Xi Jinping tours Europe amid growing divisions between America and EU

Alex Lantier

On Tuesday, Chinese President Xi Jinping wrapped up a six-day tour of Europe that took him to Rome, Sicily, Monaco and Paris. This trip and the signing of multiple business and strategic agreements between China and the European powers have exposed the deep conflicts that exist between the United States and its nominal European allies.

Before Xi’s trip, the press had leaked news that Italy planned to endorse China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) for transport, energy and industrial infrastructure across Eurasia.

This provoked bitter opposition from Washington. After launching a “pivot to Asia” to militarily isolate China in 2011, the US has now repudiated the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty to allow it to deploy large numbers of nuclear missiles targeting China and Russia. On Twitter, the US National Security Council warned Italy it was legitimizing China’s “predatory approach to investment and will bring no benefits to the Italian people.”

The European Union (EU) powers thrust aside US objections, however. After the EU powers all signed on in 2015 to the BRI’s funding arm, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, this weekend Rome signed a Memorandum of Understanding endorsing the BRI.

Paris bitterly complained that Rome had sidelined its EU partners in its talks with China. However, when Xi arrived, it proceeded to sign its own multi-billion-euro deals with him. The biggest, a €30 billion deal for Franco-German firm Airbus to sell jetliners to China, included a large new order as China abandons the Boeing 737 MAX for Airbus A320s after two horrific crashes. French President Emmanuel Macron then met Xi together with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who said she saw “nothing to criticize” in Italy’s deal with Xi endorsing the BRI.

These meetings unfolded amid explosive tensions with the United States over policy towards China and Russia. This month, after Merkel rejected US calls to boycott Chinese tech firm Huawei’s products, US Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell threatened to suspend US intelligence cooperation with Germany. At the same time, Washington is threatening Berlin with sanctions if it does not abandon its Nordstream 2 pipeline bringing Russian gas to Germany.

Despite their remarkable clashes with Washington, the policy of the European imperialist powers is not fundamentally different, or less predatory and reactionary. They plan to plunge hundreds of billions of euros into their military machines, financed by austerity targeting the working class, to give them the military might to better confront Washington.

London’s Financial Times laid out the militarist implications of attempts to pursue an independent European policy in its editorial yesterday. “The EU fears being squeezed between the US and China as the Trump administration takes an ever-harder line towards Beijing. European leaders do not want to be forced into a choice between the two,” it wrote, adding that EU member states either “take China’s direct investment or put a premium on exporting to China.”

In Europe, the FT continued, “Some argue for building an autonomous foreign and defence capacity. But for years to come, Europe will be unable to stand alone.” It euphemistically called on the major EU powers to “think more strategically” and “take the lead.” In plain English, this means Europe should hurry to rearm.

The European heads of state themselves do not know whether the weapons they are building would serve to join a US onslaught against China, a Chinese war against America, or some other conflict. However, two years since US President Donald Trump speculated about an end of the NATO alliance and threatened trade war against German car exports, longstanding international arrangements underpinning the affairs of world capitalism are rapidly disintegrating.

The contradictions of capitalism that the great Marxists of the 20th century identified as leading to the outbreak of world war and the October 1917 Revolution in Russia—between world economy and the nation-state system, and social production and private appropriation of profit—are reasserting themselves.

The BRI is a multi-trillion-dollar plan, laid out in 2013, placing China at the hub of a vast web of rail and road networks, ports, energy pipelines and industrial facilities ranging from China across the Eurasian landmass to Europe, going as far as East Africa and Indonesia. Hundreds of billions have already been spent on initiatives like the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, regular Chinese freight train service to Iran and Germany via Russia, and Indian Ocean ports. Chinese state-owned enterprises are coordinating enormous international operations as much of Eurasia industrializes.

This brings Beijing into headlong conflict with Washington. It also creates the conditions for a potential conflict with the European powers if they align themselves with the BRI. On Xi’s Europe tour, the Washington Post quoted analyst Jacob Shapiro, who warned that pan-Eurasian plans lay “the groundwork for precisely the type of power the US has been obsessed with thwarting for over two centuries. As overly ambitious as China’s larger strategic goal may be, it is precisely that strategic aim that so irks the United States. While it doesn’t particularly care if China builds a port in Italy or high-speed rail in Poland, it does care about the potential emergence of a dominant power in Eurasia.”

Washington’s main strategy, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 threw open Central Asia to imperialist intervention, was to dominate this region as the key to controlling the Eurasian land mass. It launched a series of wars in the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and beyond. Despite growing commercial rivalries with the United States, the European imperialist powers largely joined these wars. They cost millions of lives, shattered entire societies and discredited the ruling classes of the imperialist countries among workers internationally.

But the debacle of these neo-colonial interventions has only led Washington to up the ante, preparing new, even bloodier wars and provocations targeting Russia and China directly.

The European imperialist powers’ attempts to formulate an independent imperialist policy do not offer a peaceful alternative to Washington’s wars. Their rearmament, financed by austerity, goes hand in hand with a relentless march to the far right and towards police state rule. While right-wing extremist professors legitimize Hitler’s crimes to justify German remilitarization, French President Emmanuel Macron has hailed fascist dictator Philippe Pétain and given authorization to shoot down “yellow vest” protesters opposed to social inequality and war.

Ultimately, the deepening global antagonisms rending the global geopolitical order carry with them the immense danger of a new world war, this time fought with nuclear weapons. The working class is the only social force capable of opposing the imperialist war drive.

The most urgent political task is the building of an international anti-war movement in the working class amid an upsurge of the class struggle. The eruption of mass protests for the downfall of Algeria’s military regime, the “yellow vest” movement and strikes against EU wage freezes across Europe, reports of growing social protest in China, and strikes by US teachers and Mexican autoworkers against both the unions and the companies point to an enormous radicalization of workers. The critical issue is to orient them to the great tasks posed by the objective situation.

The only way to rationally organize the international productive forces created by modern society and prevent a new relapse into horrific wars is the expropriation of the capitalist classes by the working class, fighting on a program of world socialist revolution.

Sri Lankans driven to suicide by exorbitant debt repayments

Saman Gunadasa

According to a March 17 report in Sri Lanka’s Observer newspaper, at least 170 debt-ridden rural residents, mainly women, committed suicide last year. Most of those who took their lives were from the island’s war-devastated North and East.

The suicides are another indication of the deep-going social and economic problems facing the rural poor who are being hit by rising living costs and government cuts to subsidies and social welfare programs.

Citing information from the Progressive Peasants’ Congress, the newspaper reported that the latest suicide victim was from Elahara village in the Polonnaruwa district. The 38-year-old father took out an initial loan of 80,000 rupees ($US450) but was unable to service it, then borrowed another 30,000 rupees to pay back part of the original loan.

Desperate to settle the debt he moved to Colombo, over 170 kilometres away, in an attempt to secure masonry work. He was unsuccessful and returned to the village where he took his life. His suicide is one of many such tragedies reported in the media over recent years.

The loan taken out by the poverty-stricken Elahara villager is typical of those being provided by so-called micro-finance lenders.

According to the government’s National Economic Council, there are around 10,000 such lenders in the country, the majority of them not subject to any regulations. The development finance department of the finance ministry estimates that about 2.9 million people—84 percent of them women—obtained loans from these companies in 2017.

Official bank interest rates on loans in Sri Lanka are generally between 15 and 20 percent. While the Central Bank has imposed a maximum rate of 35 percent for microfinance loans, some lenders charge unbearable rates ranging as high as 220 percent.

Most of those who committed suicide in response to exorbitant loan repayments last year were from the Vavuniya and Jaffna districts in the island’s north and Batticalao in the east.

Colombo’s devastating three-decade war against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam killed nearly 200,000 people and destroyed the homes and livelihoods of tens of thousands more in these areas. Currently there are about 90,000 war widows in the North and East provinces attempting to maintain their families without any real income.

Since the war ended in 2009, successive Sri Lankan governments have refused to provide economic and social support for these war survivors, opening the way for predatory lenders to profit from the suffering.

A protest in Kilinochchi last June against the micro-finance system

A report to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) by Juan Pablo Bohoslavsky in January noted that various institutions “generate huge profits by putting enormous pressure on poor borrowers, and on women in particular.”

While some loans were for small businesses, others were to cover everyday living expenses or to reduce or pay off previous loans, Bohoslavsky reported. He noted that “collectors visit the houses of these women, sometimes on a daily basis, and that the women are [often] exposed to psychological and physical violence by collectors.” Debt collectors sometimes pressurised women for “sexual favours,” he said, and that some female borrowers had even offered to sell their kidneys to repay loans.

K. Selvadi, 45 and a mother of four children, is from Kayts in Jaffna. She told World Socialist Web Site reporters that she and two other women jointly applied for a 75,000-rupee loan for a fishing net. Their husbands had to sign as guarantors and the repayments are 2,000 rupees per month.

Selvadi said that she faced an uphill battle to pay the interest and settle the loan because the income from fishing was insufficient.

“I am looking for odd jobs in vegetable gardens. This is very difficult work because it is in the hot sun and they only pay 700 rupees for a whole day. One of my daughters works in a crab meat company for just 15,000 rupees per month,” she explained.

M. Sivaranjani, 36, from Velanai, obtained three loans totalling 300,000 rupees in order to develop the family’s fishing business. She pays about 10,000 rupees per month on loan repayments.

“If we don’t pay these installments the debt collectors come to our home. We have to borrow from friends or relatives in order keep up the payments. Our lives have been transformed into a debt-ridden existence,” she said.

Kirubalini, 44, from Velanai, spends her entire earnings on interest repayments. “The government has said that it will write off microfinance loans but it’s done nothing. It also promised to provide low interest loans but these will still be loans. I can’t sleep properly because of these debts,” she said.

While rural farmers are borrowing from the banks in order to pay for farm inputs, they are also taking out additional loans from microfinance companies for basic living expenses. They frequently confront crop failure due to drought or floods. Currently, 14 districts in Sri Lanka are experiencing severe drought.

Radhika Gunarathna, director of the Nelumyaya Foundation, a non-governmental organisation, told the media that she recently learnt that a 45-year-old mother of two was on the brink of a family suicide because their bakery had gone bankrupt. They had borrowed 800,000 rupees to sustain the small business. Her husband suggested that they close all the doors and windows of their home and that all four members of the family gas themselves to death.

Farming communities are burdened by the rising cost of seed, pesticides and fertilisers whose prices are controlled by profiting-gouging multinational corporations. Protests by farmers demanding guaranteed prices for their produce and improved subsidies, including for fertiliser, are increasing across the island.

Plantation workers are also heavily burdened by exorbitant loans because they do not receive a living wage. In recent months estate workers have held militant protests and a six-day national strike to demand a doubling of their 500-rupee daily basic wage. This struggle was betrayed by the plantation unions who settled on a paltry pay rise tied to increased productivity rates.

Sri Lankan Finance Minister Mangala Samaraweera last month visited northern Jaffna in a desperate attempt to deflect mounting anger over microfinance loans. He declared that the government would write-off nearly 1,400 million rupees in capital and interest costs to more than 45,000 female borrowers.

Blaming “loan sharks” for the high interest rates, Samaraweera, admitted that the government’s debt write-off “is a short-term solution to a much larger problem” but declared “it is not feasible to have multiple debt write offs of this nature.” He proclaimed the government would introduce new laws and regulations to control the so-called microfinance industry.

Samaraweera’s claims are bogus. His recent International Monetary Fund-endorsed budget, which will force the working masses into further debt, provided generous concessions to big business and finance capital.

Suicides caused by rural debt, including microfinance borrowings, are a rampant problem in so-called developing countries. In India, for example, 5,650 debt-ridden farmers and 6,710 agricultural workers committed suicide in 2014. The following year 8,007 farmers and 4,595 agricultural workers took their own lives. The Indian government responded to these catastrophic and increasing figures by stopping its recording of the number of suicides.

US threatens Turkey over Russian S-400 air defence purchase

Jordan Shilton

Turkish-US relations have deteriorated in recent weeks, with Washington threatening reprisals if Ankara goes ahead with the purchase of the Russian-made S-400 air defence system.

Relations between the two countries have been in a downward spiral for some time—especially since Washington made the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), which Ankara considers a “terrorist organization” and threat to the Turkish state, its main proxy army in its regime-change war in Syria, then supported a failed July 2016 coup against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Differences have since expanded to include an array of Mideast and even global issues. Washington is particularly alarmed by Ankara’s attempts to offset pressure from its traditional western allies by forging closer ties with Russia and Iran.

Washington is adamant Turkey not finalize the purchase of the S-400, a long-range air and missile defence system, for $2.5 billion, claiming that its deployment would disrupt US-Turkish and Turkish-NATO military-security cooperation.

In testimony before a congressional committee Tuesday, the acting US defense secretary, Patrick Shanahan, signalled that if Ankara proceeds with the S-400 purchase, Washington will block further shipments of F-35 fighter jets to Ankara and cut Turkish companies out of the F-35 project.

Asked if the Pentagon wants Turkey as an F-35 partner, Shanahan said, “We absolutely do,” then added, “We need Turkey to buy the Patriot.” This was a reference to Washington’s offer to sell US-made Patriot missile batteries to Ankara for $3.5 billion in lieu of the S-400.

If Turkey deploys the S-400 it will run afoul of US sanctions against Russia. The 2017 Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act empowers the president to impose sweeping sanctions on any individual, organization or state that enters into a “significant transaction” with the defence or intelligence sectors of the Russian Federation. Washington could also seek to intensify pressure on Ankara by refusing to grant Turkey an extension of the “waiver” exempting it from the unilateral and patently illegal US embargo on Iranian energy exports. Turkey is heavily reliant on Iranian natural gas.

Senior Trump administration officials have raised the prospect of Turkey being excluded from NATO activities, citing interoperability concerns with the Russian-made missile system.

Erdogan has, nonetheless, repeatedly vowed that Turkey will buy and deploy the S-400. In his latest comments on the subject, made in an interview last Sunday with television broadcaster TGRT Haber, Erdogan declared that no matter what the United States says, Turkey will not reverse its position on the deal.

Erdogan’s rebuke to Washington came just two days after he issued a critical statement protesting the Trump administration’s decision to recognise Israel’s illegal annexation of the Golan Heights. A Foreign Ministry statement subsequently declared, “This unfortunate decision... demonstrates that the US administration continues its approach to be part of the problem, rather than part of the solution in the Middle East.”

The dispute over the S-400 is a flashpoint for deeper conflicts bound up with Turkey’s geopolitical and military-strategic orientation. A member of NATO since 1952 and a key Western ally during the Cold War, Turkey has been severely destabilised by American imperialism’s more than quarter-century of uninterrupted war. Bordering Syria and Iraq to the south and with significant economic and political interests in the nearby regions of the Balkans and North Africa, Ankara was directly impacted by the first Gulf War, the Western-backed carve-up of Yugoslavia and NATO’s bombardment of Serbia, the 2003 Iraq invasion, the 2011 air onslaught on Libya to topple Gaddafi, and the ongoing bloodbath in Syria.

The Turkish ruling elite, including under Erdogan and his AKP during their first decade in power, supported the succession of US wars and tried to advance its own interests through them. But the many shifts in US policy frequently cut across their interests and ambitions.

With Syria matters came to a head. Initially Erdogan enthusiastically supported the US fomented regime-change war in Syria and Ankara was a major co-sponsor of the Islamist militias that spearheaded the drive to overthrow Bashar al-Assad and his Baathist regime. But Turkey was incensed when, once those militias had been pushed back, the US forged an alliance with the YPG, a Syrian offshoot of the Kurdish Workers’ Party (PKK), against which Ankara has waged a brutal counter-insurgency war for over three decades. It was within this context that Turkey orchestrated a rapprochement with Russia and intensified cooperation with Iran.

For Turkey, rolling back the proto-state that the YPG has established in northern Syria remains the overriding goal of its Syria policy. Toward this end it has repeatedly sent forces into Syria, while maintaining a shaky alliance of convenience with Moscow and Tehran and cooperating with them in the so-called Astana Syrian “peace process.”

The Pentagon meanwhile continues to rely on the YPG to provide a base for its predatory operations in Syria, including by denying the Assad regime access to the country’s most important oil fields.

The American national security establishment has increasingly come to view Turkey as an obstacle to its goal of securing unbridled hegemony over the energy-rich and strategically critical Middle East. In a recent analysis published by the Arab Gulf States Institute, a Washington-based think tank, the authors argued that the Middle East is increasingly divided into three blocs: the Sunni Gulf states led by Saudi Arabia, an Iran-led alliance that includes Hezbollah, and a Turkish-led bloc. “Turkey’s role at the epicenter of a new Middle East alliance was consolidated by the 2017 boycott of Qatar by Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt. Qatar has relied on Turkey, which maintains a military base in that country, for support against the boycott,” they add.

Within this context, Turkey’s decision on the S-400 missile defence system is seen as having far-reaching consequences. In an editorial published earlier this month, the Financial Times, one of the principal mouthpieces of the US and European financial elites, argued, “Turkey can still reset its relations with the West.” After noting that Erdogan “took power in Turkey in 2003, offering stable civilian leadership, a new drive for EU membership and a business-friendly approach,” the Financial Times went on to complain: “In recent years, Mr. Erdogan has moved towards authoritarianism, alienating western allies and adopting questionable stewardship of the economy. Choosing to purchase Russian military hardware has raised further concerns.”

Erdogan has used the dispute with Washington over the S-400 to capitalise on popular hostility to US imperialism ahead of Turkey’s March 31 nationwide municipal elections. However, he has given little indication he plans to alter his stance towards Washington after the elections. On April 8, the Turkish president is due to travel to Moscow for one-on-one talks with Vladimir Putin.

At the same time, and clearly with a view to exploiting the growing rift between Europe and America, Erdogan has announced that Turkey will renew its bid to join the European Union next month.

Commentary in pro-government Turkish media indicate the anger within elite circles over Washington’s failure to accommodate what they perceive as their vital interests, and their fears that the country that has been Ankara’s principal military-security partner for decades can no longer be trusted. A common refrain is that if Turkey abandons the purchase of the S-400 and accepts Washington’s offer of the Patriot missiles, it could soon face additional US conditions, including making accommodations on Israel or Syria.

Turkish ruling circles also responded angrily to US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s attendance at an energy summit involving Israel, Greece and Cyprus in Jerusalem March 20. Long-standing territorial disputes in the Eastern Mediterranean bound up with the Cyprus conflict, which pits a Turkish-recognised regime in the north of the island against the internationally-recognised Greek Cypriot government in Nicosia, have been compounded with the discovery of large natural gas resources under the sea floor.

That being said, Washington will undoubtedly bring tremendous pressure to bear on Ankara, including on the economic front. Just before Erdogan visits Moscow, Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu will travel to a NATO foreign ministers meeting, where he is due to meet with Pompeo.

Any attempt by Turkey to move closer to Russia or China, which has invested heavily in Turkey over recent years and sought to win Ankara over to its Belt and Road Initiative, would be fraught with conflicts. Ankara’s disputes with the Western powers notwithstanding, the Turkish bourgeoisie still relies overwhelmingly on capital from Europe to invest in domestic projects, and the European Union remains far and away Turkey’s most important export destination.

As shown by last Friday’s 5 percent depreciation of the Turkish lira after Erdogan denounced Trump’s Golan decision and the crashing of the Turkish currency last August after the Trump administration doubled its tariffs on Turkey’s steel and aluminium exports, Turkey’s ruling elite is extremely vulnerable to pressure from the major imperialist powers.

Tensions rise between US, Russia and China over Venezuelan coup

Bill Van Auken

US President Donald Trump told reporters at the White House Wednesday that “Russia has to get out” of Venezuela. Asked how Washington would enforce this demand, he responded, “We’ll see. All options are open.”

Trump delivered his ultimatum during a White House photo op with Fabiana Rosales, the wife of right-wing opposition leader Juan Guaidó, who, with US backing, proclaimed himself “interim president” of Venezuela in January, calling upon the military to overthrow the existing government of President Nicolas Maduro.

Rosales, referred to by Trump administration officials as Venezuela’s “first lady,” is conducting an international tour aimed at drumming up support for the US-orchestrated regime change operation, which has flagged noticeably since the fiasco suffered last month with the failure of a cynical attempt to force trucks carrying supposed humanitarian aid across the Colombian-Venezuelan border.

Both Guaidó and his US patrons had predicted that the provocation would trigger a rising by the Venezuelan armed forces against Maduro. With a handful of right-wing opposition supporters and gang members turning out for the “humanitarian” hoax, security forces easily contained the attack.

The latest US provocation has centered upon the arrival in Venezuela over the weekend of two Russian aircraft carrying approximately 100 military personnel. An Antonov An-124 cargo jet and an Ilyushin II-62 passenger plane landed on Saturday at the Maiquetía airport outside of Caracas.

The arrival of the relative handful of Russian military personnel triggered a flurry of denunciations from top Trump administration officials, who have been orchestrating the bid to bring down the Venezuelan government.

White House national security adviser John Bolton declared that the US “will not tolerate hostile foreign military powers meddling” within the Western Hemisphere.

Earlier this month, Bolton invoked the Monroe Doctrine as the foundation of US policy in Venezuela. This 19th century declaration of US foreign policy initially was directed at opposing any attempts by the empires of Europe to recolonize newly independent republics in Latin America. In the 20th century, it was invoked by successive US governments as a license for US imperialism to use military force to impose its will throughout the hemisphere, resulting in some 50 direct armed interventions and the imposition of fascist-military dictatorships over much of South and Central America.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, meanwhile, told his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov, in a March 25 telephone conversation, that Washington would “not stand idly by as Russia exacerbates tensions in Venezuela,” according to a spokesman for the State Department.

The State Department called the arrival of the Russian troops a “reckless escalation” of tensions in Venezuela, adding that “The continued insertion of Russian military personnel to support the illegitimate regime of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela risks prolonging the suffering of the Venezuelan people…”

What hypocrisy! Washington has imposed an ever-escalating wave of sanctions that have gravely exacerbated the intense crisis of the country’s economy, with Venezuelan working people paying the price. A Trump administration official briefing reporters last Friday boasted: “The effect of the sanctions is continuing and cumulative. It’s sort of like in Star Wars when Darth Vader constricts somebody’s throat, that’s what we are doing to the regime economically,”

The Russian Foreign Ministry quoted Lavrov as having responded to Pompeo by charging that “Washington’s attempts to organize a coup in Venezuela and threats against its legitimate government are in violation of the UN Charter and undisguised interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state.”

The Russian Foreign Ministry said that the arrival of the Russian troops was in fulfillment of an “agreement on military technical cooperation” signed between Moscow and Caracas in 2001.

“As in colonial times 200 years ago, the US continues to regard Latin America as a zone for its exclusive interests, its own ‘backyard’ and they directly demand that it should obey the US without a word, and that other countries should steer clear of the region,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Tuesday. “[D]oes the US think that people are waiting for it to bring democracy to them on the wings of its bombers? This question can be answered by Iraqis, Libyans and Serbs.”

Meanwhile, a US official speaking to Reuters expressed concern that the Russian military personnel who arrived on Saturday included a team of specialists in cybersecurity.

This concern coincides with a new series of electricity blackouts that began on Monday, affecting much of Caracas and at least 16 states. The Maduro government has blamed the outages on sabotage, including cyber-attacks on the power system’s computerized infrastructure.

Meanwhile the Venezuelan situation has also ratcheted up tensions between Washington and Beijing, with the US forcing the cancelation of a 60th anniversary meeting of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), which was set to begin on March 26 in Chengdu.

The Trump administration had demanded that the IDB accept a representative named by its puppet Guaidó as Venezuela’s representative at the meeting. China refused to issue a visa to Washington’s man, Ricardo Hausmann, a Harvard economist and former minister in the government of Venezuelan President Carlos Andrés Pérez, which oversaw the massacre of some 3,000 workers and youth in the suppression of the popular 1989 revolt known as the caracazo. Hausmann has publicly called for the US to invade Venezuela along with a “coalition of the willing.”

A spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry defended Beijing’s action on Tuesday, declaring that “Guaidó himself is not a president elected through legal procedures and thus lacks legitimacy,” adding that “changing Venezuela’s representative at the IDB won’t help solve the Venezuelan issue.”

In response to a question about US denunciations of the Russian military presence in Venezuela, the Chinese spokesman stated: “First of all, countries in the Western Hemisphere, including Latin American countries, are all independent and sovereign states. They have the right to determine their own foreign policy and their way to engage in mutually beneficial cooperation with countries of their own choosing.”

He added, in a pointed criticism of US imperialist policy, “Latin American affairs are not a certain country’s exclusive business, nor is Latin America a certain country’s backyard.”

The heated exchanges between Washington, on the one hand, and Moscow and Beijing, on the other, expose the geo-strategic interests that underlie US imperialism’s regime change operation in Venezuela. Both Russia and China have established extensive economic and political ties with Venezuela, which boasts the largest proven oil reserves on the planet.

China has invested upwards of $50 billion in Venezuela over the past decade in loan agreements repaid with oil exports. Russia’s total investments in the country are estimated at close to $25 billion, including in the exploitation of a significant share of the country’s oil fields.

Washington views the Venezuelan crisis through the prism of the “great power” conflicts with “revisionist” states that it laid out in the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy and the Pentagon’s strategy document elaborated at the end of 2017.

US imperialism is determined to wrest control of Venezuela’s vast oil resources for the US-based energy monopolies and deny them to its global rivals, particularly China and Russia. To that end, it is prepared to starve the Venezuelan people and turn Latin America into a battlefield in a third world war.

Parliament rejects all alternatives as May’s offer to resign fails to stem Brexit crisis

Robert Stevens

Wednesday began with Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May informing her MPs that she will resign as party leader and prime minister if parliament passes the withdrawal deal she has agreed with the European Union (EU). It ended with a series of indicative votes on possible alternatives post-Brexit, none of which secured a majority.

May made her statement to the Tories’ backbench 1922 Committee, as MPs were set to vote on eight different Brexit policies, with the aim of ascertaining whether there was any consensus that could secure a majority.

While May did not give a precise timetable for her departure, Sky Newsreported from a Downing Street source that if her EU deal was passed this week—triggering an EU exit date of May 22 instead of April 12—she would stand down at that point to set into motion a Tory leadership contest. During this election period, May would remain as prime minister, but would be gone for the beginning of the next stage of negotiations with the EU when the two parties thrash out a trade deal.

May’s pledge to resign is her last card in the attempt to convince the Tories’ hard-Brexit wing and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), upon whose 10 MPs she relies, to back the agreement. But by last night, only around 25 Brexiteers had come out openly in support of her deal.

They were led by the head of the party’s European Research Group (ERG), Jacob Rees-Mogg, who penned an article in the Daily Mail stating that May’s deal was not a good one and he would have voted against it if “No Deal remained the default legal option.” However, “the Government and the Prime Minister have now ruled this out.” The current agreement not passing could result in a “long delay,” and given “the opposition to Brexit, it could be revoked or put to a skewed second referendum.”

Following Rees-Mogg, leading Brexiteer and former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said he would also come on board. However, a substantial number of some 30 ERG Tories, including the ERG deputy chairman, Steve Baker, are still not prepared to back the deal and May has failed to win the backing of the DUP. Late last night, the party’s parliamentary leader, Nigel Dodds, rejected abstaining on May’s deal, stating that the “DUP do not abstain on the [preservation of the UK] union.”

To make things worse still for May, parliament’s speaker, the Remain-supporting Tory John Bercow, reiterated that he would not allow May’s vote to be put a third time, after being decisively rejected in votes previously, unless it was materially different, and he would not allow the government to attempt to get around his ruling by using parliamentary manoeuvres.

Sensing blood in the water, European Council President Donald Tusk sought to bolster the pro-Remain faction of the British ruling elite, telling the European Parliament that he opposed those who said that the UK’s participation in forthcoming elections to the European Parliament, were the UK to seek a longer extension to Article 50 (governing the UK’s EU departure), would be “harmful or inconvenient.”

“Let me be clear, such thinking is unacceptable. … You cannot betray the six million people who signed the petition to revoke Article 50, the one million people who marched for a people’s vote, or the increasing majority of people who want to remain in the European Union.”

The EU’s Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, added that “Everything is possible,” and that the UK “can stay” in the EU if it wants to.

In the event, however, May’s travails did not translate into a majority for any alternative, and the hopes of the EU for a decisive shift failed to materialise.

Bercow selected eight indicative amendments to be voted on from 16 tabled, most supportive of some form of “soft Brexit,” except one from Tory John Baron supporting a no-deal Brexit on April 12 and one from Scottish National Party MP Joanna Cherry to revoke Article 50 if the alternative is a no-deal Brexit. The most important for the Remain faction was that of Blairite Labour MP Margaret Beckett for a “confirmatory” second referendum on any Brexit deal agreed by parliament.

No deal was resoundingly rejected. But all the amendments calling for permutations of a soft Brexit, with four backed by Labour, including its own proposal, were also defeated—with the highest vote going to the simple and limited call by Tory Ken Clarke for the UK to sign up to the Customs Union with the EU.

The call for a confirmatory people’s vote received the highest vote of all the defeated motions. It was backed by Labour but still lost by 295 to 268. The scale of the defeat would have been larger—possibly by another 20 plus votes—had May’s cabinet not been whipped to abstain on all the indicative votes.

The sense of despair in ruling circles was summed up by the Independent ’s headline, “MPs take back control of Brexit—only to find they have absolutely no idea what to do with it.”

In the vote’s aftermath, all sides continue frantic efforts to change the parliamentary arithmetic.

Media pundits continue to speculate on whether May could put her deal again and if she might still overcome Bercow’s ruling and win over the DUP and more Tory Eurosceptics. Others note that the tide is shifting towards Remain, even if as yet not decisively, and express hopes that May will have no alternative than to seek a further extension from the EU, which pro-Remain forces can use to their advantage. Some suggest May could agree to the offer by some Remainers that they will back her deal in return for the government accepting a “confirmatory” referendum—pitching her deal against remaining in the EU.

The only thing that is certain is that the Brexit crisis will continue to worsen, under conditions in which all ruling class factions involved are hostile to the essential interests of the working class.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn heads a party whose sole concern is to safeguard the global interests of British imperialism, either by securing a soft Brexit or, if possible, restoring membership of the EU trade bloc. He can barely make mention of a general election and the bringing down of the Tories because this is opposed by the Blairites in his own party. He poses no genuine socialist alternative to the pro-capitalist trade-war-based alternatives of “Leave” and “Remain”—both of which are predicated on a continued offensive against jobs, wages and essential social services.

It is thanks to Labour that an unprecedented crisis of rule for British imperialism continues to spiral out of control without workers being able to intervene politically in their own interests.

The Socialist Equality Party (SEP) urges workers and young people to reject support for any faction of Britain’s ruling class and for its European counterparts such as Tusk, who are now masquerading as their friends. They must ally themselves with the European working class in a common struggle against the employers and their governments to replace a capitalist Europe of austerity, militarism and war with a United Socialist States of Europe based on production for social need and not private profit.

Saudi attack on hospital kills eight as war in Yemen enters fifth year

Niles Niemuth

A Saudi coalition jet fighter carried out an attack on a hospital in Yemen Tuesday morning destroying the medical facility in Kitaf, a rural area approximately 60 kilometers outside the northwestern city of Saadah. The strike, which hit a gas station just outside the gates of the hospital, killed eight people, including five children, and forced the closure of the facility, which provided much needed medical services to thousands of people in the region.

The criminal attack in Kitaf came four years to the day after a US-backed, Saudi-led military coalition began dropping bombs on Yemen in an effort to push back an insurgency by Houthi rebels that had taken over much of the country, and to reinstate the puppet government of President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi.

The attack on the hospital in Kitaf was especially egregious since it had been “de-conflicted,” meaning that its exact coordinates had been provided to the Saudis as part of a no-strike list drawn up to keep any bombs and missiles from falling within a 100-meter radius of the facility.

The missile strike on the hospital also took place just as it was opening for patients in the morning, the busiest time of day. The attack destroyed the hospital’s pharmacy and damaged its medicine supply, emergency power generator and an ambulance. It could take months for the facility to be fully operational again.

One medical worker was injured while treating two children in the hospital’s emergency room. “All people were screaming and running out of the hospital. The structure of the hospital was totally damaged inside,” he reported to Save the Children.

“Our colleague lost two children. They were burned. I got injured in my head and I was bleeding. I ran away from the hospital with my colleague to a safe place but we found nothing that could help me stop the bleeding. It was the most difficult moments of my life.”

“Not only has this attack shattered the lives of those killed and injured, but it threatens to have a catastrophic impact on health care for 5,000 people in the area,” Jason Lee, Save the Children deputy country director in Yemen warned in a statement Wednesday. “Pregnant women may be forced to give birth without the care that could save them and their babies’ lives. Starving children may go without lifesaving treatment for severe malnutrition.”

Coalition jets have continued to carry out airstrikes in the area. A jet fighter was spotted flying overhead during the funeral for one of the victims on Wednesday, causing mourners to flee for cover out of fear of an imminent missile strike.

The Saudi-fronted war, which began with the backing of US President Barack Obama and continues under Trump, has bogged down into a bloody stalemate, with Yemeni civilians bearing the brunt of the war’s casualties. Researchers from the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project estimate that between 70,000 and 80,000 people have been killed as a direct result of the war since the coalition assault began on March 26, 2015.

Three-quarters of Yemen’s population is in need of emergency aid and more than 8 million have been pushed to the brink of starvation by a Saudi blockade of the country, with children suffering a tragically heavy burden. The United Nations estimates that more than 1.3 million children have suffered from severe acute malnutrition over the last four years.

Save the Children estimates that at least 85,000 children under the age of 5 have died of starvation since 2015 as a result of the immense humanitarian crisis sparked by the war. Another 2,500 people died from cholera during the world’s largest outbreak between April 2017 and October 2018, when more than 1 million cases were recorded.

This grim toll would not have been possible without the support of the United States, which has provided Saudi Arabia with the jet fighters, bombs and other military equipment that it needed to rain down death and destruction on the poorest country in the Middle East. Crucially, the US has provided the Saudi coalition with refueling flights, allowing its fighters to carry out repeated attacks, and helped draw up lists of military targets. Saudi Arabia has even deployed US-made cluster bombs, a deadly munition banned by an international treaty neither country has signed.

Saudi Arabia and its Arab coalition partners have committed flagrant war crimes in Yemen, repeatedly carrying out airstrikes on hospitals, schools, marketplaces, factories and critical infrastructure. Last year, a Saudi warplane dropped a 500-pound bomb on a bus carrying school children, killing 40 children and 11 others and wounding 79, including 56 children.

A bipartisan initiative in the US Congress to invoke the 1972 War Powers Act and bring American military intervention in Yemen to an end is cosmetic and entirely toothless. Trump has already declared he will veto the joint resolution that was passed by the Senate this month and is currently awaiting a vote in the House.

As with Obama, the war in Yemen is seen by the Trump administration as a critical component of American imperialism’s efforts to counter Iranian influence in the Middle East and prepare for war against Tehran. Congress approved the sale of more than $500 million in precision-guided bombs to the Saudi monarchy in 2017, and US special forces have been operating on the Saudi Arabian side of the border with Yemen for more than a year.

WHO Global Malaria Programme 2019 Call for Experts

Application Deadline: 30th April 2019.

Eligible Countries: International

About the Award: In 2018, the WHO Global Malaria Programme initiated an extensive review of WHO’s processes for developing and disseminating policy guidance on malaria. Our overall objective is to deliver timely, high quality guidance to malaria-endemic countries through processes that are more transparent, consistent, efficient and predictable.
Following the recommendations of the review, the Global Malaria Programme will convene a single Guidelines Development Group (GDG) to ensure consistency in process and development of all malaria recommendations. Ad hoc Evidence Review Groups (ERGs) may be convened to support the GDG on specialized topics. These changes to the structure of Global Malaria Programme’s advisory bodies have been designed to streamline and standardize our evidence review processes for malaria control and elimination.

Type: Job

Eligibility: Applications from the following groups are welcome, noting that this is not an exhaustive list:

• malaria experts in all technical areas;
• national malaria control programme managers;
• representatives of groups most affected by malaria, such as service users and representatives of disadvantaged groups;
• experts in assessing evidence and developing guidelines informed by evidence; and
• other technical experts including surveillance, health systems, health economics, equity, human rights and gender; community engagement; etc.

Number of Awards: Not specified

How to Apply: If you would like to add your name to this roster, please complete the following questionnaire.

• Questionnaire

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

UNESCO/Poland Co-Sponsored Fellowships 2019/2020 for Developing Countries

Application Deadline: 30th April 2019

To be taken at (country): Poland

About the Award: With a view to promoting human resource capacities in the developing countries and to enhancing international understanding and friendship among nations and the people of Poland, the Polish National Commission for UNESCO and the UNESCO Chair for Science, Technology and Engineering Education at the AGH University of Science and Technology in Krakow have placed at the disposal of certain Member States (see Annex I) twenty (20) fellowships of six (6) months duration each, in Poland, starting on 1 October 2019. The beneficiaries of these fellowships will be given the opportunity to undertake an individual research programme in the field of Science, Technology and Engineering.

Type: Research

Eligibility: Applicants must hold the Bachelor’s or M.Sc. degrees. Applicants from outside the home country will often need to meet specific English language/other language requirements in order to be able to study there.

• Candidates should have a Bachelor of Arts (B.A) or a Master of Arts (M.A) degree, preferably in Archaeology or Conservation
• Be proficient in reading and writing in English
• No more than 40 year-old

Number and Duration of Awards: Twenty (20) fellowships of six (6) months duration each, in Poland.

Value of Scholarship: 
Facilities offered by Polish Authorities

• • Free tuition and access to the university facilities based on the local regulations. Accommodation at the AGH UST Student Campus organised for fellows by the UNESCO AGH Chair.

• • Monthly allowance of 1600 PLN (1 EUR = approximately 4,0 PLN) corresponding to the salary of a local junior research fellow. Thus, all living expenses and accommodation in Poland are to be borne by the fellow with this allowance; and; (iii) A one-time special allowance of 1600 PLN to be paid upon arrival in Poland, this sum will cover different activities related to your stay in Krakow, such as an obligatory medical check-up upon arrival (in accordance with the internal regulations for all students); cultural, historical and/or touristic visits, conferences, workshops, and seminars related to your studies.

• • No provision to finance or lodge family members is made.
  • At the end of the research studies, the beneficiaries will receive a certificate attesting to their attendance at the host institution, this certificate will be given after receipt of the requested reports and financial clearance from the Institution.

Facilities offered by UNESCO

• International travel expenses: (by the most direct, economical route) from the beneficiary’s country to and from Poland will be covered by UNESCO under its Regular Programme Budget.
• Health insurance for fellowship beneficiaries who are declared medically fit: UNESCO fellowship holders may be covered by a health insurance policy, taken-out by the Organization for the duration of fellowship. The costs of this health insurance is subscribed to and covered by UNESCO on behalf of awarded fellows.

How to Apply: Candidatures should be submitted by the invited Member State. Original applications in duplicate must be channelled through the National Commission for UNESCO of the candidate’s country and communicated to Mr Stoyan Bantchev, Chief, Participation programme and Fellowships Section, by 30 April 2019 at the latest (GMT +01:00)  to UNESCO mailing address. An advance copy of the application should be sent by e-mail unesco4(at)agh.edu.pl; s.bantchev(at)unesco.org; l.zas-friz(at)unesco.org and d.bianchi(at)unesco.org. Applications should have imperatively the following attachments in DUPLICATE:

(i)  UNESCO fellowships application forms, including medical certificate, ALL four (4) pages duly completed in English using capital letter (illegible documents will be eliminated from the procedure, hand writing form must include capital letter only);

(ii) Two photographs attached to the applications (4×6 cm);

(iii) Certified copies (in English) of Bachelor’s or Master’s Degree/ PhD obtained; and,

(iv) UNESCO certificate of language knowledge, duly completed by a relevant authority, if the mother tongue of the candidate is not English.

(v) Two letters of recommendation from someone related to the candidate’s work, as well confirming the candidate’s qualifications.

(vi) The endorsed candidates should register themselves to the Fellowship e-registration system available on the page:

Online Application

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

WISE Accelerator for Education Technology Projects 2019

Application Deadline: 30th April 2019

Eligible Countries: All

About the Award: The WISE Accelerator is a program designed to support the development of innovative projects in the field of education. Selected projects receive the guidance and expertise of qualified mentors and partners who provide effective strategies and practical support for their further development. Each year, five projects are selected to join the one-year program, during which time they benefit from tailor-made mentorships to address their specific needs. In addition, the WISE Accelerator assists the selected projects to connect with an international network and create opportunities to share knowledge and find support among donors and investors.
The WISE Accelerator supports innovative projects that have a high potential for:

• scalability
• a positive impact in education Projects addressing education challenges through the use and/or design of technology in all sectors and regions are welcome to apply.

Projects in this particular field may cover a wide range of activities. From the conception of apps and digital games to the creation of online platforms or the design of new curricula and pedagogies integrating technology, all education projects that are using or linking technology to their DNA are invited to apply.

Type: Entrepreneurship

Eligibility: Ideal candidates for the WISE Accelerator will be existing projects at an early stage of development, with the following attributes:

• Established for at least two years;
• A significant and growing number of beneficiaries or customers;
• A record of activities with a product or service that has been successfully implemented and beyond proof of concept;
• Existing, stable revenues, and new opportunities for growth;
• A dedicated team, with an established physical space or office;
• Deep knowledge of the market/education context and of their beneficiaries’ or customers’ needs;
• Clear future objectives and motivation to develop further;
• Good understanding of the project’s current challenges in scaling.

Projects from all sectors and regions of the world are invited to apply for the WISE Accelerator.

Selection Criteria: The WISE Accelerator Committee, composed of leading experts in education and social entrepreneurship, will conduct a rigorous selection process.

Applications will be assessed according to the following criteria:

• • Solution and innovation;

• • Strategy and management;

• • Development beyond proof of concept, and potential for growth

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Program: The year-long program is designed to assess and meet project needs as fully and precisely as possible in order to bring them to the next stage of successful development.

Duration of Program: 1 year

How to Apply: APPLY NOW

Visit Program Webpage for details


Award Provider: Project WISE

ARCUS Project 2019 IBARAKI Artist-in-Residence Program (All expenses paid to Japan)

Application Deadline: 19th April 2019 by (23:59:59 UTC-12).

Eligible Countries: International

To be taken at (country): Japan

About the Award: Artist-in-Residence Program of ARCUS Project which aims to support the artistic activities of emerging artists was launched in 1994 by Ibaraki Prefectural Government as its main organizer. In its 25 years of history,
ARCUS Project has invited 103 artists including pairs from 33 countries/regions, and supported their artistic projects and researches during the residence. A number of previous resident artists are now known as cutting-edge artists in the international art scene.
ARCUS Project Artist-in-Residence Program has focused on the “process” of activities. Therefore, we are looking for a project which does not regard final presentation as a goal, but tries to conduct a site-specific research/project within a certain period of time. It is also expected that the research/project is open to public for sharing the process and collaboration.
Not more than one artist will be selected from one country/region.

Type: Short course

Eligibility: The Applicant must:

• be an emerging artist engaged in contemporary visual arts or other related fields.
• be born on or after January 1, 1979.
• have nationality of country other than Japan.
• have legal permission to enter Japan.
• not be enrolled in educational institution during the program period. *EXCEPTION: those who are in Ph.D. program are eligible.
• be in a state of good health and able to carry out daily activities on his/her own.
• have enough English skill to communicate with other artists and studio staff.

Number of Awards: Three artists/groups (two overseas artists/groups and one Japanese artist/group)

Value of Award: Each artist is provided with the following support during the program period

• Studio
• Accommodation
• Equipments: Bicycle is provided for each artist.
• Transportation fee Artist from overseas: Round-trip (economy class) airfare from the international airport nearest his/her home to Narita International Airport is provided. Artist based in Japan: Round-trip public transportation fee from the nearest station/airport is provided.
• Allowance
• Insurance
• Support

Duration of Programme: 

• September 4th through December 12th, 2019 (100 days)
• The schedule is subject to change.

How to Apply:  ENTRY TO ONLINE APPLICATION FORM

• It is important to go through all application requirements on the Programme Webpage (see link below) before applying

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Austrian Government Joint Excellence in Science and Humanities (JESH) programme 2019

Application Deadline: 15th April 2019

About the Award: JESH is an OeAW funding programme providing young scholars in all fields of research from the target countries listed below the opportunity to initiate or intensify international contacts and cooperation.
Projects funded within the framework of JESH must reinforce the research landscape in the recipient’s country of origin. Joint research activities are intended to increase chances of securing third-party funding by international funding institutions such as the ERC, to name just one example. Successful JESH projects contribute to the establishment of sustained relations between scholars in Austria and the focus countries and to the further development of international research cooperation in their particular field of research.

Type: Research

Eligibility: Applications are invited from scholars who completed their doctorate/PhD studies no longer than 10 years ago and are affiliated to a university or non-university research institute in one of the focus countries. If a candidate is successful in his or her application, this affiliation must continue to exist after the receipt of JESH funding.
Only one application may be submitted per person.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: 2,700 Euro per month

Duration of Programme: 2-6 months

Eligible Countries:

• Albania, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Moldavia, Montenegro, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine
• Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kirgizstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan
• Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Pakistan, Syria, Turkey
• Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia
• Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Columbia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, Venezuela

To be taken at (country): Austria

How to Apply: 

• It is important to go through all application requirements on the Programme Webpage (see link below) before applying

Visit Programme Webpage for Details