy layer of billionaires that have profited from capitalist restoration since 1978.
Despite government claims that poverty is lessening, social inequality is glaring. According to the National People’s Congress (NPC) in March 2017, one third of China’s wealth is owned by the top 1 percent of households. Several of the country’s wealthiest individuals on the Hurun Rich List will be delegates to the CCP congress.
As the internal and external problems besetting the Chinese leadership have intensified, Xi has been more and more promoted as the country’s saviour. Last October, he was designated the regime’s “core” leader—a phrase now ritually used in reference to his role. He has strengthened his grip over virtually every aspect of policy, including the economy that traditionally came within the premier’s sphere, by establishing and controlling key leading groups.
Xi also has strenuously promoted Chinese nationalism. His so-called Chinese Dream is for the country to rid itself of the legacy of 19th century domination by the major powers and become a major power in its own right. According to some analysts, Xi may try to elevate his status by formally elaborating so-called Xi Jinping Thought and even using the congress to insert a reference to it in the country’s constitution.
The congress takes place under the US threat of all-out war against North Korea, a formal ally of China. Xi has bent over backwards to accommodate Washington and the new Trump administration, including by imposing harsh trade sanctions on Pyongyang. However, the Chinese leadership is well aware that a war against North Korea also would be aimed against China, which the US regards as the key obstacle to its global hegemony.
Xi has promoted the One-Belt, One-Road initiative—a massive infrastructure project aimed at linking Europe and Asia via high-speed rail, road and sea, and implicitly sidelining the United States. The project is already exacerbating tensions with Washington, which under Trump is threatening to take trade war measures to undercut China’s rising economic influence.
The CCP congress will be pored over by mainstream analysts for clues as to the leadership line-up. Five of the seven positions on the top Politburo Standing Committee could be filled by new appointees, along with 11 of the wider Politburo’s 25 seats and about half the posts on the 205-member central committee.
Whatever its exact composition, the new leadership will be confronted with the prospect of an imminent US war on its doorstep in North Korea, as well as a mounting social explosion internally as it proceeds with its pro-market agenda.

Bombings kill hundreds in Somali capital

Eddie Haywood & Thomas Gaist 

Twin bombings in central areas of Somalia’s capital of Mogadishu Saturday killed at least 302 people and injured 300 others, with the death toll expected to climb. Unknown numbers are still missing.
The attacks occurred in Mogadishu’s K5 district, which hosts government offices and upscale restaurants and hotels. The bombings, which killed top government officials, including Humanitarian Affairs Director Mohamoud Elmi, are described by witnesses and analysts as “unprecedented” and “the worst” in recent Somali history.
Nearly all of the dead were killed by the first bomb, which exploded outside a popular hotel near a busy intersection in Mogadishu, sending a plume of smoke into the sky that could be seen from across the city. The second truck bomb killed a few more people nearby.
Al-Shabaab, the Somali Islamist militia, which government officials believe to be behind the attack, has not claimed responsibility. In speaking to the likelihood of Al-Shabaab carrying out the attack, Matt Bryden, security consultant with the International Crisis Group for the Horn of Africa, told the Associated Press, “No other group in Somalia has the capacity to put together a bomb of this size, in this nature.”
The deadly attack comes as the Trump administration has escalated Washington’s military offensive against Al-Shabaab. Early in his administration, Trump authorized looser rules of engagement for US commanders in Somalia as well as a new wave of US troop deployments. In July, the White House approved a series of drone strikes against Al-Shabaab strongholds in southern Somalia.
Indicating the attack is under consideration as a pretext for further US military escalation, US officials stated to the media, “Such cowardly attacks reinvigorate the commitment of the United States to assist our Somali and African Union partners to combat the scourge of terrorism.”
While the precise extent of US involvement in Somalia is kept almost entirely secret from the public, during the past year a series of announcements and official leaks from both the Obama and Trump administrations, together with discussions between Washington and European governments, have made clear that Washington is looking to escalate its military presence in the country.
During the May 12-13 London Conference on Somalia, the plans for carving up the country by Washington with support from Britain were made clear. Topics discussed included strategies for an intensified buildup of military forces inside Somalia, and for the further breakup of Somalia’s central state structure via devolution of power to regional governments in Somaliland and Puntland.
What was clear at the conference in London is that Somalia is being used as a central testing ground for the neocolonial policies and methods of the imperialist powers. The “Somalia campaign,” enacted under Obama and continued by the Trump administration, which calls for an increased US troop presence in the country, is viewed as a “blueprint for new wars across the Middle East and Africa” according to senior government officials cited by the New York Times last year.
At least 300 American commandos are involved in daily military operations in Somalia alongside Somali, Ugandan, Kenyan and Ethiopian soldiers, with reports of US forces engaging directly in combat operations. US soldiers and mercenaries are leading ongoing training of Somali commandos at a secret base at Baledogle airport near Mogadishu.
Recent Al-Shabaab successes, including the overrunning of a Somali government military base and African Union bases manned by Burundian, Ugandan, and Kenyan troops earlier this year, have shown the ability of Al-Shabaab to exploit the mass hatred toward the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) government, which was installed via US-backed Ethiopian and Kenyan invasions, and has been propped up by a military occupation enforced by US-backed the African Union multinational army.
The chaotic state of Somali society is a consequence of the military efforts of US imperialism and its African puppets during the 25 years since the 1989-1991 breakup of the USSR, which was allied in different periods with Somalia and Ethiopia. Enlisting the regime of Siad Barre to counter Soviet influence in the Horn of Africa, Washington supported Mogadishu with millions of dollars in weaponry.
After 1991, Washington abruptly withdrew its support for Somalia and the sudden removal of US aid to Mogadishu led immediately to the collapse of the central government. The resulting chaos was in turn exploited by American military-intelligence and corporate-financial entities to begin a neocolonial carve-up of the country.
A major factor in Washington’s drive for dominance over the Horn of Africa is the region’s strategic importance abutting the waterway for much of the world’s oil traffic flowing through the Red Sea from the Persian Gulf.
China’s increased economic influence in recent decades in nearly all sectors of Africa’s economy is another major concern. Washington views Beijing as an intolerable rival to be neutralized. Ratcheting up the tensions even further are Beijing’s establishment of a naval base in Djibouti, its first outside Chinese waters.
Saturday’s attacks only underscore the catastrophic results produced by imperialist intervention. Despite a decade of brutal war and counterinsurgency against Al-Shabaab, the US-backed TFG in Mogadishu is a puppet regime with no popular support anywhere in the country and is unable to control even the most critical areas of its own capital.
Washington’s criminal role has led to the complete destruction of Somali society. Dysfunctional and corrupt, the US-backed government in Mogadishu is unable to provide basic infrastructure, such as sanitary water facilities or decent health care, and an epidemic of treatable diseases such as cholera has ensued. Washington’s nearly three-decade imperialist offensive against the country has created the conditions for the rise of such extremist groups as Al-Shabaab.

Iraqi seizure of oil-rich Kirkuk from Kurds risks broader war

Jordan Shilton

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi ordered an offensive by Iraqi army units and pro-government Shia militias Monday to capture the oil-rich city of Kirkuk and surrounding areas from the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG). The attack, which reportedly provoked clashes in some areas between Iraqi units and Peshmerga fighters, threatens not only to further destabilize Iraq, but could prove the trigger for a broader catastrophic conflict that could quickly engulf neighboring Syria, drawing in regional and imperialist powers.
The retaking of Kirkuk took place after Baghdad negotiated the voluntary withdrawal of Peshmerga forces aligned with the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) faction, which is hostile to KRG president Masoud Barzani and opposed September’s Kurdish independence referendum. The referendum, which returned a substantial majority in favor of independence, was condemned by the regional and imperialist powers, and denounced by Baghdad as unconstitutional.
Barzani declared the Iraqi advance to be an act of war and ordered the Peshmerga under his command to use all available resources to fight back. KRG officials accused the PUK of a “betrayal” for failing to resist the Iraqi advance.
The loss of Kirkuk will be a devastating setback to Barzani’s independence plans. Control of the oil reserves from the area represented an important source of income for the KRG, which established a pipeline to Turkey to bypass Baghdad and sell oil on the world market.
While Peshmerga forces remained in control of oilfields outside Kirkuk Monday, Irbil reportedly had to halt oil supplies to Turkey as engineers failed to report to work. Eurasia Group estimated that of the 600,000 barrels a day shipped by the KRG to Turkey, 450,000 barrels would fall under the control of the Iraqi central government if it establishes a secure hold over Kirkuk and surrounding regions.
While US military figures and the corporate media sought to downplay the scale of the clashes Monday, the Iraqi army’s advance will have explosive consequences and poses the danger of a renewed wave of sectarian bloodletting that could rapidly engulf the entire region. Both sides have not only been armed to the teeth and trained by the US and its imperialist allies over recent years, but are contesting areas which are of major economic and geostrategic significance. Added to this, the extremely fragile situation in Iraq and throughout the Middle East, as the US and European imperialist powers jostle to advance their interests and regional powers like Turkey, Iran, Israel and Saudi Arabia are drawn ever more closely into a complex web of alliances that are increasingly in flux, and the true extent of the danger posed to the region’s long-suffering population becomes clear.
Kirkuk was a prize possession of the KRG. The oil-rich city and surrounding oilfields have been under Kurdish control since 2014, when Iraqi forces fled before the advance of ISIS. In last month’s referendum, Barzani controversially included the ethnically diverse city in the area considered to be part of an independent state, hoping thereby to seize control of its oil wealth. Baghdad responded furiously, vowing to use the military to restore its control.
Primary responsibility for the ethnic and sectarian conflict lies with US imperialism and its allies, which have systematically encouraged Kurdish regional ambitions in northern Iraq since the illegal US-led invasion in 2003. At the same time, Washington helped establish a Shia-dominated puppet regime in Baghdad that conducted a brutal crackdown on Sunni areas of Iraq, while refusing to countenance any move by the Kurds towards independence.
Having destroyed Iraqi society, creating the political and social conditions within which regional and ethnic conflicts could assume such malignant forms, US imperialism is now hypocritically seeking to pose as a neutral arbiter between Baghdad and Irbil, appealing to both sides to show restraint. Its main goal in this is to prevent all-out civil war in Iraq, since this would cut across Washington’s broader agenda in the Middle East of pushing back Iranian influence and consolidating an alliance with the Gulf states and Israel to secure US dominance over the energy-rich and strategically important region.
However, US actions are the most destabilizing factor. While backing both the KRG and Iraqi central government with financial and military resources, as well as personnel on the ground, Washington is relying chiefly on Kurdish allies in Syria to oust the Islamic State from its rapidly shrinking territory, and, much more significantly from the Washington’s point of view, prevent forces loyal to Iran and the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad from emerging in control of eastern Syria. This would facilitate Tehran’s establishment of a land bridge to Damascus, Lebanon and the Mediterranean coast, a development which would be a major strategic blow to the US, and its major Middle East ally, Israel.
Though the Syrian Kurds are not on good terms with Barzani, instead aligning themselves with the Turkish Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), Ankara, Baghdad and Tehran all view the emergence of strengthened Kurdish autonomous areas in northern Syria and Iraq as intolerable. Turkey has once again over recent days sent troops into northern Syria to block the emergence of a contiguous Kurdish territory on its southern border, prompting sharp protests from the Syrian government that its sovereignty is being violated. Further escalating tensions in Syria, the Israeli Air Force carried out a strike on a missile battery near Damascus Monday morning, claiming it had fired at Israeli reconnaissance planes over Lebanon.
Ankara condemned Barzani’s independence referendum and held talks with Iran about a possible military intervention. It has pledged to hand over border crossings between Turkey and the KRG to the Baghdad government. With a Turkish military base in northern Iraq not far from Mosul, Ankara could also be drawn into the fighting if it spreads.
A Turkish government statement praised the Iraqi offensive, claiming that it was necessary to drive out PKK forces which were allegedly being harbored by the KRG. It noted, in what amounted to a threat of a direct military invasion, that Ankara is “ready for any form of co-operation with the Iraqi government in order to end the PKK presence in Iraqi territory.”
This follows the provocative declaration by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in the wake of the Kurdish referendum that Irbil’s actions could spark an “ethnic war.”
The Iraqi offensive comes just days after US President Donald Trump vowed to blow up the 2015 nuclear accord with Tehran, unless the pact is renegotiated to meet Washington’s demands. His announcement not only aggravated tensions between the US and Iran throughout the Middle East, with Washington’s commitment to target the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) operations in Syria, Yemen and elsewhere, but brought to light the widening rift between US imperialist policy and that of its European rivals.
Should the fighting in Iraq spread, Iran faces the immediate prospect of being dragged into the conflict. Substantial numbers of Iranian military personnel, including members of the Revolutionary Guards, have been embedded in the Iraqi military to strengthen it in its operations against ISIS, a fact which was reportedly important in preventing Trump from designating the IRGC as a “terrorist organization” in his Iran speech Friday.
In addition, the Shia militias which have joined the Iraqi army advance into Kirkuk are under Iranian influence. The Guardian reported that Qassem Suleimani, head of the IRGC’s Quds force, helped direct the offensive.
Unconfirmed reports Monday indicated that ethnic strife has already begun. Kurdish commanders claimed that advancing Iraqi forces had burned villages south of Kirkuk. Large numbers of people were said to be fleeing the city, while the Kurdish governor of the region appealed to everyone with arms to resist Baghdad’s advance.
The Iraqi government has asserted that the Shia militias or Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), who are notorious for anti-Sunni and anti-Kurdish attacks, have agreed not to enter Kirkuk itself, a multi-ethnic and multi-religious city including Arabs, Turkmens and Kurds. But already by Monday afternoon, there were reports of two senior PMU commanders entering the city to watch Iraqi flags being raised over government buildings.
Al-Abadi released a statement Monday proclaiming that the military operation sought to “protect the unity of the country” and urged Kurds not to resist.
An indication of the violence in store for the region is given by the fact that the Iraqi advance was led by elite forces from Baghdad’s Counter-Terrorism Force, which led the murderous assault on Mosul that, in conjunction with US air strikes, laid waste to much of the city and claimed tens of thousands of civilian lives.

16 Oct 2017

Wiki Loves Africa Annual Photo Contest 2017

Application Deadline: 30th November 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: African countries
About the Award: The theme for the contest is… People at Work.
Please, document all manner of occupations that are undertaken across the African continent – these can be formal and informal, contemporary or ancient, business-oriented or creative.
There are several prices to grab. Including two special prizes for photo essays that capture Women Working or Rare, Fading or Threatened Traditional Crafts, Styles or Way of Working.
Wiki Loves Africa is a photo competition to share the daily practices of people across the continent with each other and the rest of the world, via Wikipedia.
Wiki Loves Africa is a public annual photo contest where people across Africa can contribute media (photographs, video and audio) about their environment on Wikimedia Commons for use on Wikipedia and other project websites of the Wikimedia Foundation.Wiki Loves Africa particularly encourages participants to contribute media that illustrate a specific theme for that year. Each year the theme changes and could include any such universal, visually rich and culturally specific topics (for example, markets, rites of passage, festivals, public art, cuisine, natural history, urbanity, daily life, notable persons, etc).
Type: Contest
Eligibility: Images submitted to the Wiki Loves Africa contest may win prizes! There are a few rules to respect for the images to be eligible.
  • Rule 1: All photos must be taken by the person submitting them. They can be either self-uploaded or uploaded during a registered mass upload session.
  • Rule 2: Uploads can only be done from the 1st of October 2017 to 30th of November 2017. You can enter media that was taken at any time, even historical photographs (as long as you own the copyright on these photographs), but they must be uploaded during those dates.
  • Rule 3: Images must be free of watermarks or embedded signatures to be eligible. All entries will automatically be submitted under a free licence such as Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 (CC-BY-SA 4.0) (or in the public domain). Read more about the cc-by-sa license here.
  • Rule 4: All eligible pictures will be categorised under Images from Wiki Loves Africa 2017, this will be automatically assigned during the upload process. (Feel free to add other relevant category descriptions to make the images more usable.)
  • Rule 5: Participants must enable e-mail on Wikimedia Commons so they can be contacted should their image be chosen for a prize.
Notes on video
Other files, such as audio and video, are welcome. For videos, please submit files in the following formats:
  • .ogg
  • .ogv
  • .webm
Due to complex intellectual property rights issues, Wikimedia Commons can not accept video content that is submitted in any other format. A helpful ‘how to’ guide on how to convert video media into these formats can be found here on Wikimedia. It is suggested that you upload video content one video at a time.
Value of Contest:
  • 1st prize: US$600
  • 2nd prize: US$400
  • 3rd prize: US$200
  • Organizer price: US$200
  • Photo Essay Prizes : Women Working US$200
  • Photo Essay Prizes : Rare, Fading or Threatened Traditional Craft, Style or Way of Working US$200
Additional prizes in each category: a Wiki Loves Africa powerpack + t-shirt
Duration of Contest: 2 months
How to Apply: Entering Wiki Loves Africa Music and Dance is easy! Follow these 4 steps:
  • Step 1: Take some photos.
  • Step 2: Select the best.
  • Step 3: Create an account on Commons to take part. Register here.
  • Step 4: Use the Upload Wizard to enter your photographs.
Award Provider: Wikimedia

Japan Student Services Organization (JSSO) Follow-up Research Fellowship for Students from Developing Countries 2018

Application Deadline: 30th November 2017
Eligible Candidates: Returnees from Japan with nationalities of developing countries and regions
To Be Taken At (Country): Japan
About the Award: The Japan Student Services Organization provides the Follow-up Research Fellowship for former international students in Japan to researchers who have previously come to study in Japan from a developing country, region, etc. These fellowships are available to conduct short-term research of 60-90 consecutive days.
The aim of the fellowships is to give an opportunity to researchers to conduct short-term research with academic advisors at universities (except junior colleges) in Japan.
Japan Student Services Organization (JASSO) is an independent administrative institution established under the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and  Technology.
Type: Fellowship, Research
Eligibility: Under 45 years old. At least one year after returning from Japan.
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: 
  • Round-trip Air fare and
  • Daily allowance (¥11,000/day) for the recipient and
  • Remuneration for cooperation (up to ¥50,000) for the research advisor
Duration of Program: 60-90 consecutive days
How to Apply: 
  • Applications must be received by Thursday, November 30th, 2017. The deadline is just for JASSO. The deadline at your host university might be different. Please confirm the deadline for your host university.
  • Submit both 5 printed copies of application forms(1 copy of Form1 original) and the digital file data. Please let you confirm “For University Use:Cautions When Submitting Files” by all means when you make it.
Award Providers: Japan Student Services Organization (JSSO)