18 Jun 2020

Cambridge-Africa ALBORADA Research Grants 2020 for Sub-Saharan African (Including Sudan) Researche

Application Deadline: 6th September 2020.

Eligible Countries:  Sub-Saharan African Countries (Including Sudan)

Fields of Grant: Applications should generally fall into one of these four research-related categories:
  1. Workshop/research training course, in Africa
  2. Travel between Cambridge and Africa
  3. Research Project
  4. Equipment
About the Award: The Cambridge-Africa ALBORADA Research Fund competitively awards grants of between £1,000 and £20,000, for:
  • research costs (such as reagents, fieldwork and equipment)
  • research-related travel between Cambridge and Africa
  • conducting research training activities in Africa (e.g. setting up courses/workshops).
To date, 116 awards have been made, to enable Cambridge researchers to engage with African researchers from 14 African countries. Some awardees have been able to use the preliminary results from their seed fund research/collaboration to apply for and win significant funding (e.g. Royal Society/Leverhulme Awards, Global Challenges Research Fund, etc.).

Type: Grants

Eligibility: 
  • Applications should be submitted jointly by an applicant based in Cambridge and an applicant based in a university or research institution in sub-Saharan Africa.
  • Both applicants must be at post-doctoral level or above, and by completing an 2 application it is understood that they are both doing so with support from their Senior Researcher/Head of Group/Principle Investigator, if they are not in this position themselves.
  • Both applicants should have a formal link to a research group/department/faculty in their home institution.
  • The Cambridge applicant must be either working at the University of Cambridge, or at a research Institute affiliated with the University. Previous successful Cambridge applicants have included those from: Wellcome-Trust Sanger Institute; MRC Human Nutrition Research; National Institute of Agricultural Botany (NIAB).
  • The African applicant must be from a sub-Saharan African research Institution or university. The Cambridge applicants will act as the lead applicants, for administrative purposes, as the awards have to be paid to their Cambridge departments/faculties/institutes.
  • Requests for additional support from returning Cambridge or African recipients will only be considered in the following instances:
    • For supporting courses and workshops in Africa that have been previously funded, or are new. Applicants must provide justification that includes evidence that other sources of funding have been sought, and what plans there are for future funding sustainability. Also, a report(s) should have been submitted for the previous funding received
    • Request for funding for research (reagents, equipment or travel) with the old or a new collaborator, but for a new project. Report(s) should have been submitted for the previous funding received.
Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Program: Grants are between £1,000 and £20,000. Awards will range from £1,000 – £20,000, and limits apply for categories as follows:
  • Maximum of £20,000 for applications in the sciences (including equipment)
  • Maximum of £6,000 for applications in the social sciences and humanities
  • Maximum of £5,000 for a workshop/course in Africa
  • Maximum of £3,000 for a travel award
How to Apply: 
  • The online application form has been designed to allow both applicants (Cambridge- and Africa-based) to log in, update, save and eventually submit electronically.
  • To access the form, the Cambridge based applicant must Register Here. Only applicants with @cam.ac.uk, @sanger.ac.uk, @babraham.ac.uk, @bas.ac.uk and @niab.ac.uk email addresses can register.
  • The Cambridge-based applicant must then log in to the ALBORADA Research Fund application form, where they will see the words “Invite a 2nd applicant to view/edit this submission”. Click on this link in order to invite the Africa-based applicant to register and edit the forms.
Visit Program Webpage for details

ICTP Prize 2020 for Young Researchers from Developing Countries

Application Deadline: 30th September 2020.

Type: Award

Eligibility: The prize recognizes outstanding and original contributions to physics.

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The prize includes a sculpture, a certificate, and a cash prize.

How to Apply: Anybody can nominate a candidate for the ICTP Prize. In order for a candidate to be considered, ICTP needs the following essential information:
  • Candidate’s up-to-date curriculum vitae, including birthplace and date, nationality, education, main positions held including present placement and duties, and major honours and awards. Candidates must have obtained their PhD less than 12 years earlier, specifically after 31 December 2008 for the 2020 prize (or after 31 December 2007 for women with one child; after 31 December 2006 for women with two children);
  • Brief description of scientific achievements and proposed citation;
  • Two letters of recommendation.
  • It would greatly help the selection work, and make it more accurate, if you could provide us with additional information on:
    1) Names of additional potential referees or nominators
    2) Current phone and email address
    3) List of significant publications


    Self nominations are acceptable.
    Please submit your nomination, along with a signed and dated cover letter, by 30 September 2020 in one of the following ways:
    ICTP Prize
    Director’s Office
    ICTP
    Strada Costiera 11
    I-34151 Trieste, Italy


    Visit Award Webpage for Details

Police Culture in the United States

Oscar Zambrano

The call to defund the police ignores a fundamental structuring principle at work in the collective mindset of policing, and that is the culture of policing in the United States.
Any call for reform that ignores this also risks ignoring the values and traditions that feed and legitimate police violence, and the silence from within their ranks regarding racist brutality.
Ignoring this means that police culture, like any culture, will tend to persist. It won’t change just by defunding police departments, yet that sudden injury risks alienating them from the necessary service they provide to society.
A recent and drastic historical example of cultural alienation is our illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003, when Paul Bremer defunded and  “fired” the four hundred thousand trained soldiers from Saddam Hussain’s army.  Many of those military men years later ended up joining the ranks of violently anti-American ISIS.
So, the sudden “defund police” idea could be more troublesome than protesters may think. Their unqualified reaction to villainize all police is a mistake, because only a small minority of police officers is committing crimes.  Without knowing it, what protesters are condemning is police culture, and changing that culture will take more than the blunt hammer of sudden defunding.
Already we’re witnessing the angry pushback from various police departments around the country. And they have a point because most of them are good working people not engaged in killing or abusing black and brown citizens. So, changing police culture will require smarter and longer-term solutions.
Instead of defunding police and portraying them all as criminals — bad branding — the better idea out there is that of making conditional some of their funding to new codes of conduct. Putting new strings on their budgets.  And in that process also bringing new insights that will be at the foundation of better conduct going forward.
The lynching of Mr. Floyd will forever remain the unspeakable act of racist depravity it was, and the perpetrators deserve everything I hope will come to them. But as a country, we cannot make lasting national policy from inarticulate national rage.  We need a greater understanding.
Again, it is crucial we recall Iraq and Bremer’s imperial arrogance which was ignorant of local history and culture. Instead of possibly recruiting Iraq’s military for good work on our side, his firing of Hussain’s entire army contributed to the eventual growth of ISIS.  And to this day, Bremer still defends everything he did in Iraq. It is the acme of hubris never to admit one’s mistakes.
And he sure made a catastrophic mistake when he said to that prestigious and trained army of almost half a million military men “You’re fired!  Go find another job. We’ve taken over your country and now you’ll surrender your weapons and go away!”  And so they did — only to see many of them reappear years later in the ranks of ISIS, an organization so specialized in anti-American sentiment that in 2014 it broke all ties with al-Qaeda for not being committed enough in that regard.
This history suggests that whether it’s police or army troops, the generic humiliation and firing of weapons-trained people who have been serving society albeit imperfectly, risks making for more disorder down the road.
Instead of the  “defund police”  drive pursued with so much energy, a smarter limit-setting for police needs to be done in a realistic, organized, and feasible way. Rage won’t bring lasting change.
Rage may bring revolution, but violent revolutions are wild fires that burn everything equally, the good with the bad.  The smarter ways to bring about a successful revolution require strategy and patience because culture dies hard.  Throwing bricks at windows, setting fires, and demanding all police be abolished are counterproductive.
Something to consider is that police exists mainly to protect private property. In other words, to safeguard the haves from the have-not’s.
So a bigger fish to fry would be checking the greed of unregulated Big Banks which concentrate most of the private property in the world in the hands of very few people. That tiny hyper-propertied minority always buys police and security protection, a real necessity after trampling the vast majority of the working people around the globe.
How so?
A deal-breaker condition before financiers commit to making meaningful foreign investments is their preemptive requirement that those governments guarantee them no increase of the minimum wage in their countries over some a number of years.
Changing THAT is indeed a bigger war we have to fight before we can have a better world.  That war is bigger than the war against the police, important as that is.
We need to keep both those wars in view at the same time, because the knee on the neck of the workers of the world is the top-down demand from Big Banks to perpetuate non-living minimum wages.
This is the continued lynching of the little people by the mighty, and it’s been going on for so long that most workers no longer see it. They’ve normalized being in perpetual debt as part of life.  Their indentured servitude to the banks has vanished from view.  But they certainly feel the abuse, even if they have no language with which to articulate it.
The chronic pain of non-living wages is a force of nature, and when that natural force combines with access to internet, it becomes the world-wide factory of rage and misery that we live in.
Different from antiquity, today we have the technology and the resources to fix much of this unnecessary poverty and hunger, yet we don’t.
The big players at the top are not fixing world hunger and squalor because they’re insulated from all that.  So they have the time and the option to remain consumed by the pursuit of their own ever-greater self-enrichment. Their idea of world power also includes the agenda to stop the browning of America.
The financial elites sometimes do “charity” because it can be a tax advantage,  bring publicity and  feel-good photo ops, and also for the pleasure of actually giving something back. But you can see none of their charity ever changes the structure of the rentier economy they keep gaming, as they sever themselves from all social cost and consequence.  They dodge accountability and evade taxes.
The financialized economic system they built for themselves has resulted in grotesque and unsustainable levels of social and economic inequality that require policing.
Their rentier system of exploitation hails directly from our history of exterminating most Native Americans, and then buying millions of slaves over centuries. Slavery enriched our ancestors so much that they fought an utterly devastating Civil War trying to preserve it. This history remains either unknown or not accepted, and it is at the root of what’s happening today.
The police works mostly to check transgressions against private property, so an important reason for its existence is protecting the haves from the have-not’s. Private property in itself is not the problem at all, but the excess of it is because it turns society into a zero sum game.
So if people want to have at the police, let them also have at those for whom the police mostly works, so that as they push to defund the police they also remain aware about pushing to “defund” through taxation, the immense hidden loot the pirates of high finance keep stealing from the common good.
Just recently they walked away with the first four-plus Trillion dollar rescue package under the cover of Covid-19. None of that went directly to the people who need it.  Never mind their 1.8 Trillion dollar tax cut of 2017. Or the Thirteenth Amendment of the Constitution which permits the slavery of felons behind bars, and the full-retail sale of their products, a silent sideline enriching many of our biggest and most proudly American corporations. The jailed felons are mostly black and brown people.
If we’re out to defund the police, we should also be out to ban that horrible exception in the Thirteenth Amendment that hasn’t ended slavery for well over a million black and brown people doing forced labor behind bars.
If we’re out to defund the police, we should also be out to tax the colossal financial gains of Wall Street which are now stashed away in tax heavens.  This country made them rich, then they ran overseas with the money, killing American jobs for cheaper ones abroad.  So much for the “job creators”.   I doubt anyone will ever change the Big Bank culture of ruthless usury served with skin-deep gentility.  They are well dressed and well-mannered cannibals devouring today the patrimony of the unborn generations of the 99 percent.
If we’re out to defund the police, we should also be out to restore the progressive tax structure we had between 1945 and 1975, when proven regulations were still in place. Those regulations today would help curb the social carnage inflicted by the fraction of the one percent whose greed and racism have become overwhelming over the last forty years.
If we’re out to defund the police, we should also be out to denounce the monarchs of finance who owning so much of society’s resources have now also co-opted police and other security to enforce over us their “law and order” culture. That culture mostly protects their kind, not the poor, not the black and brown, and not the forgotten ones who disappear every minute with no one watching.
A wider context of history and culture could help clarify and make more effective the current drive to defund the police.

The Conviction of Maria Ressa: Press Freedom in the Philippines

Binoy Kampmark 

It has long been said that countries in Southeast Asia take a dim view of the fourth estate.  Various legal measures have been deployed against those irritable scribblers over the years: old, colonial-era security legislation; defamation suits; traditional forms of lengthy detention without charge.  Such states have mastered the supreme sensibility of their colonial forebears:  Maintain the appearance of propriety; inflict the harm under the cover of law.
The Philippines has become something of an exemplar in this regard.  According to Joshua Kurlantzick of the Council on Foreign Relations, the country is particularly dangerous, boasting “one of the highest numbers of journalists killed of any country in the world”, with the International Federation of Journalists putting it ahead of, say, Cambodia, “whose overall media climate is more constrained.”
President Rodrigo Duterte’s blustery coming to power in 2016 ushered in a feast of killing, but even prior to this, journalists had good reason to fear for their safety.  One particularly sanguinary episode stood out: the November 2009 massacre of 32 journalists in Maguindanao province in the southern Philippines.  In total, 58 were butchered, including relatives and supporters of the town mayor Esmael “Toto” Mangudadatu.  Mangudadatu had expressed his interest in running for the post of governor against then governor Andal Ampatuan Sr., whose son, Andal Ampatuan Jr., also had ambitions for office.  Mangudadatu tasked his pregnant wife, Genalyn to file the relevant papers for his candidacy.  At Ampatuan, the entire crew was ambushed by a hundred armed men in what has been touted as the worst single-day murder of journalists in the country’s history.  Andal Ampatuan Jr. already had the culprits in mind: the Moro Islamic Liberation Front.  A decade later, a judge in Manila found him guilty, along with several other members of the Ampatuan family, on multiple murder counts.
This might all make the treatment of Ressa seem mild by comparison.  On Monday, she was found guilty of cyber libel in connection with a story published on the news site she edits, Rappler.  The story had been penned by Rappler journalist Reynaldo Santos Jr, alleging links between businessman Wilfredo Keng and impeached chief justice Renato Corona.  Keng had supposedly lent his sports utility vehicle to Corona.  The property developer was also said to be under surveillance by the National Security Council for alleged involvement in drug smuggling and human trafficking.  Santos was also convicted and, along with Ressa, faces up to six years in prison.
The beastly little instrument used in securing the convictions was the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, though this outcome was achieved in rather laborious fashion.  For one thing, it came into force some months after the original story was filed, though another version of it corrected of typographical error was reposted in 2014.
In 2017, Keng filed a cyber libel complaint over the article in question.  The National Bureau of Investigation cybercrime division had little time for it: the complaint had been filed out of time, given the date of the article’s publication.  But in 2018, the Department of Justice added a distinct, sharp twist to the saga, extending the life of cyber libel for up to 12 years and filing charges under two statutes, including the Cyber Crime Prevention Act.
The Manila Regional Trial Court Branch found that Rappler had not verified the information on Keng, nor did it publish his side of the story.  “The court finds that the subject [article] was republished with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.  This clearly shows actual malice.”  While the site was not deemed liable, both Ressa and Santos were ordered to pay 200,000 Philippine pesos in moral damages and another 200,000 pesos in exemplary damages.  Keng felt vindicated, citing the standard argument that laws, whatever their content, needed to be obeyed.  “Ressa portrays herself as an alleged defender of press freedom and as a purported target of the Philippine government, but this in no way exempts her from respecting and following Philippine laws.”
David Kaye, the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, urged the reversal of the verdicts, claiming that “the law used to convict Ms Ressa, and the journalist who authored the article which led to their prosecution, is plainly inconsistent with the Philippines’ obligations under international law”.  He also took issue with the Cybercrime Prevention Act, a distinctly harsh instrument designed to chill expression.
The authorities have been getting tetchy with journalists of late.  Ressa could already see the warning signs with the closure of television station ABS-CBN.  Both have been keen to run copy on Duterte’s particularly vicious war on drugs and his less than competent handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.  Ressa already had an inkling of how grim things would become, managing, in 2015, to obtain a confession from Duterte, then Mayor of Davao City, that he had killed three people. “When I said I’ll stop criminality, I’ll stop criminality,” he boasted. “If I have to kill you, I’ll kill you.  Personally.”
Philippine authorities are particularly preoccupied with prosecuting cases for the charge of “spreading fake news” in connection with the COVID-19 response, the effect of which is to malign any constructive critique of such efforts.  In April, the PNP Anti-Cybercrime Group revealed that 24 suspects had been arrested on that charge, ostensibly for using social media portals.  Eight were also arrested for spreading false information.
The hope for Ressa and Santos, slim as it might be, lies in the appeals process.  Ressa was stoic and reflective at the press conference after the hearing.  “Are we going to lose freedom of the press?  Will it be death by a thousand cuts, or are we going to hold the line so that we protect the rights that are enshrined in our constitution?”  Undeniably, those cuts run deep, a few cuts run deeper to freedom of expression that the laws of libel.

From Toxic Food to Agrarian Disaster: Dirty Deals Done Dirt Cheap

Colin Todhunter

During the early days of the coronavirus lockdowns, in some quarters there was a certain degree of optimism around. Although millions of people were suffering, the hope was that the Covid-19 crisis would shine light on societal and economic systems across the world, exposing some of the deep-rooted flaws of capitalism. There was a belief that people working together with their respective governments could start building a fairer capitalism and more sustainable economies.
However, we see exactly the opposite taking place. In the UK, we now witness a post-Brexit trade deal being negotiated behind closed doors with the US that could see a lowering of food and environment standards, despite the Conservative government pledge that it would not compromise on standards in these areas. The government now proposes that chlorine-washed chicken, beef treated with growth hormones, pork from ractopamine-injected animals and many other toxic foods produced in the US will be allowed into the UK. Sanctioning the entry of (chemical-resistant) GM crops and GM food are also likely to be part of any deal.
It would effectively mean sacrificing UK farmers’ livelihoods, the environment and the nation’s health to suit the bottom line of US agribusiness corporations.
The UK isn’t the only country that US agribusiness has set its sights on. World Bank Group President David Malpass has stated that poorer countries will be ‘helped’ to get back on their feet after the various coronavirus lockdowns. This ‘help’ will be on condition that neoliberal reforms are implemented and become further embedded. Ranil Salgado, mission chief for India at the IMF, says that when the economic shock passes, it’s important that India returns to its path of undertaking such long-term reforms.
But haven’t ordinary Indians already had enough of these ‘structural adjustments’ and their impacts? Rural affairs commentator P Sainath has highlighted the desperate plight of migrant workers in India. He notes that millions of rural livelihoods have been deliberately snuffed out over a period of many years, sparking an agrarian crisis. As a result of lockdown, tens of millions went back to their villages but there is no work there because rural jobs have been extinguished – the reason for urban migration in the first place.
The US has been pushing to bring Indian agriculture under corporate control for a long time. Further ‘reforms’ would serve to accelerate this process. US agribusiness wants to force GMO food crops into the country, further displace peasant farmers thereby driving even more people to cities and ensure corporate consolidation and commercialisation of the sector based on industrial-scale monocrop farms incorporated into global supply chains dominated by transnational agribusiness and retail giants.
Like the UK, India is also involved in trade talks with the US. If this deal goes through and India capitulates to US demands, it could devastate the dairy, poultry, soybean, maize and other sectors and severely deepen the crisis in the countryside. India could also see GMO food flooding the country and the further corporate consolidation of the seed sector. The article ‘Perils of the US-India free trade agreement for Indian farmers’ published on the grain.org website highlights what could be in store.
In the wake of India deciding to not participate in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, another trade deal that would have had devastating consequences for farmers and the food system. the article concludes:
“It would be inconsistent, and a slap in the face, to now start US-India trade talks that will pose much bigger challenges for India’s rural communities and agriculture sector. Such a deal would greatly compromise India’s huge diversity of local seeds and plants which are conserved and reused by millions of Indian farmers year after year. It will also destroy India’s hope for food sovereignty.”
Any such trade deal will be for the benefit of powerful agribusiness giants and will reinforce the concentration of political and economic power in the hands of these corporations. It would also send millions more to the cities in search of jobs that are just not there. This will be the result of the ‘reforms’ demanded by the World Bank and IMF.
If lockdown has shown anything, it is that many of those who sought better lives in the cities have failed to establish a firm foothold. They are marginalised and employed in the worst jobs working long hours for minimal wages. The fragility of their position is demonstrated by the reverse migrations we have witnessed and the callous treatment they are used to was demonstrated by the government’s attitude to their plight under lockdown.
The various lockdowns around the globe have also exposed the fragility of the global food system, dominated by long-line supply chains and global conglomerates – which effectively suck food and wealth from the Global South to the richer nations.
What we have seen underscores the need for a radical transformation of the prevailing globalised food regime based on a system of agroecology which reduces dependency on external proprietary inputs, distant volatile commodity markets and patented technologies. It would help to shorten chains, increase crop diversity, improve diets, regenerate soils, support food sovereignty, re-localise production and consumption and boost local economies, which in India would stem the flow of people moving to the cities and would even create livelihoods for those who have returned to the countryside.
It is the type of system that Prof Michel Pimbert and Colin Anderson of Coventry University in the UK advocate. In contrast to corporate-driven trade deals, centrally controlled hi-tech innovations, people-free farming, drones replacing bees, genetically engineered crops and a future of synthetic lab-based food, the two academics argue:
“Agroecological innovations… are being driven largely from the bottom up by civil society, social movements and allied researchers. In this context, priorities for innovations are ones that increase citizen control for food sovereignty and decentralise power.”
Instead of trade deals hammered out behind closed doors above the heads of ordinary people by elite interests, the authors state that deliberative, inclusive processes like citizens’ juries, peoples’ assemblies and community-led participatory actions are urgently needed.
It is these types of processes that should guide all economic sectors, not just agriculture. Processes underpinned by a vision for a better, more just world that can only be delivered by challenging capitalism’s dis-possessive strategies which fuel India’s agrarian crisis and the types of human and environmental degradation and exploitation we see across the globe.

Membership-rigging exposes Australian Labor Party’s rot

Mike Head

Revelations this week of “industrial-scale” branch stacking inside the Australian Labor Party (ALP) have shone a light on the advanced decay of this party, which has been the central political instrument of the ruling establishment for over a century.
A near year-long investigation by the Nine Entertainment’s TV and newspaper outlets, involving secret cameras and recordings, exposed a key ALP powerbroker in the state of Victoria, Adem Somyurek, and his staff members enrolling and paying for bulk party memberships.
The recordings show Somyurek ordering others to forge signatures and create false statements claiming that people paid for their own memberships. Reportedly, up to 4,000 of the ALP’s claimed 16,000 members in the state of Victoria have been registered this way.
Moreover, “everyone” in the ALP leadership knew that this was going on, despite the feigned shock of Victorian state Premier Daniel Andrews and federal Labor leader Anthony Albanese.
Nor was this simply a Victorian state issue. On the basis of his known membership-rigging, Somyurek had risen to become a member of the ALP’s highest body, its 21-person national executive.
In damage control, Andrews quickly sacked Somyurek as a state government cabinet minister. Two other ministers closely associated with Somyurek resigned in rapid fashion. Somyurek was even expelled from the ALP. However, all three remain in parliament.
In an attempt to stem the resulting fallout, the ALP national executive convened an emergency meeting on Tuesday to take control of the entire Victorian branch for three years, and halted the voting rights of all members, including for the pre-selections of all Victoria’s federal and state members of parliament.
Massive falsification and inflation of party membership numbers is hardly new in the ALP, however. Nearly 20 years ago, a report by former Labor Prime Minister Bob Hawke and ex-New South Wales (NSW) Premier Neville Wran described it as a “cancer” eating away at the party.
In NSW, the most populous state, the ALP has become synonymous with control by trade union-backed powerbrokers like Eddie Obeid, who was later jailed for misusing his ministerial power for financial gain.
Yet the branch stacking has only gotten worse, assisted by the fact that the ALP’s actual membership has continued to collapse. Nationally, it has less than 50,000 members, even counting those fraudulently enlisted by Somyurek and his ilk, who control party branches in every state and territory.
Moreover, the party suffered a historic debacle at last year’s federal election, showing the further disintegration of its electoral base. Its vote fell to a near-century low of around 33 percent, allowing the discredited Liberal-National government to cling to office despite losing votes itself.
The resulting shockwaves and factional brawling within the discredited Labor and union bureaucracy may have sparked Nine Entertainment’s spying and entrapment operation, which reportedly began soon after the election.
The ALP national conference in 2018 (Credit: WSWS)
For decades, the ALP has been a rotted-out shell, with virtually no real working class members, just apparatchiks, parliamentarians, staffers, union officials and careerists. Local branch stacking has long been the means by which factional powerbrokers and allied trade union bureaucrats have controlled pre-selections for parliamentary seats and access to key staff jobs and other lucrative posts.
Similar methods are used to inflate union memberships, which also have shrunk, in order to give union leaders faction-aligned voting blocs at ALP conferences.
Nevertheless, the sheer size of the latest activities points to an even deeper crisis. Somyurek claimed to control two-thirds of the Victorian ALP through fake and real members, whom he shuffled around party branches as needed to secure votes, party posts and pre-selections.
Somyurek specialised in stacking branches with people recruited by ethnic business and community figures. In the taped conversations he directed his operatives, using vulgar and disparaging language, to “put in” bulk numbers of “Indians” and “Somalis” to stack branches controlled by “Anglo” members. “We can put 1000 [Indians] in, they’re all fully f---ing resourced,” he said in one recording.
Somyurek regarded the 20-something Labor staffers placed in his branch-stacking operations with equal contempt. Behind their backs, he described them as “slimy,” “patronising and annoying” and “little passive-aggressive f---ing gay kids.” The recordings are also replete with misogynistic comments about female Labor ministers.
Notably, Somyurek’s power base was an alliance formed in 2018 between right-wing factions and trade unions, such as the shop assistants union, and an “Industrial Left” grouping of supposedly militant unions, such as the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU).
Somyurek’s ruthless and anti-democratic methods epitomise those that all these formations employ, riding roughshod over any concern for the interests of the working class.
Like numerous Labor leaders before him, Albanese declared: “We will take whatever action is necessary to make sure that we have fair and clean operations of politics.” But an internal ALP review, to be headed by ex-Victorian Premier Steve Bracks and former deputy federal leader Jenny Macklin, is designed to cover up the party’s underlying putrefaction, just like the one conducted by Hawke and Wran.
At this point, the exact motivations behind the Nine Entertainment exposures remain unclear. One thing is clear, however. It has been a highly-orchestrated and extensive sting operation. The Age and “60 Minutes,” the two outlets that published the material, said they had obtained more than 100 audio and video surveillance files. Phone calls were recorded and footage of Somyurek and his associates was shot in various locations, including offices, car parks, and bank ATMS.
One of the unanswered questions is the use of the electoral office of federal Labor MP Anthony Byrne to record many of the incriminating conversations and activities. Byrne, who was once closely aligned with Somyurek, has refused to comment, as has Albanese.
However, Albanese praised Byrne for doing an “outstanding job” as deputy chair of the parliamentary intelligence and security committee. Byrne and the chair of that committee, Liberal MP Andrew Hastie, have many connections with the military-intelligence apparatus and especially with its US partners.
Somyurek evidently saw his factional coalition as a key protector of Albanese, who was installed as leader after last year’s election disaster. “I’m having discussions with people who are close to Albo,” he boasted on one tape. He told one Labor staffer: “Who’s going to protect Albo?”
Albanese, a member of Labor’s “Left” faction, is a proven defender of the US military alliance. But both Labor’s deputy leader Richard Marles and ex-leader Bill Shorten are regarded as being more unconditionally committed to the alignment behind Washington’s increasingly aggressive confrontation with China, despite its dire implications for the export-dependent Australian economy.
In one form or another, the agenda behind the revelations is driven by the requirements of the financial elite. Nine Entertainment, which last year took over the former Fairfax newspaper, radio and other outlets, is a sprawling media conglomerate. As are most publicly-listed Australian companies, it is controlled by institutional investors, notably HSBC, JP Morgan and Citicorp.
A major concern in these ruling circles, after more than a decade of political instability in which no prime minister has lasted three years, is to fashion a political instrument capable of fully imposing the assault they demand on working class jobs and conditions—an offensive now being intensified as a result of the economic crisis triggered by the global COVID-19 pandemic.
The Liberal-National Coalition’s membership also has shrunk and it has been wracked by branch stacking and other forms of factional infighting for years. As a result of this, and decades of declining living and working conditions and worsening social inequality, public confidence in these twin formations of capitalist rule has fallen to all-time lows. A post-election survey last year found that only 12 percent of voters thought the government is run for “all the people.”

Moscow court sentences ex-US Marine to 16 years for espionage

Clara Weiss

On Monday, a Moscow court sentenced Paul Whelan, a former US Marine who holds Irish, Canadian and British citizenship, to 16 years in a maximum security prison for espionage. The trial proceeded in secret.
Whelan was arrested in Moscow by the Federal Security Service (FSB) in December 2018. According to the prosecution, he was caught by an FSB officer with a flash drive containing a secret list of Russian intelligence officers.
According to Whelan’s defense lawyer, the Russian prosecutors claimed that Whelan was an officer with the US Defense Intelligence Agency. Whelan and his laywer have rejected the charges and insist on his innocence. Whelan and his family have publicly appealed to the Trump administration as well as the British and Canadian governments to work for his freedom.
Paul Whelan in Moscow
The case of Paul Whelan, which has unfolded against the background of heightened military tensions between the US and Russia and a hysterical anti-Russia campaign in the US media, is extremely murky. Whelan worked for the US Marines intermittently from 1994 to 2008 and reportedly worked as a police officer in 1998-2000. He served in Iraq for four years and was part of Operation Iraqi Freedom. However, he was indicted on several charges related to larceny in early 2008 and was given a bad conduct discharge from the Marines.
He worked for Kelly Services, a major staffing firm, from 2001 to 2003 and then again from 2008 to 2010. In 2017, he began working for BorgWarner, an international automotive parts manufacturer based in Michigan. According to the Detroit Free Press, Whelan also owned an online firearms company, Kingsmead Arsenal, and has been a supporter of Donald Trump.
From 2006, Whelan began traveling to Russia. His first trip occurred as part of the “Rest and Recuperation Leave Program” of the Marines. Over the years, he established relations with a series of lower-ranking Russian military personnel as well as the FSB officer who handed him the flash drive in December 2019. He also set up various Russian social media accounts, at least one of which cited false biographical information. The Detroit Free Press reported that in August 2014, he posted a picture that showed him in attendance at a security conference organized by the US State Department.
Whelan was arrested in December 2018 in Moscow, where he traveled ostensibly to attend the wedding of a friend and former fellow Marine. Whelan arrived in Moscow a week early. However, according to the liberal Russian outlet Meduza, did not attend the wedding ceremony itself. Rather, on that day, he met with the FSB agent who gave him the flash drive with state secrets.
According to Russian and American press reports, Whelan has cited multiple theories and made contradictory statements about his arrest. Among other things, he has claimed that the FSB officer who handed him the flash drive wanted to use the opportunity to make a career and welsh on a debt of 100,000 rubles. In another statement that was quoted by Foreign Policy in 2019, Whelan alleged that the charges brought against him were a retaliation by Russia for the US sanctions, and that Russia was seeking to harm BorgWarner. He has also claimed that he went to Russia in December 2018 for a business trip, which the company later denied. The company has no business in Russia. Whelan reportedly also made false statements in a 2013 court deposition about his biography.
Whelan’s lawyer, Vladimir Zherebenkov, stated that his client had been under surveillance by the Russian secret service for several years before the arrest.
Russian media reports have suggested that the Kremlin is preparing a prisoner exchange, and Whelan and Zherebenkov have confirmed such discussions to the media. According to Zherebenkov, Whelan “expected this decision, because even when he was detained, he was told [by Russian security service agents] that he would be exchanged.” Russian officials have repeatedly offered to exchange Whelan for Russian nationals in US custody.
After a year in which the US government has maintained a relatively muted response to the case, it has now taken to aggressive denunciations of the Russian government over Whelan’s conviction. In a statement on Monday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared that “the treatment of Paul Whelan at the hands of Russian authorities has been appalling.” The statement further said: “The United States is outraged by the decision of a Russian court today to convict US citizen Paul Whelan after a secret trial, with secret evidence, and without appropriate allowances for defense witnesses.”
The US embassy in Russia has likewise condemned the trial and called the treatment of Whelan “shameful.” It said it was seeking “justice for Paul Whelan.”
Under conditions where the US government has deployed federal forces against peaceful protesters in Washington DC, encouraged a violent rampage by the police, and been illegally persecuting and torturing the journalist and publisher Julian Assange for a decade, these statements are the height of hypocrisy. More than anything else, they are a sign that the US government is determined to continue to ramp up tensions with Russia, both to divert from the explosive social tensions at home and to prepare the grounds for further military and political provocations abroad.
In May, the Trump administration unilaterally withdrew from the Open Skies Treaty, one of the last remaining armaments treaties with Russia. On June 12, NATO recognized Ukraine as an “Enhanced Opportunities Partner,” a significant step toward the integration of Ukraine into NATO. The Ukrainian deputy prime minister, Olha Stefanishyna, has announced this will allow for joint Ukraine-NATO exercises, and for Ukraine to send representatives to NATO bodies as liaison officers for operational information exchanges.
In a piece in the current issue of Foreign Affairs, the former assistant secretary of state Victoria Nuland, who admitted in 2014 that the US had spent $5 billion on funding the Ukrainian pro-Western opposition in the lead-up to the 2014 far-right coup, called for a more aggressive intervention into Russian political life. Nuland declared Ukraine a “battlefield” that the US “must not cede to Putin,” and demanded that the US escalate political, economic and military pressure on the Kremlin.
Nuland, who has been heavily involved for decades in US operations across the former Soviet Union, also insisted that the US spend more resources building up of the right-wing liberal opposition and influencing public opinion in Russia. She wrote, “[T]he United States and its allies should do more to reach out directly to the Russian people, especially younger citizens and those outside the major cities. A package of economic incentives with concrete benefits for ordinary Russians would help. ... Washington should try to reach more of them where they are: on the social networks Odnoklassniki and VKontakte; on Facebook, Telegram, and YouTube; and on the many new Russian-language digital platforms springing up.”

Fascist network uncovered in German Army’s Special Forces unit

Gregor Link

On Friday, the German news magazine Der Spiegel reported on a 12-page letter sent by a sergeant in the Army’s Special Forces commando unit (Kommando Spezialkräfte—KSK) to Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer. The letter makes clear that the 1,100-strong unit, which operates in top secrecy and specialises in lethal operations, is directed toward suppressing domestic opposition with the methods of fascist terrorism. According to the letter, some of the KSK soldiers compare the unit to Hitler’s Waffen-SS.
“Right-wing extremist tendencies” are “tolerated” in the KSK and “sometimes consciously covered up,” wrote Der Spiegel, based on the soldier’s letter. According to the author of the article, evidence of the presence of right-wing extremist soldiers is “internally acknowledged, but for a variety of motives collectively ignored or even tolerated.” It is “drummed into” the soldiers from their superiors “not to report any incidents.”
According to the news magazine, the letter describes “accurately” and “in detail” how the trainers silence their recruits. They are “taught to be subservient,” which, in the words of the commando soldier, is “incompatible with the limits of the system of orders and obedience in the Army.”
The letter states that “To bring soldiers and, above all, critical officers into line,” “punishments” are used to create a “type of carcass obedience” and “a culture of accepting illegal behaviour.” Through the “firm leadership of newly recruited KSK fighters in training,” the recruits are “taught a rigorous obedience,” which, according to the text of the letter cited by Der Spiegel, “has been compared by commando soldiers in training to that of the Waffen-SS.”
The soldier goes into detail about the fascist outlook of his trainers. He says that one of them, who always uses Nazi codes in radio communications, makes no secret of his “national conservative ideology.”
One of the trainers mentioned in the letter is Daniel K., who, according to Deutsche Welle, was “heavily involved in the founding of the elite unit” and previously, in 2007, attracted notice due to his right-wing extremist ideology. At the time, he sent a threatening letter signed with his full name to a higher-ranked Army officer. That officer, a spokesman for the critical soldiers’ organisation “Darmstädter Signal,” had requested on the grounds of conscience to be relieved from duties related to drone operations in southern Afghanistan.
K. wrote at the time, “I deem you to be an internal enemy and will direct my actions to destroy this enemy with a decisive blow.” He attacked the “contemporary conglomerate of left-wing uniform-wearing recipients of care,” and urged the critical officer to return “to the swamp of Stone Age Marxism.” In conclusion, he warned, “You are being observed, no, not by impotent instrumentalised services, but by a new generation of officers who will act if the times demand it.” He wrote in the postscript, “Long live holy Germany!”
The officer filed a formal complaint concerning the threat, but no action was taken in response to K.’s letter, other than it being noted in K.’s personnel file. Although his superiors knew by 2007 at the latest that K. was a right-wing extremist, he was allowed to continue training soldiers and rose through the ranks to become a lieutenant colonel.
He was suspended in 2019 only after it emerged he was a supporter of the far-right “Reichsbürger” and the right-wing extremist “Identitarian Movement.” According to media reports, he claimed that the state no longer had the situation under control due to the influx of immigrants, meaning that “the Army now has to take things over.”
The author of the letter to the defence minister stressed that it would be “naive” to view K. as an isolated case.
Just a month ago, another KSK soldier was suspended after his close ties to the Identitarian Movement were revealed. The Tagesschau reported last Wednesday that the soldier played a part in the mistreatment of Murat Kurnaz in Afghanistan.
Kurnaz, who was born in Bremen, was held in the US Guantanamo Bay prison camp for four years as a “Taliban fighter.” After his release, he accused two KSK soldiers of having abused him in Afghanistan in 2002. The Defence Ministry confirmed that the incident involved the soldier who was suspended a month ago and a fellow soldier, who were posted to the US air base in Kandahar on “guard duty.”
Kurnaz testified in 2006: “Then one of the two Germans said to me, ‘You picked the wrong side. Eyes on the ground … Do you know who we are? We are the German force, KSK.’… Then he slammed my head on the ground and one of them kicked me.”
According to research by Southwest Broadcasting (SWR) and Tagesschau, the soldier remained stationed in Calw with the KSK before “making a career in the United States.” After a leadership training course at Fort Bliss, Texas, he took a post at Fort Bragg in North Carolina and later became an official liaison between the German and US militaries.
Spokesmen from the Army and the Bundeswehr refused to discuss the content of the allegations with SWR.
The links of the two KSK soldiers to the Identitarian Movement are also significant because one of the movement’s most prominent supporters, Brenton Tarrant, carried out a fascist attack in Christchurch, New Zealand in March 2019, killing 51 people and injuring another 50. One year earlier, he donated €1,500 to the Identitarian youth movement, prompting its leader, Martin Sellner, to initiate enthusiastic direct email contact with Tarrant.
Under far-right Austrian Foreign Minister Herbert Kickl (Austrian Freedom Party), Sellner was able to delete the messages from his hard drive shortly before the Austrian police carried out a search warrant on his home. According to the Military Intelligence Service (MAD), the KSK soldier suspended in May also donated money to the Identitarians.
The KSK pursues the interests of German imperialism around the world in secretive operations and specialises more than any other Army unit in killing people.
Against the backdrop of the return of German militarism and the revival of the class struggle, such capabilities are increasingly required at home. Der Spiegel wrote that according to the letter, K. demanded that his recruits write “essays ... that sketch out a potential KSK domestic intervention.”
Such plans are already well advanced. The letter to the defence minister makes clear that the far-right network in and around the KSK, which has repeatedly been in the headlines in recent years, is no mere “isolated case,” but is systematically promoted from above and covered up.
Just a few weeks ago, investigators took a KSK soldier into custody after he was found to be hoarding military weaponry, and a large underground store of explosives and munitions from the German Army’s supplies was found on his private land.
As the World Socialist Web Site reported, a right-wing extremist “shadow army” composed of KSK soldiers, police officers, judges, lawyers and intelligence service agents is preparing to round up and kill political opponents on “day X,” using death lists, military transports and munitions seized from the Army. Witnesses reported in 2017 that in this context, discussions about a “final solution” had taken place.
A central figure in this terrorist network is Andre S., code named “Hannibal,” a former KSK soldier and friend of Franco A., an army officer strongly suspected of planning political assassinations, using the fabricated identity of a refugee. Together with an intelligence agent, Andre S. founded the organisation “Uniter,” which provided the personnel and organisational basis for the network.
The available information leaves no doubt about the fact that these right-wing extremist command structures have enjoyed the backing of figures at the highest levels. The MAD (Military Intelligence Service), in collaboration with the domestic intelligence service, placed the leading figures under surveillance and even used “Hannibal” as an informant during his time as a soldier.
In its official annual report, the agency wrote that it was supporting “members of the Army who are in a ‘social close relationship’ to suspected extremists, to protect them from ... unjustified suspicion.” In this context, the MAD described the KSK as the “focus of the work.”
The cover-up will continue even after the sergeant’s letter. Eva Högl (Social Democratic Party), the new parliamentary commissioner for the Army, confirmed this in an interview with Deutschlandfunk. She said it was “very, very important to say that there is no blanket suspicion, neither towards the army or the KSK.” The army is “not a hotbed for right-wing extremists,” she continued, but rather a “piling up of isolated cases.”
Högl said she intended to carefully review “whether the right-wing extremist structures or networks exist.” But she would leave the investigation to a working group composed of the MAD and the KSK. This means the criminals—the KSK and the MAD, which covered up these developments—will be investigating themselves.
Asked whether “the dissolution of the elite unit could take place at the end of the review process in a worst-case scenario,” Högl answered: “This is not the time to talk about or even consider the dissolution of the KSK. Next year, we will celebrate—if it comes to that, and I hope it will—25 years since the founding of the KSK, and I am firmly convinced that we need this elite unit. It performs a tremendous service under extremely difficult conditions.”

German Navy prepares for worldwide military missions

Tino Jacobson & Johannes Stern

A central component of German imperialism’s return to an aggressive foreign and great power policy is the massive rearmament of the German Navy.
Given the growing conflict between the great powers over geopolitical zones of influence and trade routes, the rearmament is being systematically promoted by the grand coalition of Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) and Social Democrats (SPD) as well as German industry. In mid-May, the two German shipyards Lürssen Group and German Naval Yards Kiel (GNYK) announced their intention to merge into a national German shipyards’ alliance. The declared goal is to create the necessary armament structures for the building of German warships.
“The aim is to improve the national industrial structure as well as to strengthen efficiency and sustainability,” says a joint communication from Lürssen and GNYK. The planned merger follows “the demands of the public client to see high-performance industrial structures in nationally reliable availability and guaranteeing efficient cost structures.” This includes, “not only the construction of technologically highly innovative naval ships but also their functional maintenance over the entire life cycle.”
The merger of the two shipyards, which Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems could also join in the future, is directly related to the construction of the Multipurpose Combat Ship 180 (MKS) and the ruling class’ goal of building a powerful navy.
Norbert Brackmann, the government’s Maritime Coordinator and a CDU member of the Bundestag (parliament), said he very much hoped “that with this decision, the construction of the Multipurpose Combat Ship 180 can now also start promptly.” This would enable “the envisaged timetable for the ships to be realised, by and large. This would be good news for our navy since it is waiting for the ships.”
Since then, the MKS project—the largest naval contract of its kind in the history of the German armed forces—has been single-mindedly implemented. According to a report by the Ministry of Defence, GNYK withdrew its legal reservations against awarding the MKS180 to a consortium led by the Dutch Damen Shipyard Group immediately after the planned merger with Lürssen was announced.
Part of the consortium is the Hamburg shipyard Blohm+Voss, which belongs to Lürssen. According to media reports, the Bundestag’s budget committee was to approve the funds for the construction of the first four MKSs, worth around six billion euros, on Wednesday.
The Bundeswehr’s official website provocatively calls the approximately 155-meter-long and heavily armed MKS a future “all-purpose weapon.” It should be able “to patrol large sea areas all over the world for a long time, to monitor embargoes and, if necessary, to evacuate German citizens from crisis situations, and on the other hand be able to assert itself in the North Atlantic or Mediterranean in sea battles against other warships of its kind and submarines, if necessary.”
Other ships that essentially serve the same objectives are now to be completed quickly or have already been put into service, such as four frigates of the Baden-Württemberg Class 125, five corvettes of the Class 130 and two further submarines of the Class 212 Common Design.
The costs for the planned projects are gigantic and set to explode in future. The government’s current armament report mentions a cost increase of 1.175 billion euros for frigates and corvettes alone, compared to the original estimate. And that is only the beginning—behind the scenes, the German ruling class is already thinking about building its own aircraft carrier, which would put all previous projects far in the shade.
The ruling elite is making no secret of the imperialist goals associated with the rearmament of the German Navy. In his keynote address at the 60th Historical-Tactical 2020 Fleet Meeting in January, the Navy’s Inspector, Vice Admiral Andreas Krause, quoted the core statement of the foreign policy keynote speech of Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer (CDU) last November: “A country of our size and our economic and technological power, a country of our geostrategic position and with our global interests, cannot simply stand on the side-lines and watch.”
Then he added, “The statement makes it clear that our minister knows where she’s going and, of course, influences the course of our navy. Even if many in our country still don’t really want to recognize it. The sea and therefore the German Navy is playing an increasingly decisive role in German security and defence policy.”
Later in his speech, Krause explained why this is so. “For a nation dependent on foreign trade such as ours, freely usable and safe sea routes are of paramount importance, and not only for the classic movement of goods.” For example, “over 90 percent of global internet traffic is transmitted by underwater cables, the expansion of wind turbines in the sea is steadily increasing and the amount of mineral resources extracted from the sea is growing.” Especially “for the last remaining resources that have not yet been clearly allocated and developed,” the “global competition has long since begun.”
Germany must therefore be in a position to act globally on the high seas and wage war successfully. “Global developments in security policy require a navy that is capable of worldwide deployment, on the one hand, but that can also effectively assert our interests on our own doorstep at any time,” Krause reminded his audience. “Only with a globally deployable navy that is capable of fighting,” he said, would Germany be able to meet its alliance obligations and assert its interests.
Krause’s plans and his rhetoric are reminiscent of the German megalomania on the eve of the First and Second World Wars. “It is not only the sea routes of the Baltic that are of crucial strategic importance to us,” he said. “The maritime lines of communication across the North Atlantic, through the English Channel and into the North Sea are also important lifelines for our continent and our country.” Here, “the German Navy would also be called upon in the event of a military confrontation.”
In the course of “globalisation and the corresponding effects on world trade to and from the East… other sea areas have gained in importance for us. Although the Mediterranean has lost none of its strategic relevance for Germany and Europe, the new ‘mare nostrum’ of the world, ladies and gentlemen, is the Indian Ocean.”
Then Krause threatened the nuclear powers Russia and China. “Even though Russia is the primary focus for us in Germany, in Europe and in NATO, another strategically relevant player is increasingly establishing itself with China.” In just four years, “China has built and commissioned about as much tonnage as the British Royal Navy has in total” and has “set out on a determined course to become a globally active ‘maritime nation.’”
It is not Russia and China who are the aggressors on the world’s oceans, but the imperialist powers. As part of its provocative military encirclement of China, the US Navy has sent three aircraft carrier combat groups into the Pacific Ocean simultaneously for the first time in years. From June 3 to 16, the German Navy took an active part in the “Baltops” manoeuvres in the Baltic Sea, which is part of the NATO military build-up against Russia. A total of 29 ships and 29 aircraft were deployed.
In its struggle against the return of German militarism and the danger of a Third World War, the working class is confronted not only with all parties in the Bundestag but also with the trade unions. In an official statement, the head of the IG-Metall Küste (Coastal) district, Daniel Friedrich, backed the plans for a national shipyard alliance and the government’s decision to classify naval shipbuilding as a key national technology.
“A merger in naval shipbuilding” was “sensible, if it would strengthen the industry and thus secure the key technology in Germany,” Friedrich stated on the record. “The know-how in German shipbuilding, to which naval shipbuilding makes an important contribution,” had to be “secured.”