Cuba – “The Equilibrium of the World” – and Economy of Resistance

Peter Koenig

The Forth International Conference for “The Equilibrium of the World” took place in Havana., Cuba from 28 to 31 January 2019. The Conference, organized by the José Marti Project of International Solidarity,was sponsored by UNESCO and a number of local and international organisms and NGOs. It coincided with the 60th Anniversary of the Cuban Revolution and as such was also a celebration of that successful demonstration to the world that socialism, solidarity and love for live can actually survive against all odds – and, yes, Cuba, has faced more hardship than any other country in recent history, through boycotts, embargoes and all sorts of economic sanctions, heinous military infiltrations and assassination attempts, initiated by the United States and followed, largely under threats from Washington, by most of the western world.

Viva Cuba! – A celebration well deserved – and in the name of José Marti, who was born 166 years ago, but whose thoughts and spiritual thinking for a new world are as valid today as they were then. They may perhaps best be summarized as love, solidarity, justice, living well for all and in peace. These principles were taken over by Fidel and Raul Castro, the Che and Hugo Chávez. They transcend current generations and reach far beyond Latin America.

The conference had many highlights; brilliant speakers; a torch march was organized at the University of Havana in honor of José Marti;and the organizers offered the participants an extraordinary music and modern ballet performance at the National Theater.

From my point of view some of the important messages came from the representative of China, who talked about the New Silk Road, or the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), of building bridges and connecting countries and people, whereas the west was building walls. A Russian speaker sadly admitted that it took his government a longtime and relentless trying to build alliances with the west – until they realized, relatively recently, that the west could not be trusted. Professor Adan Chavez Frias Chavez, Hugo’s brother, described an invasive history over the past 100 years by the United States of Latin America and called upon the brother nations of the Americas and the world to bond together in solidarity to resist the empire’s infringement and steady attempts to subjugate sovereign nations – with a vision towards a multipolar world of equals, of sovereign nations living together in peaceful relations.

---

My own presentation focused on Economy of Resistance. And what a better place than Cuba to talk about economy of resistance!Impossible. Cuba has a 60-year history of successful resistance against a massive embargo, ordered by Washington and followed by almost the entire western world, thus demonstrating that the west has been reduced to a US colony. This was true already during the Cold War, but became even clearer when the SovietUnion “fell”. Here too, the west, led by Washington, was instrumental in the collapse of the USSR – but that’s another story – and the US grabbed the opportunity to become the emperor of a unipolar world. Cuban troops also resisted and conquered the attempted US Bay of Pigs (Playa Girón) invasion launched by President Kennedy in 1961 – and not least, Fidel Castro survived more than 600 CIA initiated assassination attempts.

The principles of Economy of Resistance cover a vast domain of topics with many ramifications. This presentation focused on four key areas:

• Food, medical and education sovereignty
• Economic and financial sovereignty
• The Fifth Column; and
• Water Resources – a Human Right and a vital resource for survival.

On food, health and education sovereignty – Cuba is 100% autonomous, as far health and education go.

However, Cuba imports more than 70% of the food her citizens consume and that, at present, mostly from the European Union. Cuba has the capacity and agricultural potential to become not only fully self-sufficient, but to develop and process agricultural produce into an agricultural industry and become a net exporter of agricultural goods.

This process might be addressed as apriority policy issue. However, it will take some time to fully implement. Meanwhile, it may be wise to diversify imports from other parts of the world than the EU – i.e. Russia, China, Central Asia, friendly ALBA countries – because Europe is not trustworthy. They tell you today, they will always honor your purchasing contracts, but if the empire strikes down with sanctions – as they did recently for anyone doing business with Iran, Cuba may be “cooked”.

Spineless Europe will bend to the orders of Washington. They have demonstrated this time and again, not least with Iran, despite the fact that they signed the so-called Nuclear Deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, on 14 July 2015(the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council – the United States, UK, Russia, France, and China—plus Germany and the EU – and Iran), after which Obama lifted all sanctions with Iran – only to have Trump break the agreement and reimpose the most draconian sanctions on Iran and on enterprises doing business with Iran. The US government, and by association Europe, does not adhere to any agreement, or any international law, for that matter, when it doesn’t suit them. There are plenty of indications – Venezuela today, to be followed by Nicaragua and Cuba. These should be valid signals for Cuba to diversify her food imports until full self-sufficiency is achieved.

Already in 2014, Mr. Putin said the ‘sanctions’ were the best thing that could have happened to Russia. It forced her to revamp her agriculture and rebuild her industrial parks with the latest technology – to become fully independent from imports. Today, sanctions are a mere propaganda tool of the west, but they have hardly an impact on Russia. Russia has become the largest wheat exporter in the world. – Cuba could do likewise. She has the agricultural potential to become fully food-autonomous.

On Economic and financial sovereignty – four facets are being addressed. The first one, foreign investments, Cuba may want to focus on (i) technology; (ii) assuring that a majority of the investment shares remains Cuban; (iii) using to the extent possible Cuba’s own capital (reserves) for investments. Foreign capital is bound to certain conditionalities imposed by foreign investors, thus,it bears exchange rate and other risks, to the point where potential profits from foreign assets are usually discounted by between 10% and 20%; and (iv) last but not least, Cuba ought to decide on the sectors for foreign investors – NOT the foreign investor.

Following scenario, as propagated by opposition lawyer and economist, Pablo de Cuba, in Miami, should be avoided: “Cuba cedes a piece of her conditions of sovereignty and negotiates with foreign investors; puts a certain amount of discounted debt at the creditors’ disposal, so as to attract more investments in sectors that they, the investors choose, for the internal development of Cuba.”

As the hegemony of the US dollar is used to strangle any country that refuses to bend to the empire, a progressive dedollarization is of the order, meaning, in addition to the US dollar itself, move progressively away from all currencies that are intimately linked to the US dollar, i.e. Canadian and Australian dollars, Euro, Yen, Pound Sterling – and more.This is a strategy to be pursued in the short- and medium term, for the protection against more sanctions dished out by the US and its spineless allies.

Simultaneously, a rapprochement towards other monetary systems, for example in the east, especially based on the Chinese gold-convertible Petro-Yuan, may be seriously considered. Russia and China, and in fact the entire SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization), have already designed a monetary transfer system circumventing the western SWIFT system, which has every transaction channeled through and controlled by a US bank. This is the key motive for economic and financial sanctions. There is no reason why Cuba could not (gradually but pointedly) join such an alternative system, to move out of the western claws of embargo. The SCO members today encompass about half of the world population and control one third of the globe’s GDP.

Drawbacks would be that the import markets would have to be revisited and diversified, unless western suppliers would accept to be paid in CUC, or Yuan through a system different from SWIFT. Moving away from the western monetary transfer system may also impact remittances from Cubans living in the US and elsewhere in the west(about US$ 3.4 billion – 2017 – less than 4% of GDP). It would mean departing from monetary transactions in the Euro and European monetary zones.

Be aware – the future is in the East. The West is committing slowly but steadily suicide.

Another crucialadvice is – stay away from IMF, World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), World Trade Organization (WTO) – and the like. They are so-called international financial and trade organizations, all controlled by the US and her western “allies” – and tend to enslave their clients with debt.

Case in Point – Mexico: President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO), a leftist, has little margin to maneuver Mexico’s economy, inherited from his neoliberal predecessor, Enrique Peña Nieto. Mexico’s finances are shackled by the international banking system, led by the IMF, FED, WB and by association, the globalized Wall Street system. For example, AMLO intended to revive PEMEX, the petroleum state enterprise. The IMF told him that he first had to “financially sanitize” PEMEX, meaning putting PEMEX through a severe austerity program. The banking community agreed. In caseAMLO wouldn’t follow their “advice”, they might strangle his country.

The CUC versus the Peso, a dual monetary system (CUC 1 = CuP 25.75), has also been used by China up to the mid-80s and by Germany after WWI, to develop export / import markets. However, there comes a time when the system could divide the population between those who have access to foreign currencies(CUC-convertible), and those who have no such access.

Also, the convertibility of the CUC with the Euro, Swiss franc, Pound Sterling and Yen, make the CUC, de facto, convertible with the dollar – hence, the CUC is dollarized. This is what Washington likes, to keep Cuba’s economy, despite the embargo, in the orbit of the dollar hegemony which will be used in an attempt to gradually integrate Cuba into the western, capitalist economy. – However, Washington will not succeed. Cuba is alert and has been resisting for the last 60 years.

The Fifth Column – refers to clandestine and /or overt infiltration of opposing and enemy elements into the government. They come in the form of NGOs, US-CIA trained local or foreigners to destabilize a country – and especially a country’s economy – from inside.

There are ever more countries that do not bend to the dictate of the empire and are targets for Fifth Columns – Russia, China, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Pakistan and more – and Cuba?

The term, “Fifth Column” is attributed to General Emilio Mola, who during the Spanish civil war in 1936, informed his homologue, General Francisco Franco, that he has four columns of troops marching towards Madrid, and that they would be backed by a “fifth column”, hidden inside the city. With the support of this fifth column he expected to finish with (the legitimate) Republican government.

The process of “infiltration” is becoming ever more sophisticated, bolder and acting with total impunity. Perhaps the most (in)famous organization to foment Fifth Columns around the world, among many others, is the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the extended arm of the CIA. It goes as a so-called NGO, or ‘foreign policy thinktank’ which receives hundreds of millions of dollars from the State Department to subvert non-obedient countries’ governments, bringing about regime change through infiltration of foreign trained, funded and armed disruptive forces, sowing social unrest and even “civil wars”. Cases in point are Ukraine, Syria, Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia, Libya – and more – and now they attempt to topple Venezuela’s legitimate, democratically elected Government of Nicolás Maduro.

They work through national and international NGOs and even universities in the countries to be ‘regime changed’. Part of this ‘Infiltration” is a massive propaganda campaign and intimidation on so-called allies, or client states. The process to reach regime change may take years and billions of dollars. In the case of Ukraine, it took at least 5 years and 5 billion dollars. In Venezuela, the process towards regime change started some 20 years ago, as soon as Hugo Chavez was elected President in 1998. It brought about a failed coup in 2002 and was followed by ever increasing economic sanctions and physical military threats. Earlier this year, Washington was able to intimidating almost all of Europe and a large proportion of Latin America into accepting a US-trained implant, a Trump puppet, Juan Guaidó, as the interim president, attempting to push the true legitimate Maduro Government aside.

To put impunity to its crest, the Trump Government blocked 12 billion dollars of Venezuela’s foreign reserves in NY bank accounts and transferred the authority of access to the money to the illegitimate self-appointed interim president, Juan Guaidó. Along the same lines, the UK refused to return 1.2 billion dollars-worth of Venezuelan gold to Caracas. All these criminal acts would not be possible without the inside help, i.e. the “Fifth Column”, the members of which are often not readily identifiable.

It is not known, how often the empire attempted ‘regime change’ in Cuba. However, none of these attempts were successful. The Cuban Revolution will not be broken.

Water resources – is a Human Right and a vital component of an economy of resistance.

Water resources will be more precious in the future than petrol. The twin satellites GRACE (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) discovered the systematic depletion of groundwater resources throughout the world, due to over-exploitation and massive contamination from agriculture and industrial waste. Examples, among many, are the northern Punjab region in India with massive, inefficient irrigation; and in Peru the Pacific coastal region, due to inefficient irrigation, unretained runoff rain- and river water into the Pacific Ocean, and destruction of entire watersheds through mining.

Privatization of water resources, not only of drinking water and water for irrigation, but of entire aquifers, is becoming an increasing calamity for the peoples of our planet. Again, with impunity, giant water corporations, led by France, the UK and the US are gradually and quietly encroaching on the diminishing fresh water resources, by privatizing them, so as to make water a commodity to be sold at “market prices”, manipulated by the water giants, hence, depriving ready access to drinking water to an ever-growing mass of increasingly impoverished populations, victims of globalized neoliberal economies. For example, Nestlé and Coca Cola have negotiated with former Brazilian President Temer, and now with Bolsonaro, a 100-year concession over the Guaraní aquiver, the largest known, renewable freshwater underground resource, 74% of which is under Brazil. Bolsonaro has already said, he would open up the Amazon area for private investors. That could mean privatization of the world’s largest pool of fresh water – the Amazon basin.

Economic Resistance means – Water is a Human Right and is part of a country’s sovereignty; water should NEVER be privatized.

For Cuba rainwater – on average about 1,300 mm / year – is the only resource of fresh water. Cuba, like most islands, is vulnerable to rainwater runoff, estimated at up to 80%. There are already water shortages during certain times of the year, resulting in droughts in specific regions. Small retention walls may help infiltrate rainwater into the ground, and at the same time regulate irrigation, provide drinking water and possibly generate electricity for local use through small hydroelectric plants.

The National Water Resources Institute (INRH – Instituto Nacional de RecursosHidráulicos), is aware of this issue and is formulating a forward-looking water strategy and planning the construction of infrastructure works to secure a countrywide water balance.

Other challenges include the hygienic reuse and evacuation of waste water, as well as in the medium to long run an island-wide Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM).

In Conclusion, Economic Resistance might be summarized as follows:

• Self-sufficiencyin food, health services and education. Cuba has achieved the latter two and is now aiming at achieving 100% agricultural autonomy – and in the meantime is advised diversifying food import markets.
• Economic and financial sovereignty, including progressive dedollarization, deglobalizing monetary economy and creating internal monetary harmony.
• The “Fifth Column” – always be aware of its existence and with perseverance keep going on the path of past successes, preventing the Fifth Column’s destabilizing actions.
• Water resources autonomy – achieving countrywide Integrated Water Resources Management, with focus on protection, conservation and efficient water use.

The 2019 Grammy Awards: The music industry’s love affair with itself

Matthew Brennan

The 61st annual Grammy Awards were held last Sunday in Los Angeles. The event claims to be “the biggest night in music” where the “recording industry’s most prestigious award” is handed out to “honor excellence in the recording arts and sciences.” The ceremony was attended by a good number of talented musicians, singers, writers and technicians.

Lady Gaga, Jada Pinkett Smith, Alicia Keys, Michelle Obama and Jennifer Lopez speak at the 61st annual Grammy Awards, Credit: Emma McIntyre/Getty Images for The Recording Academy

A few artists were recognized for genuinely moving or interesting work. The country singer-songwriter Kacey Musgraves won Album of the Year and three Country-specific awards (Album, Song and Performance) from her somewhat humane and musically-vibrant album Golden Hour.

Some other nominees among the 84 categories were also noteworthy, such as the jazz guitarist virtuoso Julian Lage (Modern Lore), the vibrant US-Cuban jazz collaboration Orquesta Akokán, the interesting Mississippi blues and roots recordings by archivist William Ferris, several powerful orchestras, Willie Nelson, John Prine and a few others. The presence of figures like Smokey Robinson, Dolly Parton, and Mavis Staples, as well as musical tributes to the exciting and powerful work of Motown Records and Aretha Franklin also added a little bit of life to the mostly dull affair.

The Grammys were mostly remarkable, however, for the fact that so little about the world—or even the situation facing the artists themselves—was reflected in any of the awards, speeches and musical performances of the ceremony.

Instead the event was dripping with conformity, self-congratulations and banality. One could sense that a lot of money was on the line if an artist “stepped out of line,” said or performed a sentiment that conflicted with the program’s tightly controlled “storylines,” or protested the complacency of it all.

Kacey Musgraves at Grammys, Credit: Kevin Winter/Getty Images

The now ubiquitous and mandatory theme of every awards show—identity politics—was on heavy display Sunday. The unofficial “theme” of the Grammys, repeated endlessly in popular media coverage, was that it was “an event to celebrate women in music.” Several of the most celebrated categories were won by female artists, such as Best Album (Kacey Musgraves), Best New Artist (Dua Lipa), Best Pop Solo Performance (Lady Gaga) and others.

Host and singer-pianist Alicia Keys, who is talented but was at times painfully complacent, set the tone at the opening monologue. “Tonight we celebrate each other through music. I’m taking it in.”

She then quickly brought out four women, singer Lady Gaga, actresses Jada Pinkett Smith and Jennifer Lopez, and former First Lady Michelle Obama, to chants of “Who runs the world?”—a reference to a feminist-themed song by Beyoncé. Each presenter then spoke about their own successful lives and careers, and its transformative connection to music…and quite literally nothing else.

A more appropriate theme would have been that it was an event to “celebrate women in the top ten percent of society.” Much of the pettiness, career-maneuvering and self-involvement of the women and men of that layer found expression throughout the night.

Anthony Kiedis and Post Malone at the Grammys, Credit: Matt Sayles | Invision | A

Nowhere was this more self-evident than in the silence regarding the major development preceding the event where one of the nominees, Atlanta rapper 21 Savage, was detained in a “targeted operation” by the semi-fascistic Immigrant and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency.

The British-born rapper, who has been living in the US since he was 7 years old, had recently performed a new song “A Lot” on national TV, which in part denounced the attack on immigrants and the poisoning of Flint (“Went through some things, but couldn’t imagine my kids stuck at the border/Flint still need water …”), and was detained by ICE shortly after the performance.

The rapper was nominated with the artist Post Malone for their rap song “Rockstar,” and was scheduled to attend the Grammys before being caught up in the widespread right-wing attack on immigrants and refugees across the United States. With one brief exception—producer Ludwig Göransson, who briefly noted his absence in an acceptance speech for Best Song (Childish Gambino’s “This Is America”)—no one spoke a word of the attack on one of their fellow artists, let alone tens of thousands of other immigrants being terrorized, including children.

Particularly notable was the silence of Post Malone, who performed the collaborative song “Rockstar” on stage at the event without uttering a word or sign of protest. Again, one can sense in these artists the feeling that there is a lot of money to lose if one sticks one’s neck out.

Kacey Musgraves, Credit: Bruce Comer Jr

What was celebrated instead was largely crass money-worship, success and supposed progress for women in music. There were over 15 live performances broadcast. Almost without exception—perhaps only Brandi Carlile’s sincere performance of “The Joke”—each were terribly unmoving or worse. Some were dull and heavily self-conscious performances, dressed up as “edgy” takes on sexuality, such as St. Vincent and Dua Lipa’s “Masseducation” or Janelle Monae’s “Make Me Feel.”

Other elements spoke to the low level of the evening driven on by identity politics. Singer-actress Jennifer Lopez faced media criticism prior to the event regarding her selection to lead the performance tribute to Motown Records, because she is a Puerto Rican woman honoring artists who are largely of African-American descent. To his credit Smokey Robinson denounced these attacks before and after the show.

The rapper Drake, who won an award for best Rap Song with “God’s Plan,” gave a largely vain speech—typical of the night—imploring other performers that they’ve “already won” in the “business” if people “are spending their hard-earned money to buy tickets to come to your show.” As banal as this was, it was largely considered the most controversial moment of the night by media outlets, because he was allegedly speaking “truth” to the Academy.

Drake at the Grammys, Credit: Kevin Mazur/Getty Images

One of the more mind-numbingly crass performances of the night—which embodied something of the character of the event as a whole—was that of rapper Cardi B, who performed the terrible song “Money.” To take just a small sampling of the least foul lyrics:

I was born to flex (Yes)
Diamonds on my neck
I like boardin’ jets, I like mornin’ sex (Woo!)
But nothing in this world that I like more than checks (Money)
All I really wanna see is the (Money)

She went on to win Best Rap Album of the year later in the evening. The music press largely referred to this as a “historic” victory because she was the first solo female rapper to win the award.

The resurgence of class struggle in the US, Mexico and around the world will undoubtedly produce much richer, sharper and urgent music in the coming period. One trusts that much of the events and musical output involved in the 61st Grammys will be quickly forgotten.

New Zealand government expands police training in schools

Tom Peters 

On February 1, New Zealand’s Labour Party-led government launched police training courses at three high schools in the greater Wellington region: Aotea, Mana and Kapiti Colleges. Year 13 students are being encouraged to take the “Introduction to Police Studies” course for academic credits to go towards their National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA), NZ’s high school qualification.

The course was originally announced in November 2017, just days after the formation of the coalition government, as a pilot scheme at two high schools in the working class town of Rotorua. Last year 35 students completed the course, which is now being expanded to the three largely working-class schools in Porirua and Kapiti, near the country’s capital.

At the launch ceremony, a police sergeant said the course would be “useful for the recruitment process, such as helping [students] train for the physical entry requirements.” It incorporates a 12-week pre-entry course which all police applicants complete as part of their training.

Moving this course into high schools further demonstrates the right-wing character of the coalition Labour-led government, which also includes NZ First and the Greens. Police officers will run the program with the aim of instilling discipline and unquestioning respect for the forces of the state among young people—the section of the working class worst-affected by low wages and the social crisis.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern falsely claims to be implementing “kind” and “compassionate” policies, while areas such as Rotorua and Porirua remain mired in poverty, with high rates of homelessness, illnesses caused by poor living conditions, and suicide.

Soaring social inequality has fueled an upsurge of strikes and protests over the past year involving teachers, health workers, transport workers and others—a trend that has alarmed the ruling class. Like governments around the world, Labour is responding to the developing class struggle with authoritarian measures—strengthening the power of the police, military and spy agencies to suppress popular anger.

In its coalition deal with the right-wing nationalist NZ First Party, Labour agreed to recruit 1,800 more front-line police officers—a 20 percent increase on 2016 figures. During the 2017 election the major parties competed to be the toughest on “law and order.” Labour recruited Greg O’Connor, former Police Association leader, as a star candidate—a man with a long record of defending killings by police and calling for all officers to be armed with guns.

The plan to roll out Police Studies in high schools, however, was hidden from the public until after the vote. It cannot be found in Labour or NZ First’s pre-election policy statements or media coverage.

The introduction of the course follows years of the military’s involvement in schools. Dozens of schools now give academic credit for “Service Academy” programs: “military-focused” training run by the Defence Force. Several were established under the 1999-2008 Labour government and the number increased under the 2008-2017 National Party government, mostly in poor neighbourhoods. According to the Ministry of Education website, 29 schools now run Service Academies, up from 16 in 2011.

The 2008-2017 National Party government opened several for-profit charter schools, including the Vanguard Military School in Auckland, which prepares teenagers to join the armed forces. Labour has integrated the school into the public system while allowing it to keep its “special” militarist character.

Throughout the past year there has been a determined recruitment drive for the armed forces and the police. One of the Labour-led government’s first announcements was that a six-week military training scheme offered to unemployed youth—known as the Limited Service Volunteers—would double in size, from 800 to 1,600 people per year.

Schools have been flooded with nationalist material celebrating New Zealand’s participation in the First World War, as part of multi-million-dollar Anzac centenary commemorations. Tens of thousands of young New Zealanders died in the war as part of the British Empire’s forces in the Middle East and Europe. In the lead-up to WWI, schools were heavily militarised and children were indoctrinated with jingoistic propaganda.

More than a century later, society is once again being militarized in the context of an intractable crisis of the capitalist system and preparations for war by every country, with the United States in the forefront. US imperialism is determined to offset its historic economic decline by seizing resources and markets with military force—including against nuclear-armed powers like Russia and China.

New Zealand’s ruling elite is part of the US-led Five Eyes intelligence network and seeks to advance its own imperialist ambitions through its military alliance with the US. The Ardern government has kept New Zealand troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, called for a greater US military presence in the Pacific, and joined the Trump administration in labeling China and Russia the main “threats” to global stability.

Despite widespread anti-war sentiment, there is no opposition within the political establishment to the Police and Defence Force programs targeting teenagers and unemployed youth. The Green Party, which is part of the government, the trade unions and pseudo-left groups have remained silent.

Aotea College principal Kate Gainsford, former president of the Post-Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA), the secondary teachers’ union, hailed the Police Studies course, telling the NZ Police website: “We found our school values aligned very well with Police values. We don’t see it as necessarily a recruitment tool—it’s more about service to the community and opening the door for other possible pathways, including a pathway to Police.”

Such statements reflect the anti-working class politics of the unions, which have spent decades working with governments and businesses to suppress workers’ opposition to wage freezes and the running down of working conditions. It is no surprise that union bureaucrats would feel a close affinity with the police.

The PPTA is currently negotiating with the Ministry of Education in an attempt to avoid strike action, which teachers have voted for, against low wages, under-staffing and the lack of classroom aides.

In 2016, the nationalist Daily Blog, which is funded by the Unite union, the Rail and Maritime Transport Union and the New Zealand Dairy Workers Union, promoted NZ First’s proposal for unemployed teenagers to be encouraged to undergo army training. The blog has also called for a more aggressive and militarist stance against China.

The demand must be raised for an immediate end to military and police recruitment programs in schools and universities—as part of a broader political and industrial campaign to unite workers, students and parents on the basis of a socialist anti-war program. The struggle of primary and secondary teachers, and other workers, against austerity must be linked with conscious opposition to military spending and law-and-order spending. This requires an implacable struggle against the Labour Party government, including NZ First and the Greens, and a complete break from the trade unions and their pseudo-left allies.

Australian government loses vote on refugee medical evacuation legislation

Oscar Grenfell 

The federal Liberal-National Coalition government of Prime Minister Scott Morrison suffered a blow on Tuesday, when it lost a vote on legislation amending the Migration Act in the House of Representatives. The Senate passed the laws the following day.

However, contrary to the claims of Labor, the Greens and the independent MPs who voted for the passage of the medical evacuation or “medivac” bill, it will not alleviate the suffering of refugees illegally incarcerated in Australian-operated detention centres on Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island and on Nauru in the Pacific.

Instead it will entrench the powers of the minister for home affairs and the intelligence agencies to prevent sick asylum-seekers in offshore detention from travelling to Australia to receive necessary medical attention.

Underscoring the crisis-ridden character of the Coalition, Tuesday’s vote was the first time a sitting government has lost a vote on a substantial piece of legislation in the House of Representatives, the lower house of the Australian parliament, since 1941.

On Tuesday, Labor guaranteed that the Coalition’s defeat would not result in a constitutional crisis or trigger a “no confidence” motion that could rapidly have brought the government down.

Under Section 53 of the Constitution, the Senate is not permitted to move legislation that allocates federal funds. Labor therefore removed a section of the “medivac” amendment that provided for fund appropriations that had originated in the Senate. This ensured that there were no money allocations tied to the legislation. Defeat on a so-called money bill in the House of Representatives is regarded as similar to a “no confidence” vote.

Labor’s role in preventing a full-scale crisis for the government and the official parliamentary set-up was in line with the sordid character of the backroom maneuvers that led to the passage of the legislation.

The origins of the bill lie in a string of reports last year that hundreds of refugees on Nauru and Manus Island are suffering serious and even life-threatening medical conditions, for which they are being denied adequate treatment by the Australian government and the contractors that it employs to operate offshore detention centres.

In August, for instance, a number of whistleblowing government employees and health workers reported that dozens of refugee children were suffering from “resignation syndrome,” a condition associated with prolonged imprisonment and trauma that results in a withdrawal from all interaction and activity.

Numbers of detained children were refusing food or water for extended periods. Some as young as 10 had self-harmed, including by ingesting sharp metal objects. It was also revealed that the federal government’s immigration authorities were routinely blocking attempts to transport the refugees to Australia for medical treatment.

The exposures triggered anger among broad sections of the population. To head off an emerging movement in defence of refugees and to divert opposition behind the parliamentary establishment, independent MP Kerryn Phelps introduced the “Medivac” amendment to government legislation late last year.

The Coalition prevented it from being voted on in the House of Representatives during the final sitting day of parliament last year. Over the following months, Labor, the Greens and independent MPs presented the bill as a crucial step towards “more humane” treatment of refugees, while making clear that it would do nothing to undermine Australia’s draconian “border security” regime.

From the outset, the bill did not propose the resettlement of ill refugees to the Australian mainland. Instead it stipulated that, in certain cases, refugees could be transported to Australia for necessary medical treatment, while remaining in incarceration. They would then be returned to the detention camps in the Pacific that damaged their health in the first place.

Over the past weeks, Labor and the independents have done everything they can to ensure that the legislation entrenches ministerial powers. Senior Labor figures and independent MPs have all kowtowed to the intelligence agencies, receiving confidential briefings from them to make sure that the laws did not jeopardise purported “national security.”

With the changes made by Labor, the final bill allows the minister for home affairs to reject medical transfers proposed by doctors on “security or character grounds.” Such rulings, which cannot be appealed or overturned, would be based upon secret assessments conducted by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), the country’s domestic spy agency.

The minister can also reject a transfer on the grounds that it is medically unnecessary. This decision will then be reviewed by an Independent Health Advice Panel composed of government doctors. Even if the panel opposes the minister’s decision, he can still prevent the transfer by invoking the vague “security and character” provisions.

Labor, Greens and independent MPs nevertheless hailed the passage of the bill.

Labor representatives stressed, however, that it would not “weaken border security,” or aid “people smugglers,” as has been claimed by the government. Labor leader Bill Shorten has repeatedly declared, over the past year, that a government he leads will continue the policy of consigning refugees who attempt to reach Australia by boat to prison camps in the Pacific.

This is in line with Labor’s central role in the persecution of refugees and immigrants. It was the Labor government of Prime Minister Paul Keating that introduced the “mandatory detention” regime. In 2012, the Greens-backed Labor governments of Julia Gillard reopened the detention centres on Nauru and Manus Island and decreed that the refugees imprisoned there would never be granted asylum.

The Greens support for the legislation demonstrates that its claims to defend refugees are a sham. The party, no less than Labor and the Liberal-Nationals, uphold the entire framework of border protection and immigration controls, which are used to deny people the right to seek asylum and block their free movement.

Significantly, Greens leader Senator Richard Di Natale admitted on Tuesday morning that Labor’s changes to the amendment, expanding ministerial powers, could “make the situation worse than doing nothing.” Di Natale and his party nevertheless ensured the passage of the bill.

For their part, the independent MPs have yet again demonstrated that they have no independence from the official two-party set-up. Their role is to act as a safety valve, diverting growing discontent behind the political establishment and fraudulently presenting a parliament that is uniformly committed to war, austerity and authoritarianism, as a forum of contesting political views and perspectives.

The immediate outcome of the bill is the government’s announcement that it will reopen a refugee detention centre on Christmas Island, which has been the subject of class action lawsuits over the mistreatment of asylum-seekers, to shore up “border protection.”

This weeks’ events have also left little doubt that the campaign for the 2019 Australian federal election, which is likely to take place in May, will be a chauvinist contest between the major parties over which is “toughest” on “national security” and most vicious in persecuting refugees.

Mass protests shut down Haiti

John Marion

Protests have shut down large portions of Haiti since last Thursday, the 33rd anniversary of Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier’s flight from the country as his regime collapsed.

The current protests are demanding a similar fate for President Jovenel Moïse, who in 2015 won an election in which only 20 percent of eligible voters turned out. Last July an attempt by Moïse’s government to cut fuel subsidies led to large protests and the resignation of his prime minister.

Moïse’s government and that of PHTK predecessor Michel Martelly have been deeply implicated in the PetroCaribe corruption scandal. Last autumn, protest signs asked where the PetroCaribe money went, but now banners demand “give us the PetroCaribe money.”

A protester named Valckensy Dessin told the Miami Herald, “we have a little minority, rich people in this country, running this country, earn everything, and we have the mass of the population dying, hunger, and misery like this. It’s impossible.”

The protests, now called Pays Lock (Country Lock), have taken on the character of a general strike with the aim of shutting down the country until Moïse resigns. In addition to his government’s corruption, the strike is being fueled by unbearable inflation and an exchange rate with the US that has climbed to 84 gourdes to the dollar. A year ago the rate was 64 to one.

Food staples, including rice and poultry, are among the largest of exports from the US to Haiti. Over the weekend, the owner of a bakery in Jacmel complained to Alterpresse that in a very short time the price of a sack of flour has increased from 1,750 to 2,500 gourdes.

While bread is still available from small bakers despite the protests, supermarkets have been closed and the transportation of food is becoming impossible. This scarcity will only add to inflation.

Since last Thursday, banks have been attacked in Delmas, Gonaïves, and other cities, and gas stations have been set on fire. In Cap-Haïtien and other cities, protesters have rebuilt barricades of burning tires as soon as the police clear them.

The Association of Private Hospitals of Haiti (AHPH) issued a press release Tuesday stating that its 28 member hospitals “are starting to face major challenges: lack of electricity, lack of fuel, lack of oxygen, impoverishment of medication inventories and stoppage of means of transportation and communication. These challenges bear directly on our ability to save lives.” This crisis comes on top of a chronic lack of medical care: as of the end of 2018 there were only 3,354 medical doctors in all of Haiti, fewer than 1 for every 3,000 people.

Although the police claimed to have control of the country’s second largest city, Cap-Haïtien, on Monday, Le Nouvelliste reported that large and mall businesses, banks, schools, and public transportation were not functioning.

The building housing the Italian and Peruvian consulates in Port-au-Prince was threatened by protesters, and in St-Marc protesters tried to burn down the city hall.

The government of the Dominican Republic, which deported more than 10,000 Haitians per month in 2018, is fortifying its border, particularly near the border town of Dajabón, with troops, helicopters, machine guns and surveillance equipment.

At least ten and as many as 50 people have died across the country since February 7. In the commune of Mirabelais, a woman was killed by a car fleeing from police who had fired tear gas. The car was subsequently torched by protesters. As the situation intensified, nine police and an equal number of protesters were injured. In Jacmel, three armed men did not try to disguise themselves when they opened fire on protesters, killing one and injuring five. In Port-au-Prince an adolescent was gunned down by police in front of his mother.

Bourgeois charlatans have attempted to exploit the protests, which are dominated by the working class and poor, in order to advance their own interests. Attorney Michel André, a protege of former first lady Leslie Manigat, who has been groomed by the US State Department and the Organization of American States, is putting himself forward as the leader of a “democratic and popular” movement. In the 2016 presidential election, André did not receive enough votes to advance to the second round.

Moïse Jean-Charles of the Pitit Dessalines (Children of Dessalines) formation has threatened “to name an interim president in the coming days,” according to the Daily Mail. The 2016 Pitit Dessalines platform, on which Jean-Charles ran for president, expressed his admiration for Fidel Castro while calling for vaguely “socialist” reforms. Jean-Jacques Dessalines, for whom Jean-Charles’ movement is named, was declared Emperor of Haiti in 1804 after aiding in the arrest of Toussaint Louverture. His government then issued a constitution under which he became emperor for life.

The Core Group, composed of Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Spain, the US and others, issued a press release on Sunday calling for the imposition of austerity and “reiterating the fact that in a democracy change must come through the ballot box, and not through violence.” These countries, which have made no bones about raining down violence on Haiti since the 1790s, are keeping their current plans secret. Nonetheless, they fear that they cannot rely on the Haitian National Police (PNH), with which they have tried to replace UN forces in recent years.

The Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Haiti (CCIH) is also calling for austerity, as though there were no protests outside its window. On Sunday it issued a press release calling for “a national dialogue” about the future of Moïse’s presidency, followed by “urgent, realizable, and measurable actions geared toward installing a regime of austerity in the government’s budget, while suppressing all non-essential expenditures.”

The lower house of parliament, on the other hand, is trying to quell the protests with a pretense of largesse, by insisting that the government increase the portion of domestic revenues budgeted for social programs from 15 to 20 percent. The budget for the 2018-2019 fiscal year was supposed to take effect on November 1, but still has not been passed. The government, in panic, is proposing small business credits and financing for agricultural enterprises in order to kick-start the economy.

On Monday morning, presidential counselor Guichard Doré told Radio Magik9 that resignation is not one of the options being considered by President Moïse, and that “there is not an alternative to dialogue.” Doré went on to say that “the president offers his hand to everyone” because “we have a country to build together.” However, the president and prime minister have gone silent. A second, anonymous counselor told Le Nouvelliste that the two are open to a UN “mediation” of the crisis.

New study reveals more details on deadly flammable cladding used on Grenfell Tower

Alice Summers

Flammable cladding similar to the material which had covered Grenfell Tower is still being widely used across the UK. The combustible cladding used on Grenfell was a significant factor in allowing the rapid spread of a small fire and creating toxic smoke with deadly consequences on June 14, 2017.

A new study led by Professor Richard Hull, who is Professor of Chemistry and Fire Science at the University of Central Lancashire, is a step forward in revealing how deadly cladding materials of this type really are. The research team included Professor Anna Stec, whose study last year revealed that large concentrations of harmful and potentially carcinogenic toxins were and are present in the dust and soil around Grenfell Tower.

Professor Hull’s study demonstrates that the specific combination of building materials used at Grenfell had resulted in the highest flammability and smoke toxicity of any products currently available.

According to the research, published in the Journal of Hazardous Materials, the polyethylene-filled aluminium composite material (ACM) cladding and polyisocyanurate (PIR) insulation used on the Tower interact in a way that makes the materials far more dangerous together than when they are burnt separately.

Professor Hull’s team tested the flammability of ACM panels and PIR foam insulation, which are both widely used across the UK. The cladding caught fire easily, with the heat generated quickly melting the polyethylene contained within it and sending molten drops onto the PIR insulation, which ignited this material in turn. According to the study, this effect is likely to have substantially aided the rapid spread of fire at Grenfell.

PIR insulation is so toxic that burning just 1kg of this material is enough to fill a 50m3 room with an “incapacitating and ultimately lethal” combination of carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide gas, according to the study. Countless kilograms of this material coated the entirety of Grenfell Tower.

The research notes that in many cases smoke from the burning façade entered the tower block before the fire itself had penetrated inside the building, meaning that the smoke toxicity of these materials was a key factor in the tragic and entirely avoidable deaths of 72 people at Grenfell.

The study showed that ACM cladding is 55 times more flammable than the least flammable panels, with the PIR insulation used behind it at Grenfell Tower giving off smoke that was 15 times more toxic than the less flammable alternatives.

The research also highlighted the dangers of High-Pressure Laminate (HPL) materials, a popular alternative to the ACM cladding used at Grenfell Tower. HPL materials have already been associated with fire fatalities. Window panels using this material were installed at Lakanal House, a tower block in south London where six residents lost their lives in a fire in 2009 and at least another 20 were injured.

HPL cladding releases heat 25 times faster and burns 115 times hotter than non-combustible products, the study found.

While there are currently no official figures available for the number of buildings clad in HPL, the product is thought to be three times as popular as ACM cladding but more commonly used on low-rise buildings, according to online housing publication, Inside Housing.

Inside Housing revealed last year that HPL cladding had never passed a large-scale fire safety test. According to official government guidance, combustible cladding must be subject to a large-scale test, known as a British Standard (BS) 8414 test, before being used.

Yet according to a spokesperson for the Building Research Establishment—the privatised former government national building research laboratory and the only UK organisation that conducts BS 8414 tests—“[n]one of the cladding systems that have passed a BS 8414 test include a high-pressure laminate.” But at least one system using HPL cladding has failed a BS 8414 test, insulation company Kingspan revealed.

However, the very minimal government fire-safety programmes introduced since the Grenfell inferno have done nothing to counter the risks posed by HPL cladding. The Building Safety Programme, established by the government in July 2017, has focussed exclusively on ACM cladding and only addressed high-rises above 18 metres.

Speaking to Inside Housing, Professor Hull stated, “I think that HPL has been neglected, and shouldn’t have been neglected.

“One would fear that because of all the attention that has gone to the ACM buildings [that] the next disaster is likely to involve HPL rather than ACM—because they haven’t had the fire risk assessments and so on.”

In fact, the scantest attention has been given by the authorities to the real and present danger of ACM cladding on many buildings. The latest figures compiled by the Building Safety Programme for the period up to December 31, 2018 showed that there are 437 high-rise residential buildings and publicly owned buildings in England over 18m in height with ACM cladding systems deemed unlikely to meet current Building Regulations Guidance.

But work to remove and replace dangerous ACM material had only been completed on 15 percent of these buildings, 18 months after the Grenfell fire.

This makes a mockery of the government’s claim to be addressing the problem and why it committed just £400 million for the removal and replacement of this cladding. Even if all the £400 million were spent tomorrow on removing existing ACM cladding this would be woefully inadequate in resolving this massive threat to public safety.

Last month, it was estimated that the cost of removing cladding on just five local authority-run tower blocks on the Chalcots estate in Camden, north west London, will cost almost £90 million. The government has only committed to paying £63.5 million of this amount, with a further £26.2 million having to be raised by the cash-strapped council.

How seriously the Conservative government and Labour Party run council are taking the safety of thousands of Chalcots residents is seen in the fact that the remedial work is not set to be finished until the summer of 2021—fully four years after the Grenfell fire.

A further indication of the ruling elite’s utter disregard for public safety was found in a Freedom of Information Request by Inside Housing, which revealed that the government had denied funding to 12 housing blocks clad in ACM because they “didn’t meet the application criteria.”

Three of these buildings were rejected because they were under the arbitrary 18 metre threshold used to define high-rise structures. One of these, a six-storey building, was a mere 64cm “too short.”

The Socialist Equality Party and Grenfell Fire Forum insist that those guilty of social murder at Grenfell Tower must be arrested and charged. We will continue to expose the inquiry and to campaign, along with local residents, to bring out the truth and establish justice for the victims of the Grenfell atrocity.

The Grenfell Fire Forum demands:

• Justice for Grenfell means no cover-up and no inquiry whitewash!
• Arrest the political and corporate criminals responsible!
• Stop the scapegoating of firefighters!
• Quality public housing is a social right!
• For an emergency multi-billion pound programme of public works to build schools, hospitals, public housing and all the infrastructure required in the 21st century!

Italy: Mass demonstration in Rome against right-wing government

Marianne Arens 

On Saturday, February 9, the first major national demonstration against the right-wing government of Lega and the Five-Star Movement took place in Rome. According to the organizers, 200,000 participants marched through Rome under the slogan “A future for work.” The three trade union umbrella organizations CGIL, CISL and UIL had called the protest.

The demonstration was marked by an obvious contradiction. The large number of participants shows that the international class struggle is also awakening in Italy. The march was supported by angry workers, retirees and groups of school students who wanted to fight the government’s right-wing course. Some of the banners read: “Hands off pensions,” “Less state [attacks] against social networks—more welfare state,” and “stop racism.”

But the initiators of the demonstration—union leaders, Democratic Party (PD) representatives and pseudo-left politicians—lent the rally a pro-business orientation. They even managed the feat of attacking the ultra-right Lega/Five-Star government from the right.

The Conte government, which took over government in June last year, is the most right-wing Italian government since the fall of the fascist regime of Mussolini in 1945. It is pursuing a chauvinist, xenophobic course, expanding the military and the police state and driving tens of thousands of migrants into illegality.

The government wants to begin paying its so-called “citizens income” shortly before the European elections in May. However, this is far from providing an unconditional basic income for all, as was promised in the general election campaign. Like the Hartz IV welfare and labour “reforms” in Germany, the “citizens income” of €780 maximum, which applies only to Italian citizens, serves the state as a whip to force the needy to undertake any work offered and to lower wages overall. As a result, the government has met with increasing resistance among working people.

The union leaders who spoke at the rally on Saturday criticized the government from the standpoint of that wing of Italian capital that works closely with the European Union and has carried out massive social cuts over the past three decades, supported by the Democratic Party.

They argue like worried business leaders and accuse the government of leading the country into recession with unrealistic projects. “For months, the decline in industrial production points to the risk of a recession in Italy,” the CGIL said in its call for the demonstration. At the rally, Maurizio Landini, CGIL Secretary-General, called for more investment. “The bottom line is investment: without a specific plan of public and private investment, you will not be able to get work done.”

Landini, the former head of the metal workers federation FIOM, became Secretary-General of the CGIL in January 2019. In addition to the two other union leaders, Carmelo Barbagallo (UIL) and Annamaria Furlan (CISL), the former CGIL leaders Guglielmo Epifani and Sergio Cofferati marched with him at the head of the demonstration. Both represent a split from the PD: Epifani stands for the party MDP-Articolo Uno, and Cofferati for the Free and Equals (Liberi e Uguali, LeU). In addition, prominent PD politicians, such as current PD chief Maurizio Martina and former head of government and PCI leader Massimo D’Alema, also took part in the demonstration.

Together with these union bureaucrats and representatives of former PD governments, employers and a president of the business association Confindustria also participated. Ermanno Bellettini, head of Confindustria in Romagna, criticized the government’s halting of several projects, such as oil and gas exploration off the coast of Italy, justifying the collaboration with the unions by saying, “We too are equally concerned.”

The main speech at Piazza San Giovanni in Laterano was given by Annamaria Furlan, leader of the Catholic CISL. She too, spoke in tune with the national interests of Italian business. “The Italian working people love Italy,” announced Furlan. But under the current government, industrial production was in decline and economic output was declining, she said. “The only thing that keeps growing is the spread,” the union president announced. The “spread” is stock market jargon referring to the interest differential between Italian and German government securities.

Furlan appealed to the government to work with the unions. “We have provided important suggestions on how to get the country back on track ... We want economic growth, because without growth there is no work ... without growth there is no future for our country.”

These were not the words of a representative of the working class but of the Italian ruling class. The close partnership of the three big trade union federations—CGIL, CISL and UIL—with representatives of Italian capital and the PD camp has a long tradition. It made possible the social attacks of earlier governments and paved the way for today’s Lega/Five-Star government.

In a TV interview in 2016, former Prime Minister and EU Commissioner Mario Monti confirmed the crucial role the unions played in the introduction of the hated Fornero pension reform, reversing in one fell swoop the old-age security that Italian workers had fought for after the fall of fascism in 1945. When he introduced the pension reform by decree in December 2011, union leaders did not seize the opportunity for social revolt. “No other country has implemented such a drastic pension reform so easily,” Monti gleefully noted.

The rise of the Five-Star movement from nothing is a result of this class collaboration, which is fully supported by the pseudo-left organizations. For example, Rifondazione Comunista called for support for the demonstration on February 9, without saying a word of criticism about its political line.

A break with these organizations and the trade unions is the most important precondition for fighting social attacks and the rise of the right. As long as they suppress the working class’s preparedness to fight and divert it into the dead end of class collaboration, the right-wing can benefit from growing disappointment and anger.

This was shown the day after the demonstration in Rome, in the results of the regional election in Abruzzo, which had been shaken by devastating earthquakes in 2009 and 2016. The right-wing camp won the election with 49 percent and its top candidate, Marco Marsilio of the fascist Fratelli d’Italia, is the new regional president.

The Lega, which supported Marsilio’s candidacy, was the strongest single party, with 27.9 percent. In contrast, the votes of the Five-Star Movement halved. At 19.3 percent, it did not receive half as much as in the last regional election in 2014 (40 percent). The so-called “centre-left” alliance under the leadership of the Democratic Party (PD) received only 31.2 percent, the PD alone just 11 percent.

A year ago, Beppe Grillo’s Five-Star Movement had risen to become the country’s strongest single party. It won the parliamentary election in 2018 with almost a third of the vote. But despite claiming to be “neither right nor left,” it entered a governing coalition with the far-right Lega, who have used it as a stepping-stone for its further advancement. Meanwhile, the Lega is by far the strongest single party.

Mexican President López Obrador cracks down on Central American migrants

Don Knowland

In his state of the union speech last week, American president Donald Trump continued his racist and fascistic rant against oppressed Central American migrants who are seeking asylum in the United States, depicting them as illegals steeped in drugs and violence.

Trump’s diatribe won praise from Mexico’s president Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), who said “it is Trump’s right, his vision. He was respectful enough of our government and I thank him for that, because we are doing our part.”

This week, AMLO’s government responded with force when some 2,000 immigrants detained in Piedras Negras, Coahuila rebelled against their jailers from the local police and federal armed forces. For nine days, the Central American refugees have been detained by Mexican police at Trump’s behest, right across the border from Eagle Pass, Texas.

According to Univision, migrants were physically repressed by Mexican government forces on Tuesday night when a group attempted to leave the abandoned factory where they are being detained. On Wednesday afternoon, migrants began turning over tables in the facility in protest over the poor conditions in the detention center. The immigrants demanded better access to food and more sanitary conditions. Hundreds of children are among the detainees.

Last month, AMLO agreed to participate in Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy, under which asylum seekers are returned to Mexico for the foreseeable future while awaiting a court hearing in the US. AMLO’s government has kept silent despite the charge by Amnesty International on February 1 that the US-Mexican policy is not only “absolutely illegal,” given its aim of deterring asylum seeking by making it inaccessible, but “shameful and malicious” as well.

If migrants stay in Mexico for an extended time period, this will also allow US immigration to argue in court that asylum in the US is no longer necessary because Mexico has become a “safe third country” due to the migrants’ extended stay there.

The Mexican government has cynically cloaked its acquiescence with a policy that allows migrants to register and obtain visitor cards for “humanitarian reasons.” The cards permit the holder to remain in the country and work for at least a year. According to Mexico’s Institute of National Migration, thus far 12,000 visitor cards have been issued.

Yet the High Commission of the United Nations for Refugees says that only 46 percent of those who have applied have been granted the visitor cards. This is despite the fact that, according to the Commission, 63 percent of migrants from the “Northern Triangle” of Central America, encompassing Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, left their countries because they feared violence, while seven of 10 feared that their lives would be in danger if they returned.

Even if these immigrants could scrape together occasional work in Mexico, they will be paid at the lowest end of Mexico’s miserly wage scale. If they manage to escape horrific detention conditions in places like Piedras Negras, they and their children can share the miserable conditions of life in poor, violence-wracked barrios along the US border and be relegated to living in makeshift slums and encampments. In other words, they will largely face the same conditions they fled, in many cases with the same gang persecutors dominating their neighborhoods.

While López Obrador speaks about the need to respect immigrant rights, his new budget proposal for next year includes a 20 percent cut for refugee funding.

As Adam Isaacson of the Washington Office on Latin America told the Financial Times, “You’re going to have hundreds of migrants with no resources, no safety net, no system.”

In return for its part in these barbaric policies the Mexican government has received pledges from Washington of billions of dollars to permit Mexico’s ruling class to develop Mexico’s southernmost poor states as low-wage platforms for exploitation by US corporations.