23 Feb 2018

Junk Planet: Is Earth the Largest Garbage Dump in the Universe?

Robert J. Burrowes

Is Earth the largest garbage dump in the Universe? I don’t know. But it’s a safe bet that Earth would be a contender were such a competition to be held. Let me explain why.
To start, just listing the types of rubbish generated by humans or the locations into which each of these is dumped is a staggering task beyond the scope of one article. Nevertheless, I will give you a reasonably comprehensive summary of the types of garbage being generated (focusing particularly on those that are less well known), the locations into which the garbage is being dumped and some indication of what is being done about it and what you can do too.
But before doing so, it is worth highlighting just why this is such a problem, prompting the United Nations Environment Programme to publish this recent report: ‘Towards a pollution-free planet’.
As noted by Baher Kamal in his commentary on this study: ‘Though some forms of pollution have been reduced as technologies and management strategies have advanced, approximately 19 million premature deaths are estimated to occur annually as a result of the way societies use natural resources and impact the environment to support production and consumption.’ See ‘Desperate Need to Halt “World’s Largest Killer” – Pollution’ and ‘Once Upon a Time a Planet… First part. Pollution, the world’s largest killer’.
And that is just the cost in human lives.
So what are the main types of pollution and where do they end up?
Atmospheric Pollution
The garbage, otherwise labelled ‘pollution’, that we dump into our atmosphere obviously includes the waste products from our burning of fossil fuels and our farming of animals. Primarily this means carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide generated by driving motor vehicles and burning coal, oil and gas to generate electricity, and agriculture based on the exploitation of animals. This is having a devastating impact on Earth’s climate and environment with a vast array of manifestations adversely impacting all life on Earth. See, for example, ‘The World Is Burning’ and ‘The True Environmental Cost of Eating Meat’.
But these well-known pollutants are not the only garbage we dump into the atmosphere. Airline fuel pollutants from both civil and military aircraft have a shocking impact too, with significant adverse public health outcomes. Jet emissions, particularly the highly carcinogenic benzpyrene, can cause various cancers, lymphoma, leukemia, asthma, and birth defects. Jet emissions affect a 25 mile area around an airport; this means that adults, children, animals and plants are ‘crop dusted’ by toxic jet emissions for 12 miles from a runway end. ‘A typical commercial airport spews hundreds of tons of toxic pollutants into our atmosphere every day. These drift over heavily populated areas and settle onto water bodies and crops.’ Despite efforts to inform relevant authorities of the dangers in the USA, for example, they ‘continue to ignore the problem and allow aviation emissions to remain unregulated, uncontrolled and unreported’. See Aviation Justice. It is no better in other countries.
Another category of atmospheric pollutants of which you might not be aware is the particulate aerosol emitted into the atmosphere by the progressive wear of vehicle parts, especially synthetic rubber tyres, during theirservice life. Separately from this, however, there are also heavier pollutants from wearing vehicle tyres and parts, as well as from the wearing away of road surfaces, that accumulate temporarily on roads before being washed off into waterways where they accumulate.
While this substantial pollution and health problem has attracted little research attention, some researchers in a variety of countries have been investigating the problem.
In the USA as early as 1974, ‘tire industry scientists estimated that 600,000 metric tonnes of tire dust were released by tire wear in the U.S., or about 3 kilograms of dust released from each tire each year’. In 1994, careful measurement of air near roadways with moderate traffic ‘revealed the presence of 3800 to 6900 individual tire fragments in each cubic meter of air’ with more than 58.5% of them in the fully-breathable size range and shown to produce allergic reactions.See ‘Tire Dust’.
A study in Japan reported similar adverse environmental and health impacts. See ‘Dust Resulting from Tire Wear and the Risk of Health Hazards’.
Even worse, a study conducted in Moscow reported that the core pollutant of city air (up to 60% of hazardous matter) was the rubber of automobile tyres worn off and emitted as a small dust. The study found that the average car tyre discarded 1.6 kilograms of fine tyre dust as an aerosol during its service life while the tyre from a commercial vehicle discarded about 15 kilograms. Interestingly, passenger tyre dust emissions during the tyre’s service life significantly exceeded (by 6-7 times) emissions of particulate matters with vehicle exhaust gases. The research also determined that ‘tyre wear dust contains more than 140 different chemicals with different toxicity but the biggest threat to human health is poly-aromatic hydrocarbons and volatile carcinogens’. The study concluded that, in the European Union: ‘Despite tightening the requirements for vehicle tyres in terms of noise emission, wet grip and rolling resistance stipulated by the UN Regulation No. 117, the problem of reduction of tyre dust and its carcinogenic substance emissions due to tyre wear remains unaddressed.’ See ‘Particulate Matter Emissions by Tyres’.
As one toxicologist has concluded: ‘Tire rubber pollution is just one of many environmental problems in which the research is lagging far behind the damage we may have done.’ See ‘Road Rubber’.
Another pollution problem low on the public radar results from environmental modification techniques involving geoengineering particulates being secretly dumped into the atmosphere by the US military for more than half a century, based on research beginning in the 1940s. This geoengineering has been used to wage war on the climate, environment and ultimately ourselves. See, for example, ‘Engineered Climate Cataclysm: Hurricane Harvey’‘Planetary Weapons and Military Weather Modification: Chemtrails, Atmospheric Geoengineering and Environmental Warfare’‘Chemtrails: Aerosol and Electromagnetic Weapons in the Age of Nuclear War’ and ‘The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use’.
With ongoing official denials about the practice, it has fallen to the ongoing campaigning of committed groups such as GeoEngineering Watch to draw attention to and work to end this problem.
Despite the enormous and accelerating problems already being generated by the above atmospheric pollutants, it is worth pausing briefly to highlight the potentially catastrophic nature of the methane dischargesnow being released by the warming that has already taken place and is still taking place. A recent scientific study published by the prestigious journal Palaeoworld noted that ‘Global warming triggered by the massive release of carbon dioxide may be catastrophic, but the release of methane from hydrate may be apocalyptic.’ This refers to the methane stored in permafrost and shelf sediment. Warning of the staggering risk, the study highlights the fact that the most significant variable in the Permian Mass Extinction event, which occurred 250 million years ago and annihilated 90 percent of all the species on Earth, was methane hydrate. See Methane Hydrate: Killer cause of Earth’s greatest mass extinction’ and Release of Arctic Methane “May Be Apocalyptic,” Study Warns.
How long have we got? Not long, with a recent Russian study identifying 7,000 underground [methane] gas bubbles poised to “explode” in Arctic.
Is much being done about this atmospheric pollutionincluding the ongoing apocalyptic release of methane? Well, there is considerable ‘push’ to switch to renewable (solar, wind, wave, geothermal) energy in some placesand to produce electric cars in others. But these worthwhile initiatives aside, and if you ignore the mountain of tokenistic measures that are sometimes officially promised, the answer is ‘not really’ with many issues that critically impact this problem (including rainforest destruction, vehicle emissions, geoengineering, jet aircraft emissions and methane releases from animal agriculture) still being largely ignored.
If you want to make a difference on this biosphere-threatening issue of atmospheric pollution, you have three obvious choices to consider. Do not travel by air, do not travel by car and do not eat meat (and perhaps other animal products). This will no doubt require considerable commitment on your part. But without your commitment in these regards, there is no realistic hope of averting near-term human extinction. So your choices are critical.
Ocean Garbage
Many people will have heard of the problem of plastic rubbish being dumped into the ocean. Few people, however, have any idea of the vast scale of the problem, the virtual impossibility of cleaning it up and the monumental ongoing cost of it, whether measured in terms of (nonhuman) lives lost,ecological services or financially. And, unfortunately, plastic is not the worst pollutant we are dumping into the ocean but I will discuss it first.
In a major scientific study involving 24 expeditions conducted between 2007 and 2013, which was designed to estimate ‘the total number of plastic particles and their weight floating in the world’s oceans’ the team of scientists estimated that there was ‘a minimum of 5.25 trillion particles weighing 268,940 tons’. See ‘Plastic Pollution in the World’s Oceans: More than 5 Trillion Plastic Pieces Weighing over 250,000 Tons Afloat at Sea’ and ‘Full scale of plastic in the world’s oceans revealed for first time’.
Since then, of course, the problem has become progressively worse. See ‘Plastic Garbage Patch Bigger Than Mexico Found in Pacific’ and ‘Plastic Chokes the Seas’.
‘Does it matter?’ you might ask. According to this report, it matters a great deal. See New UN report finds marine debris harming more than 800 species, costing countries millions’.
Can we remove the plastic to clean up the ocean? Not easily. The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration has calculated that ‘if you tried to clean up less than one percent of the North Pacific Ocean it would take 67 ships one year’. See ‘The Great Pacific Garbage Patch’. Nevertheless, and despite the monumental nature of the problem – see ‘“Great Pacific garbage patch” far bigger than imagined, aerial survey shows’ – organizations like the Algalita Research FoundationOcean Cleanup and Positive Change for Marine Life have programs in place to investigate the nature and extent of the problem and remove some of the rubbish, while emphasizing that preventing plastic from entering the ocean is the key.
In addition, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity outlined a series of measures to tackle the problem in its 2016 report ‘Marine Debris Understanding, Preventing and Mitigating the Significant Adverse Impacts on Marine and Coastal Biodiversity’.In February 2017, the UN launched its Clean Seas Campaign inviting governments, corporations, NGOs and individuals to sign the pledge to reduce their plastic consumption. See #CleanSeas Campaign and ‘World Campaign to Clean Torrents of Plastic Dumped in the Oceans’.
Sadly, of course, it is not just plastic that is destroying the oceans. They absorb carbon dioxide as one manifestation of the climate catastrophe and, among other outcomes, this accelerates ocean acidification, adversely impacting coral reefs and the species that depend on these reefs.
In addition, a vast runoff of agricultural poisons, fossil fuels and other wastes is discharged into the ocean, adversely impacting life at all ocean depths – see ‘Staggering level of toxic chemicals found in creatures at the bottom of the sea, scientists say’– and generating ocean ‘dead zones’: regions that have too little oxygen to support marine organisms. See ‘Our Planet Is Exploding With Marine “Dead Zones”’.
Since the Fukushima nuclear reactor disaster in 2011, and despite the ongoing official coverup, vast quantities of radioactive materials are being ongoingly discharged into the Pacific Ocean, irradiating everything within its path. See ‘Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation’.
Finally, you may not be aware that there are up to 70 ‘still functional’ nuclear weapons as well as nine nuclear reactors lying on the ocean floor as a result of accidents involving nuclear warships and submarines. See ‘Naval Nuclear Accidents: The Secret Story’ and ‘A Nuclear Needle in a Haystack The Cold War’s Missing Atom Bombs’.
Virtually nothing is being done to stem the toxic discharges, contain the Fukushima radiation releases or find the nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors on the ocean floor.
Waterways and Groundwater Contamination

Many people would be familiar with the contaminants that find their way into Earth’s wetlands, rivers, creeks and lakes. Given corporate negligence, this includes all of the chemical poisons and heavy metals used in corporate farming and mining operations, as well as, in many cases around the world where rubbish removal is poorly organised, the sewage and all other forms of ‘domestic’ waste discharged from households. Contamination of the world’s creeks, rivers, lakes and wetlands is now so advanced that many are no longer able to fully support marine life. For brief summaries of the problem, see ‘Pollution in Our Waterways is Harming People and Animals – How Can You Stop This!’Wasting Our Waterways: Toxic Industrial Pollution and the Unfulfilled Promise of the Clean Water Act’ and ‘China’s new weapon against water pollution: its people’.

Beyond this, however, Earth’s groundwater supplies (located in many underground acquifers such as the Ogallala Aquifer in the United States) are also being progressively contaminated by gasoline, oil and chemicals from leaking storage tanks; bacteria, viruses and household chemicals from faulty septic systems; hazardous wastes from abandoned and uncontrolled hazardous waste sites (of which there are over 20,000 in the USA alone); leaks from landfill items such as car battery acid, paint and household cleaners; and the pesticides, herbicides and other poisons used on farms and home gardens. See

However, while notably absent from the list above, these contaminants also include radioactive waste from nuclear tests – see ‘Groundwater drunk by BILLIONS of people may be contaminated by radioactive material spread across the world by nuclear testing in the 1950s’ – and the chemical contamination caused by hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in search of shale gas, for which about 750 chemicals and components, some extremely toxic and carcinogenic like lead and benzene, have been used. See ‘Fracking chemicals’.

There are local campaigns to clean up rivers, creeks, lakes and wetlands in many places around the world, focusing on the primary problems – ranging from campaigning to end poison runoffs from mines and farms to physically removing plastic and other trash – in that area. But a great deal more needs to be done and they could use your help.

Soil Contamination

Our unsustainable commercial farming and soil management practices are depleting the soil of nutrients and poisoning it with synthetic fertilisers, herbicides, pesticides and antibiotics (the latter contained in animal manure) at such a prodigious rate that even if there were no other adverse impacts on the soil, it will be unable to sustain farming within 60 years. See ‘Only 60 Years of Farming Left If Soil Degradation Continues’.

But not content to simply destroy the soil through farming, we also contaminate it with heavy metal wastes from industrial activity, as well as sewer mismanagement – see ‘“Black Soils” – Excessive Use of Arsenic, Cadmium, Lead, Mercury…’– the waste discharges from corporate mining – see, for example, ‘The $100bn gold mine and the West Papuans who say they are counting the cost’ – and the radioactive and many other toxic wastes from military violence, discussed below.

We also lose vast quantities of soil by extensive clearfelling of pristine forests to plant commercially valuable but ecologically inappropriate ‘garbage species’ (such as palm oil trees – see ‘The Great Palm Oil Scandal’ – soya beans – see ‘Soy Changes Map of Brazil, Set to Become World’s Leading Producer’ – and biofuel crops). This leaves the soil vulnerable to rainfall which carries it into local creeks and rivers and deposits it downstream or into the ocean.

Staggering though it may sound, we are losing tens of billions of tonnes of soil each year, much of it irreversibly.

Is anything being done? A little. In response to the decades-long push by some visionary individuals and community organizations to convert all farming to organic,biodynamic and/or permaculture principles, some impact is being made in some places to halt the damage caused by commercial farming. You can support these efforts by buying organically or biodynamically-certified food (that is, food that hasn’t been poisoned) or creating a permaculture garden in your own backyard. Any of these initiatives will also benefit your own health.

Of course, there is still a long way to go with the big agricultural corporations such as Monsanto more interested in profits than your health. See ‘Killing Us ‘Top 10 Poisons that are the legacy of MonsantoSoftly – Glyphosate Herbicide or Genocide?’ and ‘Monsanto Has Knowingly Been Poisoning People for (at Least) 35 Years’.

One other noteworthy progressive change occurred in 2017 when the UN finally adopted the Minimata Convention, to curb mercury use. See ‘Landmark UN-backed treaty on mercury takes effect’and ‘Minamata Convention, Curbing Mercury Use, is Now Legally Binding’.

As for the other issues mentioned above, there is nothing to celebrate with mining and logging corporations committed to their profits at the expense of the local environments of indigenous peoples all over the world and governments showing little effective interest in curbing this or taking more than token interest in cleaning up toxic military waste sites. As always, local indigenous and activist groups often work on these issues against enormous odds. See, for example, ‘Ecuador Endangered’.

Apart from supporting the work of the many activist groups that work on these issues, one thing that each of us can do is to put aside the food scraps left during meal preparation (or after our meal) and compost them. Food scraps and waste are an invaluable resource: nature composts this material to create soil and your simple arrangement to compost your food scraps will help to generate more of that invaluable soil we are losing.

Antibiotic Waste

One form of garbage we have been producing, ‘under the radar’, in vast quantities for decades is antiobiotic and antifungal drug residue. See ‘Environmental pollution with antimicrobial agents from bulk drug manufacturing industries… associated with dissemination of… pathogens’.

However, given that the bulk of this waste is secretly discharged untreated into waterways by the big pharmaceutical companies – see ‘Big Pharma fails to disclose antibiotic waste leaked from factories’– the microbes are able to ‘build up resistance to the ingredients in the medicines that are supposed to kill them’ thus ‘fueling the creation of deadly superbugs’. Moreover, because the resistant microbes travel easily and have multiplied in huge numbers all over the world, they have created ‘a grave public health emergency that is already thought to kill hundreds of thousands of people a year.’

Are governments acting to end this practice? According to the recent and most comprehensive study of the problem ‘international regulators are allowing dirty drug production methods to continue unchecked’. See ‘Big Pharma’s pollution is creating deadly superbugs while the world looks the other way’.

Given the enormous power of the pharmaceutical industry, which effectively controls the medical industry in many countries, the most effective response we can make as individuals is to join the rush to natural health practitioners (such as practitioners of homeopathy, ostepathy, naturopathy, Ayurvedic medicine, herbal medicine and Chinese medicine) which do not prescribe pharmaceutical drugs. For further ideas, see ‘Defeating the Violence in Our Food and Medicine’.

Genetic Engineering and Gene Drives

Perhaps the most frightening pollutant that we now risk releasing into the environment goes beyond the genetic mutilation of organisms (GMOs) which has been widely practiced by some corporations, such as Monsanto, for several decades. See, for example, ‘GM Food Crops Illegally Growing in India: The Criminal Plan to Change the Genetic Core of the Nation’s Food System’.

Given that genetic engineering’s catastrophic outcomes are well documented – see, for example, ‘10 Reasons to Oppose Genetic Engineering’ – what are gene drives? ‘Imagine that by releasing a single fly into the wild you could genetically alter all the flies on the planet – causing them all to turn yellow, carry a toxin, or go extinct. This is the terrifyingly powerful premise behind gene drives: a new and controversial genetic engineering technology that can permanently alter an entire species by releasing one bioengineered individual.’

How effective are they? ‘Gene drives can entirely re-engineer ecosystems, create fast spreading extinctions, and intervene in living systems at a scale far beyond anything ever imagined.’ For example, if gene drives are engineered into a fast-reproducing species ‘they could alter their populations within short timeframes, from months to a few years, and rapidly cause extinction.’ This radical new technology, also called a ‘mutagenic chain reaction’, combines the extreme genetic engineering of synthetic biology and new gene editing techniques with the idea ‘that humans can and should use such powerful unlimited tools to control nature. Gene drives will change the fundamental relationship between humanity and the natural world forever.’

The implications for the environment, food security, peace, and even social stability are breathtaking, particularly given that existing ‘government regulations for the use of genetic engineering in agriculture have allowed widespread genetic contamination of the food supply and the environment.’ See ‘Reckless Driving: Gene drives and the end of nature’.

Consistent with their track records of sponsoring, promoting and using hi-tech atrocities against life, the recently released (27 October 2017) ‘Gene Drive Files’ reveal that the US military and individuals such as Bill Gates have been heavily involved in financing research, development and promotion of this grotesque technology. See ‘Military Revealed as Top Funder of Gene Drives; Gates Foundation paid $1.6 million to influence UN on gene drives’ and the ‘Gene Drive Files’.

‘Why would the US military be interested?’ you might ask. Well, imagine what could be done to an ‘enemy’ race with an extinction gene drive.

As always, while genuinely life-enhancing grassroots initiatives struggle for funding, any project that offers the prospect of huge profits – usually at enormous cost to life – gets all the funding it needs. If you haven’t realised yet that the global elite is insane, it might be worth pondering it now. See ‘The Global Elite is Insane’.

Is anything being done about these life-destroying technologies? A number of groups campaign against genetic engineering and SynBioWatch works to raise awareness of gene drives, to carefully explain the range of possible usesforthem and to expose the extraordinary risks and dangers of the technology. You are welcome to participate in their efforts too.

Nanoparticles

A nanoparticle is a microscopic particle whose size is measured in nanometers. One nanometer is one billionth of a meter. In simple English: Nanoparticles are extraordinarily tiny.

Nanoparticles are already being widely used includingduring the manufacture of cosmetics, pharmacology products, scratchproof eyeglasses, crack- resistant paints, anti-graffiti coatings for walls, transparent sunscreens, stain-repellent fabrics, self-cleaning windows and ceramic coatings for solar cells. ‘Nanoparticles can contribute to stronger, lighter, cleaner and “smarter” surfaces and systems.’ See ‘What are the uses of nanoparticles in consumer products?

Some researchers are so enamored with nanoparticles that they cannot even conceal their own delusions. According to one recent report: ‘Researchers want to achieve a microscopic autonomous robot that measures no more than six nanometers across and can be controlled by remote. Swarms of these nanobots could clean your house, and since they’re invisible to the naked eye, their effects would appear to be magical. They could also swim easily and harmlessly through your bloodstream, which is what medical scientists find exciting.’ See ‘What are Nanoparticles?’

Unfortunately, however, nanoparticle contamination of medicines is already well documented. See ‘New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro- and Nanocontamination’.

Another report indicates that ‘Some nanomaterials may also induce cytotoxic or genotoxic responses’. See ‘Toxicity of particulate matter from incineration of nanowaste’.What does this mean? Well ‘cytotoxic’ means that something is toxic to the cells and ‘genotoxic’ describes the property of chemical agents that damage the genetic information within a cell, thus causing mutations which may lead to cancer.
Beyond the toxic problems with the nanoparticles themselves, those taking a wider view report the extraordinary difficulties of managing nanowaste. In fact, according to one recent report prepared for the UN: ‘Nanowaste is notoriously difficult to contain and monitor; due to its small size, it can spread in water systems or become airborne, causing harm to human health and the environment.’ Moreover ‘Nanotechnology is growing at an exponential rate, but it is clear that issues related to the disposal and recycling of nanowaste will grow at an even faster rate if left unchecked.’ See ‘Nanotechnology, Nanowaste and Their Effects on Ecosystems: A Need for Efficient Monitoring, Disposal and Recycling’.
Despite this apparent nonchanlance about the health impacts of nanowaste, one recent report reiterates that ‘Studies on the toxicity of nanoparticles… are abundant in the literature’. See ‘Toxicity of particulate matter from incineration of nanowaste’.
Moreover, in January, European Union agencies published three documents concerning government oversight of nanotechnology and new genetic engineering techniques. ‘Together, the documents put in doubt the scientific capacity and political will of the European Commission to provide any effective oversight of the consumer, agricultural and industrial products derived from these emerging technologies’. See ‘European Commission: Following the Trump Administration’s Retreat from Science-Based Regulation?’
So, as these recent reports makes clear, little is being done to monitor, measure or control these technologies or monitor, measure and control the harmful effects of discharging nanowaste.
Fortunately, with the usual absence of government interest in acting genuinely on our behalf, activist groups such as the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy and the Organic Consumers Association campaign against nanotechnology as part of their briefs. Needless to say, however, a lot more needs to be done.
Space Junk
Not content to dump our garbage in, on or under the Earth, we also dump our junk in Space too.
‘How do we do this?’ you may well ask. Quite simply, in fact. We routinely launch a variety of spacecraft into Space to either orbit the Earth (especially satellites designed to perform military functions such as spying, target identification and detection of missile launches but also satellites to perform some civilian functions such as weather monitoring, navigation and communication) or we send spacecraft into Space on exploratory missions (such as the Mars Exploration Rover Opportunity).
However, getting spacecraft into Space requires the expenditure of vast amounts of energy (which adds to pollution of the atmosphere) and the progressive discarding of rocket propulsion sections of the launch craft. Some of these fall back to Earth as junk but much of it ends up orbiting the Earth as junk. So what form does this junk take? It includes inactive satellites, the upper stages of launch vehicles, discarded bits left over from separation, frozen clouds of water and tiny flecks of paint. All orbiting high above Earth’s atmosphere. With Space junk now a significant problem, the impact of junk on satellites is regularly causing damage and generating even more junk.
Is it much of a problem? Yes, indeed. The problem is so big, in fact, that NASA in the USA keeps track of the bigger items, which travel at speeds of up to 17,500 mph, which is ‘fast enough for a relatively small piece of orbital debris to damage a satellite or a spacecraft’. How many pieces does it track? By 2013, it was tracking 500,000 pieces of space junk as they orbited the Earth. See ‘Space Debris and Human Spacecraft’. Of course, these items are big enough to track. But not all junk is that big.
In fact, a recent estimate indicates that the number of Space junk items could be in excess of 100 trillion. See ‘Space Junk: Tracking & Removing Orbital Debris’.
Is anything being done about Space junk? No government involved in Space is really interested: It’s too expensive for that to be seriously considered.
But given the ongoing government and military interest in weaponizing Space, as again reflected in the recent US ‘Nuclear Posture Review 2018’, which would add a particularly dangerous type of junk to Space, the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space has been conducting an effective worldwide campaign since 1992 to mobilize resistance to weapons and nuclear power being deployed and used in Space.
Military Waste
The carnage and waste produced by preparation for and the conduct of military violence is so vast that it almost defies description and calculation. In its most basic sense, every single item produced to perform a military function – from part of a uniform to a weapon – is garbage: an item that has no functional purpose (unless you believe that killing people is functional). To barely touch on it here then, military violence generates a vast amount of pollution, which contaminates the atmosphere, oceans, all fresh water sources, and the soil with everything from the waste generated by producing military uniforms to the radioactive waste which contaminates environments indefinitely.
Many individuals, groups and networks around the world campaign to end war. See, for example, War Resisters’ International, the International Peace Bureau and World Beyond War.
You can participate in these efforts.
Nuclear Waste
Partly related to military violence but also a product of using nuclear power, humans generate vast amounts of waste from exploitation of the nuclear fuel cycle. This ranges from the pollution generated by mining uranium to the radioactive waste generated by producing nuclear power or using a nuclear weapon. But it also includes the nuclear waste generated by accidents such as that at Chernobyl and Fukushima.
While the London Dumping Convention permanently bans the dumping of radioactive and industrial waste at sea (which means nothing in the face of the out-of-control discharges from Fukushima, of course) – see ‘1993 – Dumping of radioactive waste at sea gets banned’ – groups such as Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace continue to campaign against the nuclear industry (including radioactive waste dumping) and to promote renewable energy.
They would be happy to have your involvement.
Our Bodies
Some of the garbage that ends up being dumped is done via our bodies. Apart from the junk food produced at direct cost to the environment, the cost of these poisoned, processed and nutritionally depleted food-like substances also manifests as ill-health in our bodies and discharges of contaminated waste. Rather than eating food that is organically or biodynamically grown and healthily prepared, most of us eat processed food-like substances that are poisoned (that is, grown with large doses of synthetic fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides that also destroy the soil and kill vast numbers of insects – see ‘Death and Extinction of the Bees’ and ‘Insectageddon: farming is more catastrophic than climate breakdown’ – and then cook this food in rancid oils and perhaps even irradiate (microwave) it before eating. Although microwave ovens were outlawed in the Soviet Union in 1976, they remain legal elsewhere. See ‘The Hidden Hazards of Microwave Cooking’‘How Your Microwave Oven Damages Your Health In Multiple Ways’ and ‘Microwave Cooking is Killing People’.
Unfortunately, however, considerable official effort still goes into developing new ways to nuclearize (contaminate) our food – see ‘Seven examples of nuclear technology improving food and agriculture’– despite long-established natural practices that are effective and have no damaging side effects or polluting outcomes.
But apart from poisoned, processed and unhealthily prepared food, we also inject our bodies with contaminated vaccines – see ‘New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro- and Nanocontamination’‘Dirty Vaccines: New Study Reveals Prevalence of Contaminants’ and ‘Aluminum, Autoimmunity, Autism and Alzheimer’s’ – consume medically-prescribed antibiotics (see section above) and other drugs – see ‘The Spoils of War: Afghanistan’s Multibillion Dollar Heroin Trade. Washington’s Hidden Agenda: Restore the Drug Trade’– and leave the environment to deal with the contaminated waste generated by their production and the discharges from our body.
Many individuals and organizations all over the world work to draw attention to these and related issues, including the ‘death-dealing’ of doctors, but the onslaught of corporate media promotion and scare campaigns means that much of this effort is suppressed. Maintaining an unhealthy and medically-dependent human population is just too profitable.
If you want to genuinely care for your health and spare the environment the toxic junk dumped though your body, the ideas above in relation to growing and eating organic/biodynamic food and consulting natural health practitioners are a good place to start.
‘Ordinary’ Rubbish
For many people, of course, dealing with their daily garbage requires nothing more than putting it into a rubbish bin. But does this solve the problem?
Well, for a start, even recycled rubbish is not always recycled, and even when it is, the environmental cost is usually high.
In fact, the various costs of dealing with rubbish is now so severe that China, a long-time recipient of waste from various parts of the world, no longer wants it. See ‘China No Longer Wants Your Trash. Here’s Why That’s Potentially Disastrous’.
Of course there are also special events that encourage us to dump extra rubbish into the Earth’s biosphere. Ever thought about what happens following special celebrations like Christmas? See ‘The Environmental Christmas Hangover’ or the waste discharged from cruise ships? See ‘16 Things Cruise Lines Never Tell You’.
Does all this pollution really matter? Well, as mentioned at the beginning, we pay an enormous cost for it both in terms of human life but in other ways too. See ‘The Lancet Commission on pollution and health’.
Junk information
One category of junk, which is easily overlooked and on which I will not elaborate, is the endless stream of junk information with which we are bombarded. Whether it is corporate ‘news’ (devoid of important news about our world and any truthful analysis of what is causing it) on television, the radio or in newspapers, letterbox advertising, telephone marketing or spam emails, our attention is endlessly distracted from what matters leaving most humans ill-informed and too disempowered to resist the onslaught that is destroying our world.
So what can we do about all of the junk identified above?
Well, unless you want to continue deluding yourself that some token measures taken by you, governments, international organizations (such as the United Nations) or industry are going to fix all of this, I encourage you to consider taking personal action that involves making a serious commitment.
This is because, at the most fundamental level, it is individuals who consume and then discharge the waste products of their consumption. And if you choose what you consume with greater care and consume less, no one is going to produce what you don’t buy or discharge the waste products of that production on your behalf.
Remember Gandhi? He was not just the great Indian independence leader. His personal possessions at his death numbered his few items of self-made clothing and his spectacles. We can’t all be like Gandhi but he can be a symbol to remind us that our possessions and our consumption are not the measure of our value. To ourselves or anyone else.
If the many itemized suggestions made above sound daunting, how does this option sound?
Do you think that you could reduce your consumption by 10% this year.?And, ideally, do it in each of seven categories: water, household energy, vehicle fuel, paper, plastic, metals and meat? Could you do it progressively, reducing your consumption by 10% each year for 15 consecutive years? See ‘The Flame Tree Project to Save Life on Earth’.
I am well aware of the emotional void that makes many people use ‘shopping therapy’ to feel better or to otherwise consume, perhaps by traveling, to distract themselves. If you are in this category, then perhaps you could tackle this problem at its source by ‘Putting Feelings First’.
No consumer item or material event can ever fill the void in your Selfhood. But you can fill this void by traveling the journey to become the powerful individual that evolution gave you the potential to be. If you want to understand how you lost your Selfhood, see‘Why Violence?’ and ‘Fearless Psychology and Fearful Psychology: Principles and Practice’.
You might also help ensure that children do not acquire the consumption/pollution addiction by making ‘My Promise to Children’.
If you want to campaign against one of the issues threatening human survival discussed briefly above, consider planning a Nonviolent Campaign Strategy.
And if you wish to commit to resisting violence of all kinds, you can do soby signing the online pledge of ‘The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World’.
In the final analysis, each of us has a choice. We can contribute to the ongoing creation of Earth as the planet of junk. Or we can use our conscience, intelligence and determination to guide us in resisting the destruction of our world.

Job cuts continue in New Zealand under Labour government

Sam Price

The working class in New Zealand faces a continuing wave of job losses across a wide range of industries. Plans for about 500 job cuts were announced during January and early February alone.
The job destruction gives the lie to claims by the Labour Party-led government, repeated by the corporate media, the trade unions and pseudo-left groups, that it is moving to improve living standards.
In October 2017, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said soaring poverty and homelessness showed capitalism had “failed” and needed to be reformed. The reality, however, is that the government is working with big business and the trade unions to deepen the attacks on working conditions, wages and jobs that intensified following the 2008 financial crisis.
The list of job cuts so far this year in New Zealand, which only has a population of 4.6 million, is staggering.
On January 10, Rotorua rest home Cantabria sent a letter to 36 staff members informing them of redundancy after the facility was sold to Heritage Lifecare Limited.
ABCorp, which employs around 50 workers in a Christchurch plant manufacturing plastic cards, told staff on January 18 it is moving operations to Australia. The plant may close as early as March 30.
On January 26, children’s healthcare provider Plunket said it will axe 53 jobs in the central region when a restructure takes effect in April. A staff briefing document said the redundancies will reduce costs. A staff member told Fairfax Media this will involve computerising paperwork and replacing jobs with volunteers.
The Plunket announcement came just months after Labour’s election campaign promise of 100 more nurses for Plunket and Tamariki Ora.
Porirua’s Vega Industries, which manufactures marine navigation systems, will close down within the next 9 to 12 months. Its 38 workers were informed after they returned from their New Year break. The company, founded in 1972, was purchased last August for $12 million by Canadian firm Carmanah.
In early February, ANZ bank informed 39 staff in its Wellington call centre that their jobs will be axed and outsourced to Manila. ANZ reported an annual profit of $1.86 billion in October, a 20 percent increase and the highest profit ever reported by a New Zealand bank.
In October, the trade union FIRST Union said Bank of New Zealand also planned to axe 100 jobs.
Waiwera Thermal Resort made all its staff redundant on February 7 in preparation for a six-month refurbishment. The company refused to say how many workers were affected. Waiwera Group, which owns the resort, last year liquidated its bottled water company, Waiwera Water.
Supermarket operator Foodstuffs announced on February 7 a proposal to close its Rotorua distribution centre in 2020, making 51 staff members redundant. This follows 14 finance and administration job cuts at Foodstuffs’ Dunedin distribution centre last November.
On February 12, wood processing company Juken confirmed it will make 97 of its 200 Gisborne workers redundant, blaming a decline in demand from Japan.
Stuff, which is by owned by Australia’s Fairfax Media, announced on February 21, that it will sell off or close 28 community and rural papers, eliminating at least 60 jobs over the next six months.
“The business has to sustain its earnings and if there are parts that aren’t doing their bit we have to make the decision to rationalise them and that is what we have done,” Fairfax Media CEO Greg Hywood said.
The Labour Party-controlled Rotorua City Council has been in a protracted dispute with workers at the Rotorua Aquatic Centre. The council handed over management of the centre to private firm Community Leisure Management, which decided to make 38 workers redundant. The council has delayed its final decision until February 28, after workers demonstrated and gathered 4,000 signatures on a petition opposing the decision.
Major job cuts are also being threatened in the Auckland commuter rail network. Transdev, the French multinational transport company contracted by the Labour-dominated Auckland Council, proposed a restructure last May under which 160 on-board train managers could be made redundant.
Since 2016, the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) has been planning to slash 1,500 jobs between 2018 and 2021.
Last October, Otago University confirmed it will cut 160 support staff to save $15 million. In November, Massey University mailed 1,000 staff asking for voluntary redundancy. Sixty-nine staff members agreed.
Also late last year, networking company Chorus announced it planned to reduce its staff. Chorus has not publicly announced the exact number but the trade union E tu said it was up to 119.
Far from fighting the wave of redundancies, the trade unions are facilitating the offensive, dismissing any prospect of opposition.
In a press statement on the ABCorp closure, E Tu spokesperson Joe Gallagher said: “The short consultation period makes us think that the company’s mind is made up.” In response to Juken’s announcement, the union’s Ron Angel said E Tu and FIRST Union would negotiate to try “to save these jobs, but the company is very serious about this proposal.”
Since the 2008 global financial crash, the unions have worked with the corporations and the government, enforcing sellout wage agreements and orderly redundancies. Strike activity is at an historic low point. As few as six work stoppages were reported in 2013, compared with a peak of over 200 in 1986.
On February 3, Public Service Association (PSA) leader Erin Polaczuk told the Listener that the “modern union” saw no need for strikes, preferring to negotiate and go through the courts. The PSA last year collaborated with Auckland Council to cut 194 library jobs, and is playing a similar role on the axing of 1,500 IRD workers’ jobs.
Labour’s industrial relations policy is designed specifically to restrict industrial action. It plans to introduce a new mechanism for unions and employers to negotiate benchmark wages across an entire industry. Industrial action would be banned during negotiations for the “fair pay agreements.” The Council of Trade Unions has welcomed the policy.
The ongoing destruction of jobs exposes the pro-capitalist politics of the Labour Party. The 1984–1990 Labour government imposed big business-driven restructuring, privatisation and de-regulation, leading to tens of thousands of job losses in rail, forestry, meat processing and other industries. In 2000, the then-Labour government introduced the Employment Relations Act, with full support of the unions, which imposed tight restrictions on when strikes could be held.

Study finds regular use of common cleaning chemicals decreases lung capacity

Jessica Goldstein

A study conducted by scientists at the University of Bergen in Norway found that the regular use of cleaning sprays that contain common chemicals such as bleach, hydrogen peroxide, and quaternary ammonium (quats) causes severe damage to lung capacity over extended periods of time.
The study was conducted over 20 years to measure the effects of the inhalation of cleaning chemicals over long periods of time. Lung function was measured by the amount of air that participants could forcefully breathe out after breathing in.
The extraordinary findings of the study revealed that for some participants, lung capacity was so damaged after long-term exposure to cleaning chemicals that it resembled that of a habitual pack-per-day cigarette smoker. The study controlled for variables such as smoking that could also cause damage lung capacity. A total of 3,298 of the participants were women and 2,932 were men.
The findings showed that the damage was more prevalent in female participants, but could be due to the fact that more women participated in the study. Occupational cleaners showed the highest amount of lung damage in the study, including cases of asthma. However, participants who used cleaning sprays containing common chemicals to clean their homes at least once per week showed a marked increase of damage to their lung function compared to those who did not.
The results of the Norway study are similar to those of a September 2017 study among nurses in France who used common industrial chemical cleaners to sanitize surfaces at least once per week.
The French study was authored by pulmonologist Orianne Dumas at the French Institute of Health and Medical Research. It followed 55,185 registered nurses over eight years who had no prior history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The results of the study showed that nurses who used disinfectants to clean surfaces at least once per week showed a 24 to 32 percent increased risk of developing COPD than those who did not use them as frequently.
The similar findings from both studies, which examined participants in two different countries and across different occupations, suggest that similar studies conducted in other countries and among a diverse participation of workers will yield similar results. The cleaning chemicals that were found to cause the damage are used in many occupations, such as health care, maintenance and janitorial work, retail, food service and hospitality, the sciences, and education. They are also very commonly used in household cleaning, regardless of occupation.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in the United States provides bare minimal protection to workers who are required to clean with chemicals that can cause harm. OSHA only provides requirements to employers—which are not laws—on how to protect workers from harsh chemicals. This includes the use of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) on all chemicals used by workers, which provide information on the proper dilution, protective equipment, and risks associated with the chemical being used, and also the requirement that all workers are trained on how to use the chemicals prior to cleaning with them.
OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard is the closest to a real regulation on the books regarding cleaning chemicals. However, this standard is not law and only provides suggestions to employers on how to communicate to workers about the potential health risks of using a chemical and how to properly handle chemicals to reduce the risk of injury when using them. It is likely that these standards are violated countless times each year, as OSHA remains woefully understaffed after decades of budget cuts since its inception in 1970. In 2015, under the Obama administration, OSHA had only 1,840 state and federal inspectors, that is, only one inspector for every 74,760 workers, making regular inspections impossible.
The Trump administration has vowed to cut funding to OSHA even further. Already understaffed, the agency requires the funding of the federal government to operate, and is tied to the profit interests of the corporations. Slap-on-the-wrist fines are the norm for workers’ deaths caused by the cost-cutting practices of businesses of all sizes, and inspectors rarely go out to a site when workers complain of violations, instead addressing issues by calling the company to offer suggestions for improvement with no threat of a penalty if they do not comply.
Both the French and the Norwegian study suggested that the chemicals proven to cause lung damage not be used at all for cleaning, with the Norwegian study suggesting the use of water and microfiber cloths instead of cleaning sprays to remove dirt and bacteria from surfaces. In the US, OSHA also suggests the use of microfiber cloths in place of chemicals.
In 2014, Newsweek published a story on Pureti, a product manufactured from titanium dioxide, which was tested with success as a treatment on American stadium surfaces for its potential to act as a self-cleaning agent when sprayed onto a surface and allowed to react with light and air. The compound was shown to be successful as a self-cleaning agent that could last up to five years and is able to absorb toxins from the air itself. The treatment has also been used to clean mold from the crevices of La Pedrera, a Gaudi-designed building in Barcelona, Spain and in hotels around the world. It is used as an alternative to common methods of cleaning and disinfecting such as bleach, ammonia, and power washing of surfaces.
Despite this alternative, the profit interests of the chemical industry prevent the further development and distribution of safe cleaning treatments from being used and regulated worldwide. Clorox, the world’s leading manufacturer of bleach, has seen profits soar as its stock price climbed from under $18 in 1993 to $127.30 this month. Clorox CEO, millionaire Benno Dorer, sits on the board of the American Cleaning Institute, which works in liaison with the government and academia to “advance public understanding of the safety and benefits of cleaning products.” Powerful chemical giants like Clorox do all that they can to prevent any threat to their skyrocketing profits, even at the risk of the health of millions around the world.
Even though safer alternatives exist, the vast majority of corporations that control the use of cleaning products in their operations will always opt to purchase cheaper options that are of immediate benefit to their bottom line, regardless of the health risks to workers, no matter how serious.
The elimination of the profit system and establishment of worker control over production and distribution of the goods of society is necessary to eliminate the vast harm that is caused by these cleaning chemicals worldwide, and the vast profits of the corporations expropriated by the working class for the research and development of sanitation methods that will benefit the health of global society.
Government agencies such as OSHA, tied to the profit interests of the corporations, do nothing to penalize companies that put workers in harm’s way, and must be replaced by health and safety committees under the democratic control of the working class.

Egyptian elections held under massive repression

Jean Shaoul

Egypt’s military dictator President Abdul Fattah el-Sisi looks set to win a second term in office, having intimidated, arrested or otherwise eliminated any candidates not to his liking.
The presidential election, to be held March 26-28, highlights the vicious power struggle taking place within the military and intelligence circles that control much of Egypt’s economy and its political apparatus.
It takes place amid mounting social and economic dissent among the impoverished working class.
On January 23, the junta arrested former chief of staff of the Egyptian armed forces, Sami Anan, after he announced his candidature. The authorities have also arrested Anan’s aide, Egypt’s former Auditor General Hesham Geneina, for alleging that Anan possessed secret “documents and evidence” that would undermine the country and its leadership.
Geneina, who was fired after exposing government corruption, said he would release files incriminating senior government figures for incidents following the January 25 revolution, if Anan was harmed in any way.
Anan’s confinement in a military prison came soon after the regime pressured another candidate, Ahmed Shafik, a former commander-in-chief of the Egyptian air force and prime minister, to withdraw from the election.
The authorities similarly intimidated Khalid Ali, a human rights lawyer who had also announced his candidature, raiding a publishing house that stored his campaign brochures and arrested his campaign organisers. Ali now faces a three-month prison sentence for “offending public decency.”
Mohamed Anwar Sadat, a former member of parliament and nephew of the late Egyptian president and military figure, Anwar Sadat, also stood down under pressure.
In December, Colonel Ahmed Konsowa, who had also announced he wanted to run for the presidency, was detained. A military court sentenced Konsowa to a six-year jail term for “disobeying military orders by expressing his political views.”
Having eliminated all candidates who posed a threat to his rule, al-Sisi has brought in Moussa Mustapha Moussa as a token opposition candidate to avoid a single-candidate election. A trusted member of the military circle around el-Sisi, Moussa—at the behest of former President Hosni Mubarak—organised a split in the Ghad (Tomorrow) Party set up by legislator Ayman Nour, who ran against Mubarak in the 2005 presidential campaign.
With no independent political base, Moussa wholeheartedly supported Sisi’s re-election until called upon to oppose him, registering just minutes before the deadline, having been furnished with the requisite 47,000 signatures.
El-Sisi doubtless feels that President Donald Trump’s assurances that he is not concerned about human rights and democracy abroad, and that el-Sisi is a “fantastic guy,” means that the $1.3 billion a year in US aid is not in jeopardy. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, speaking during a visit to Cairo last week as part of a tour of the Middle East to build an anti-Iran coalition, confirmed his support for Egypt and refrained from commenting on el-Sisi’s crackdown on his election rivals.
That so many potential presidential candidates are former officers speaks to the enormous divisions and conflicts within military circles that control around 40 percent of Egypt’s economy. This has prompted el-Sisi to try and shore up his base of support in the security services. Last October, he replaced the armed forces chief of staff, Mahmoud Hegazy, and appointed him as presidential adviser for strategic planning and crisis management.
El-Sisi also fired a number of leaders in the intelligence services, amid concerns about their loyalty, including Khaled Fawzy, the director of the General Intelligence Directorate since 2014, replacing him with his closest ally and chief of staff, Major General Abbas Kamel. He has sent a further 17 under-secretaries into retirement.
This comes amid political repression that far exceeds the worst excesses of the Mubarak era. The el-Sisi government has enacted legislation to crush civil society, monitored and censored news, human rights websites and social media, made demonstrations illegal without giving three days’ notice, arrested strikers, and carried out campaigns of forced disappearances and torture.
Sweeping new anti-terrorism laws have widened the definition of terrorism to include civil disobedience, giving prosecutors the power to roll over 15-day pre-trial detention periods, often without limit, while the minister of justice has fired nearly half of the 75 judges who called for more democracy in an open letter to Sisi and replaced them with regime loyalists, and sidelined 200 others.
According to human rights groups, at least 60,000 political prisoners languish in Egypt’s prisons, compared with between 5,000 and 10,000 at the end of Mubarak’s rule. The jails are filled to triple their capacity, despite the government building 16 more prisons.
The state of emergency imposed last autumn after a series of bombings in North Sinai, on the pretext of dealing with “the dangers and funding of terrorism,” has been extended for three months.
Last week, police arrested Abdel Moneim Aboul-Fotouh, a presidential candidate in the 2012 elections, who had called for a boycott of the elections, accusing him of links to the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood and inciting to topple the government, along with six aides.
The call for an election boycott has also been taken up by the Civil Democratic Movement, a loose affiliation of opposition parties and political figures.
Repression is being spurred on by the precarious nature of the Egyptian economy. Egypt was forced to accept the International Monetary Fund’s onerous conditions, in return for a $12 billion three-year loan, that included floating the currency (leading to a 50 percent fall in its value), a value-added tax and multiple cuts to energy, petrol and basic foods subsidies. Inflation soared to 33 percent last year, interest rates rose and growth fell. Many imports are now unaffordable.
At least 35 percent of Egypt’s 95 million population are living below the poverty line, up from 28 percent in 2016. Youth unemployment in a country where more than 60 percent of the population is under 30 years of age is a ticking time-bomb. According to the government’s statistical service, 26.7 percent of people aged 18-29 are unemployed. Thirty-eight percent of those young people hold graduate and postgraduate university certificates, while 30 percent hold vocational high school diplomas.
Two weeks ago, seeking to deflect social tensions and bolster the regime—whose standing has been undermined by reports that Israel has carried more than 100 raids on jihadists on Egyptian soil—the military announced a large-scale “Comprehensive Military Operation.” While the purpose is to eliminate the country’s growing insurgency, the regime has deployed forces not just to the Sinai Peninsula, its primary focus, but also to the Western Desert and parts of the Nile Delta, as well as naval and air force patrols in Egypt’s border regions.
This follows a series of high-profile attacks, including last October’s ambush that killed 54 members of the security forces in a botched counterterror operation in the Western Desert; last November’s attack by Wilayat Sinai, an Islamic State affiliate, on a Sufi mosque that killed 305 worshipers in the deadliest terror attack in Egyptian history, and last December’s attack by Wilayat Sinai on the Arish military airport, targeting Minister of Defence Sedky Sobhy and Minister of Interior Magdy Abdel Ghaffar, who were carrying out an unannounced visit to Sinai, killing one officer and injuring two others.
Military planes have launched at least 15 raids in North Sinai, mostly targeting the outskirts of Arish City. The regime ordered the closure of all schools in North Sinai until further notice. According to the Egyptian army, it has killed at least 28 suspected militants in clashes since the operation began.

Maldives political crisis deepens

Rohantha De Silva

The ongoing political crisis in the Maldives has thrown into sharp relief that the strategically-located Indian Ocean archipelago has become a focal point of the increasingly explosive geopolitical competition between India and the US on one side, and China on the other.
This competition extends across South and South-East Asia, and is increasingly being played out in Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa. However, the Indian Ocean—the world’s most important commercial waterway—is very much at its heart.
On Tuesday, Maldives President Abdulla Yameen got the country’s parliament to extend for a further 30 days the 15-day state of emergency he had declared on February 5. Yameen said the extension was needed because of “threats to national security and the constitutional crisis.”
With this anti-democratic move, Yameen is seeking to strengthen his hand against his political opponents within the Maldive elite, principally former President Mohamed Nasheed, who from exile has been denouncing Yameen for “selling-off” the Maldives to China and imperilling the “security” of the Indian Ocean.
Within hours of Yameen’s initial suspension of core democratic rights, Nasheed publicly appealed for India to invade the archipelago. He has since issued a flurry of statements spelling out that were he to return to power, he would curtail ties with China and align Maldives with India, the US and other western powers.
India has long viewed the Maldives as part of its “backyard.” In 1988 it deployed military forces to the Maldives to thwart an attempted coup against Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who for three decades, ending in 2008, ruled the tiny 1,000-plus island state as an autocrat.
India has let it be known that its armed forces are ready for “any eventuality.” But thus far, New Delhi has publicly confined itself to demands Yameen end the state of emergency and allow the opposition to contest elections, slated for later this year, unimpeded.
Sections of India’s military-security establishment and corporate media, however, are becoming increasingly impatient and have issued warnings that if New Delhi does not demonstratively take matters in hand, its claims to be a “net security provider” for, or policeman of, the Indian Ocean will be undermined.
“Make no mistake,” wrote Indian strategic commentator Brahma Chellaney in Tuesday’s Hindustan Times, “India’s rapidly eroding influence in its strategic backyard holds far-reaching implications for its security, underscoring the imperative for a more dynamic, forward-looking strategy.”
Reflecting both the anxiety over, and depth of the hostility toward, China within broad sections of India’s elite, this week also saw a barrage of alarmed media reports about Chinese naval manoeuvres in the easternmost reaches of the Indian Ocean. Many of these drew a direct connection between these manoeuvres and the events on the Maldives well over 1,500 kilometres away.
The current crisis erupted on February 1 when the Maldives Supreme Court, which had hitherto been supportive of Yameen’s increasing authoritarian moves, vacated the convictions of Nasheed and eight other opposition politicians and ordered that twelve parliamentarians who had defected to the opposition be allowed allow to take up their seats.
Both rulings represented a grave threat to Yameen’s presidency, since the first would allow Nasheed to return to the country and contest the coming elections, and the second would deprive Yameen of majority support in parliament.
In response, Yameen declared the state of emergency, ordered the arrest of two Supreme Court judges, including the Chief Justice, on the charges of corruption, and then bullied the three remaining judges into reversing their February 1 rulings.
In extending the state of emergency, Yameen once again ran roughshod over basic democratic norms. The government declared parliament had extended the emergency, although fewer legislators than required when adopting a “matter of public compliance” were present. Speaker Abdullah Maseeh, nevertheless, declared the vote valid, saying the constitutionally-mandated quorum was irrelevant when extending a state of emergency.
Tuesday’s extension of the state of emergency was carried out in defiance of India, which less than 24 hours before had issued a statement saying it hoped the emergency would be allowed to lapse, so that the “political process in Maldives can resume with immediate effect.”
After the emergency was extended, India’s Ministry of External Affairs quickly issued a statement that expressed “deep dismay” and said it was “important that all democratic institutions [in the Maldives be] allowed to function in a fair and transparent manner in accordance with the Constitution.” The US soon followed suit, with State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert demanding Yameen end the state of emergency and Maldives “respect its international human rights obligations and commitments.”
The real concerns of New Delhi, as exemplified by its decades-long support for the autocrat Gayoom, and of Washington, which has armed and sponsored bloody dictatorial regimes the world over, have nothing to do with the democratic rights of the people of the Maldives.
Their keen interest in the political crisis in the Maldives is motivated rather by their determination to ensure that unbridled control over the Indian Ocean—the principal conduit for the oil that fuels China’s economy and for its exports to Europe, the Middle East, and Africa—remains in the hands of powers hostile to China.
The Maldives are situated near key Indian Ocean sea lanes. In fact, shortly before Yameen came to power the US was attempting to prevail on Maldives’ government to sign agreements that would have allowed US warships to routinely use its harbours and paved the way for the establishment of one or more US bases.
There is no question that India, egged on by Washington, is determined to be rid of Yameen, who in pursuit of investment (and no doubt healthy returns for the faction of the elite with which he is aligned) has accepted Chinese offers to incorporate Maldives into its One Belt One Road transport infrastructure scheme.
But for the moment, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his BJP government are proceeding cautiously, calculating that there may be less risky options than an outright invasion to bring about regime-change in Malle.
Thus far Maldive security forces have remained loyal to Yameen. A second and much bigger concern for India is the impact a military intervention in the Maldives would have on its already deeply fraught relations with China.
Since the Maldive political crisis erupted, Beijing has repeatedly warned against any “foreign”—read Indian—intervention in the archipelago’s “internal affairs,” and said it doesn’t want the Maldives to become a fresh “flashpoint” in Sino-Indian relations. The state-owned Global Times went further, threatening New Delhi with unspecified retaliation, if “India one-sidedly sends troops to the Maldives.”
Last summer, India and China came to the brink of war as the result of a 10-week military stand-off on a Himalayan Ridge, the Doklam Plateau, jointly claimed by China and Bhutan.
The Modi government is also aware of the explosive impact an Indian military intervention in the Maldives—supported, if not actively assisted, by the US, and patently aimed at countering China—would have on popular consciousness in India. Among India’s workers and toilers there is no enthusiasm for the Indian bourgeoisie’s plans to serve as a satrap for US imperialism.
That said all sorts of intrigues, including no doubt active planning for an Indian assault on the Maldives, are underway.
On Sunday, Nasheed met Indian Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on the side-lines of a media event sponsored by the Hindu in the South Indian city of Bengalaru (Bangalaore). New Delhi apparently hoped to keep the meeting secret, but Nasheed tweeted a photo of himself with Sitharaman: “Pleasure to meet and brief Indian Minister of Defence Nirmala Sitharaman on the situation in the Maldives.”
An Indian government spokesman responded with the implausible claim the meeting had been “unscheduled” and “no discussion on the situation in the Maldives” had transpired.
In a subsequent interview with the Hindu, Nasheed repeated his call for India to mobilize its military to pressure the Maldives government, but tried to distinguish this from an invasion. “Gunboat diplomacy,” he said, “doesn’t mean an attack; it means a show of strength. I feel we are at a defining moment in the Indian Ocean … We have always seen India as a net provider of security and safety in the region, for the past 600 years. So, we mustn’t lose the moment.”

Air France workers strike to demand pay increase

Anthony Torres

Air France workers went out on a one-day strike yesterday against a miserable sweetheart contract negotiated by a group of trade unions closely linked to management. Faced with rising anger among workers, the unions felt compelled to organize a strike of all layers of the Air France workforce, for the first time since 1993.
Workers are demanding a 6 percent pay increase, given bumper profits recorded by Air France in 2017 of €590 million. After the usual mandated yearly negotiations, management obtained the support for a 1 percent raise of two legally recognized, but unpopular unions, the General Managers Union (CFE-CGC) and the French Democratic Labor Confederation (CFDT). Especially given that executives were granting themselves double-digit pay increases, workers' anger exploded, as they have suffered a six-year wage freeze and 10,000 job losses.
All layers of workers, from pilots to stewardesses and ground crew, went out on strike. In France, 50 percent of long-distance flights were canceled, as well as 25 percent of medium-distance flights and 15 percent of national flights. However, management refused to grant the workers' demands, which would cost €240 million according to Patrick Terner, the CEO of Air France, who called their demands 'unreasonable' and 'not realistic,' adding that they would eat up too much of the profits of the company.
Workers are preparing to take further strike action to obtain their demands. At the same time, the organizations making up the trade union alliance that called yesterday's strike is meeting today to “decide on what follow-up” the strike should have, said Sandrine Techer, the secretary for the National Union of Commercial Air Crews (SNPNC).
The decisive question posed to the striking workers is to prepare politically for the challenges of a long-term struggle. In what will be a political confrontation not only with Air France but with French President Emmanuel Macron and the European Union, the allies of Air France workers are workers across Europe and internationally who are also increasingly entering into struggle.
The Air France strike is part of a European and international wave of strikes against the counter-revolutionary offensive of the capitalist class to slash real wages and social benefits in order to enrich themselves and finance militarism and war. While Air France claims it has no money for raises, Macron is smashing France's Labor Code, slashing taxes on the wealthy (ISF), and announcing a €300 billion defense spending program.
Workers are mobilizing throughout the region, including in Iran and Turkey, where metalworkers obtained a 20 percent wage increase. Hundreds of thousands of metal, auto and electricity workers have gone on strike in Germany, while autoworkers have taken strike action in both Romania and Serbia. In Greece, the working class has taken strike action and joined protests against the austerity diktat of the European Union (EU) and the pseudo-left Syriza (“Coalition of the Radical Left”) government. And teachers are mobilizing in both Britain and the United States.
The previous struggles of Air France workers demonstrate that it is impossible to mount a serious struggle on a purely national basis, under the control of the union bureaucracies.
Air France could not have slashed jobs and frozen wages for so long without the complicity of the trade union officialdom. In 2014, pilots went on strike against the plan to build Transavia, a low-cost subsidiary of Air France that would hire pilots and other workers at wages well below those of their fellow workers at Air France. The pilot strike lasted 14 days and cost Air France hundreds of millions of euros, threatening not only the company, but the deeply unpopular Socialist Party (PS) government of then-President François Hollande.
The PS feared that this strike, which was widely popular, could push broader layers of workers to take strike action, in France and across Europe, including workers at Lufthansa who were struggling for wages and pensions at the time. Then-Prime Minister Manuel Valls intervened to demand an end to the strike. The National Airline Pilots Union (SNPL) completely capitulated, calling off the strike on the pretext that “it is our duty to preserve the future of our company and to bandage its wounds before the damage [the strike is causing] becomes irreversible.”
The SNPL added that the unions had a critical role to play to impose and obtain agreement for restructuring plans: “Management cannot by itself implement the development of Transavia-France. It cannot either by itself implement its 'Perform 2020' plan.”
By calling off the strike when victory was in reach, the SNPL opened the door for a broad wave of attacks on the workforce. And various petty-bourgeois parties like the New Anti-capitalist Party and Workers Struggle (LO) applauded the sell-out. Now, Transavia workers have wages that are 25 to 30 percent lower than those of Air France, for 30 to 40 percent more flying time. A year after this betrayal of the pilots strike by the SNPL, Air France announced thousands of layoffs.
The current contract will in fact lead to cuts in pilots' compensation. The bonus for night flying will fall from 50 to 40 percent, working times while on the ground will be calculated in a less favorable way, and preparation time on the ground will be cut by half.
The day of action organized by the trade union alliance aims to contain the rising anger and legitimate distrust of Air France workers of both the company and the unions. Workers must be warned that the confederations making up the trade union alliance that called yesterday's strike have negotiated the labor law with Hollande as well as Macron's anti-worker decrees. They will oppose the determined political struggle against Macron that will be needed to defeat Air France.
Techer said, “It is not one day of strike action that will make management reflect on its position, unfortunately! [An] important rolling strike has been carried out for over a month among some of the maintenance workers, but without results.”
Similarly, SNPL officials said, “The strike will get tougher. … Pilots will mobilize in solidarity with the other layers of staff in order to get wage increases to deal with inflation, but they also have other specific demands” which are still not met.
Workers seeking to fight to improve their working conditions and their wages must take the struggle out of the hands of the unions and independently organize rank-and-file committees for an international and political struggle.

Australian government to deport Tamil refugee despite torture warnings

Max Newman

A 46-year-old Tamil asylum seeker, Santharuban Thangalingam, imprisoned in a detention facility in the Melbourne suburb of Broadmeadows, was due to be deported today by the Australian government, despite the risk of torture and imprisonment on return to Sri Lanka.
The Australian Border Force (ABF), the para-military agency that oversees the capture and removal of asylum seekers, issued Thangalingam with a deportation notice on February 8. The ABF told him he will be physically escorted on his flight to Colombo and not permitted any visitors. Thangalingam refused to sign the deportation order.
Thangalingam is a victim of two policies pursued by successive Australian governments. One is the anti-refugee “border protection” regime of barring entry to asylum seekers trying to flee to Australia by boat. The other is a concerted push by Canberra, in partnership with Washington, to firmly align Sri Lanka, a strategically-located island in the Indian Ocean, behind the US-led drive to combat China’s growing influence across the Indo-Pacific region.
Last October, the UN Committee against Torture asked the current Turnbull Liberal-National government to “refrain from returning [Thangalingam] to the Republic of Sri Lanka while his complaint is under consideration.” It was an interim measure to prevent his deportation, pending an investigation.
According to the UN brief submitted on December 26, Thangalingam was a senior member of the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), working in its naval wing, the Sea Tigers. In May 2009, nearly three decades of civil war in Sri Lanka ended with the LTTE’s defeat and the imposition of de facto military rule in the country’s north and east.
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s government flatly rejected Thangalingam’s application for refugee status under the UN test of fearing persecution if forcibly returned to Sri Lanka. His application was refused on the basis that he did not reveal his connection to the LTTE when he first arrived in Australia in 2012.
A former member of the Sri Lankan parliament, M. K. Shivajilingam, has confirmed that Thangalingam played a leading role in the LTTE. A former LTTE member, Manoharan Thanapalasingam, also confirmed his role, saying: “[I] believe 100 percent that he’ll be tortured and [I] will not be surprised if he’s arrested right at the airport … and then taken to military camps … and that he’ll be tortured indefinitely.”
Australia’s permanent mission to the UN in Geneva dismissed the UN request, declaring “it is not necessary to take the interim measures requested” because “there were not substantial grounds for believing [Thangalingam] faces a real risk of irreparable harm if returned to Sri Lanka.”
On February 19, just four days before Thangalingam was due for deportation, the UN withdrew its interim request, effectively approving the deportation of a man who faces brutalisation at the hands of the Sri Lankan authorities.
Thangalingam initially did not report his connection to the LTTE because he feared deportation and punishment. This was not an unfounded fear. In August 2012, Australia’s Greens-backed Gillard Labor government, in a move to strengthen geo-strategic relations with Sri Lanka’s authoritarian President Mahinda Rajapakse, began mass deportations of refugees to Colombo, initially sending back 700.
In December 2012, Labor’s Foreign Minister Bob Carr conducted a four-day visit to Sri Lanka, during which he announced direct military cooperation with the Rajapakse government, including “intelligence sharing,” under the fraudulent banner of combatting “people smuggling” of refugees.
Since then Labor and Liberal-National governments alike have continued the mass deportations, including 29 Sri Lankan asylum seekers who were deported last December, three months after the Australian High Court sanctioned the policy of forcible removal.
There are many documented cases of Tamil refugees, especially alleged LTTE members or supporters, being tortured by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) after being deported to Sri Lanka.
Despite this, the current Sri Lankan government of President Maithripala Sirisena, like that of his predecessor Rajapakse, has denied any mistreatment of refugees or the Tamil minority. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, when visiting Australia last year, said: “They [Tamils who fled the country] are welcome to return to Sri Lanka and we won’t prosecute them.”
Sirisena’s administration has been painted as less ruthless than Rajapakse’s. In truth, the torture and imprisonment of Tamils has continued. Victims, speaking to the Associated Press after fleeing to Europe last year, described physical and sexual torture at the hands of the CID during 2016 and 2017. All the men were rounded up under the pretext of working with the LTTE.
A Tamil Refugee Council spokesman, Aran Mylvaganam, said the deportation notice against Thangalingam “ignores the reality facing returning Tamils.” He stated: “Members and suspected former members of the LTTE continue to be disappeared, detained, tortured and harassed by the Sri Lankan security forces.”
Mylvaganam also cited numerous condemnations by UN agencies of Australia’s “violations of human rights.” He commented: “It is unreasonable for the Committee against Torture to accept the testimony of the Australian government while ignoring eye-witness testimony of refugees in this case.”
Turnbull’s government has refused to comment on the deportation. Instead, a Home Affairs Department spokesperson told the Guardian: “Australia does not remove people to their country of origin where it would be inconsistent with Australia’s protection obligations.”
In reality, Australian governments have systematically violated the UN refugees convention since the late 1990s, repelling asylum seekers, often without even permitting them to apply for protection visas. Thousands more have been detained in onshore and offshore prison camps, effectively indefinitely, in defiance of the international treaty, which forbids punishment of refugees, regardless of how they seek to enter a country.
All Australia’s main political parties are responsible for the mass deportations of Sri Lankan asylum seekers to face possible torture and death, including the Greens, who propped up the minority Labor government from 2010 to 2013.

Bangladesh opposition leader jailed for five years on corruption charges

Rohantha De Silva 

Former prime minister and current head of the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), Khaleda Zia, was convicted and sentenced to five years jail this month after a special court found her guilty of corruption. She was imprisoned on February 8.
Zia was accused of embezzling nearly 21 million taka ($US250,000) in foreign donations meant for an orphanage trust established when she was prime minister from 2001 to 2006. The trust was named after her late husband and former Bangladesh President Ziaur Rahman. Her son, Tarique Rahman, the current BNP vice-chairman, received a 10-year sentence.
Although Zia has been detained many times during her 35-year political career, this is the first time she has been convicted. Early this week she lodged a High Court appeal, but faces dozens of other charges.
Dhaka University law professor Asif Nazrul told the media it was a “controversial verdict” and many people in Bangladesh viewed it as a way of “demonising a political opponent.”
The conviction is a clear attempt by Prime Minister Sheik Hasina’s Awami League government to bar Zia from contesting December’s general elections. According to Bangladesh law, anyone convicted of an offence with a sentence of more than two years cannot contest elections. By removing her main rival from the elections, Hasina hopes to secure her government a third consecutive term.
More than 5,000 police officers were mobilised in Dhaka on the day of Zia’s conviction. They violently attacked thousands of BNP supporters who rallied near the court. Ain o Salish Kendra, a Dhaka-based human rights group, reported that more than 1,780 people, including several BNP leaders, were arrested. The police operation was a clear indication that Hasina’s government is not going to tolerate any dissent over the sentence.
Before the last general elections in January 2014, the BNP called for the ballot to be conducted under a “neutral caretaker” government. When the Awami League administration rejected this, the BNP boycotted the elections and engaged in protests.
The BNP-led demonstrations were marked by vandalism, arson and firebombing of vehicles and property, killing more than 120 people and injuring hundreds more.
While the Awami League secured a two-thirds parliamentary majority, the protests impacted heavily on Bangladesh businesses. According to the Centre for Policy Dialogue, a think tank, gross domestic product fell by 0.55 percent, or 49 billion Taka ($US630 million), between January and March 2014. Some estimates claim that the total damage, including the informal sector, was around 1.25 trillion Taka.
The brutal repression unleashed by Hasani’s government was another demonstration that her administration would stop at nothing to implement its austerity measures and pro-market reforms.
The government’s main target is not the BNP, the ruling elite’s other major political faction, but the working class, especially garment workers, and the rural poor.
By suppressing her rivals in the ruling elite, Hasina is attempting to strengthen her hand to combat the growing opposition of workers to low wages, slave labour conditions and declining living standards.
Bangladesh is a cheap labour platform for the international apparel industry. According to the US-based Forbes magazine, a Bangladeshi garment worker earns $0.13 an hour, compared to $7,283 an hour (pre-tax) for one of the top 350 US clothing company chief executive officers.
A recent Center for Policy Dialogue report noted that the income share of the poorest 5 percent of households in Bangladesh dropped to 0.23 percent in 2016, down from 0.78 percent in 2010. The income share of the wealthiest 5 percent of households increased to 27.89 percent in 2016, up from 24.61 percent in 2010.
The Bangladesh capitalist class, which depends heavily on foreign remittances from expatriate workers and export income, fears a slowdown in the global economy, ongoing military conflict in the Middle East and a slump in global oil prices. A majority of Bangladeshi expatriate workers are employed in the Middle East.
Another indication of the Hasina government’s increasing repression is the growing number of people being “disappeared.” According to human rights organisations and the media, over 90 people disappeared in 2016 and 48 in the first five months of last year. In April 2017, a senior Rapid Action Bureau officer admitted during a secretly-recorded interview with Swedish Radio that the counter-terrorism police and military unit routinely pick up people, kill them and dispose of the bodies.
The government is banking on US and Indian support for its suppression of the BNP. Commenting on Zia’s conviction, a US State Department spokesperson called on the government to “guarantee a fair trial” and defend “the right of all individuals to freely express their political views, without fear of reprisal.” This amounts to a tacit endorsement of the repression.
India’s ruling elites prefer an Awami League administration, rather than a BNP-led government. New Delhi recently signed various trade deals as part of its efforts to undermine Chinese political and economic influence in Bangladesh. Historically the Indian ruling class has been close to the Awami League, having supported its campaign for separation from Pakistan in 1971. The BNP consistently uses anti-Indian chauvinism to divert mass anger into nationalist channels.