19 Jun 2020

Australian government alleges cyber-attack to ramp-up provocations against China

Oscar Grenfell

Over the past days, the Australian government has escalated its role as an attack dog in a US-led campaign against China, aimed at ensuring American hegemony in the Asia-Pacific.
On Tuesday, Foreign Minister Marise Payne delivered a speech accusing China of spreading “disinformation” during the coronavirus pandemic and of fomenting “division,” particularly through the use of the internet. She warned that Beijing was seeking to “undermine liberal democracies” and made clear that Australia would pursue an aggressive foreign policy in the region and internationally.
As if on cue, Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced this morning that Australia was being subjected to an ongoing “major state-based cyber-attack.” Morrison claimed that the operation had targeted “all levels of government, industry, political organisations, education, health, essential service providers and operators of other critical infrastructure.”
Asked by reporters whether Beijing was responsible, Morrison said that the government was “not making any public attribution about these matters.” In the same breath, however, he said that there were “few countries capable of such sophisticated activity.”
His statements have already had their desired effect, with corporate journalists rushing to declare that China is the prime suspect. Less than an hour after Morrison’s remarks, for instance, the Sydney Morning Herald published an article baldly declaring that China is “understood to be a likely source of the threat.”
It appears that none of the reporters at Morrison’s press conference asked any of the obvious questions, starting with whether he had evidence for his sweeping assertions.
It was not even clear that Morrison was speaking about a specific cyber-attack that could be attributed to one source. Asked whether he would describe the alleged operation as “unprecedented in scale,” Morrison evasively stated “This is ongoing activity, it hasn’t just started. This is a constant threat to Australia.”
In other words, despite the atmosphere of national emergency that he sought to cultivate, Morrison could not even confirm a specific “cyber-attack” in recent days. He did not provide a single concrete example of an institution that had been hacked.
Notwithstanding the supposed breadth of the operation and the fact that it had targeted virtually every government service, Morrison said that there had been “no large-scale personal data breaches,” leaving open the possibility that nothing had been successfully hacked.
The purpose of the announcement was to whip-up a wartime atmosphere to justify further provocations against China. In this campaign, the government has the complete support of the Labor Party opposition, which has played a central role in fully aligning Australia with the US drive against Beijing.
Labor Party leader Anthony Albanese repeated Morrison’s vague talking points, telling reporters that “cyber-attacks are a real issue,” and stating: “What the evidence is, is that these attacks are expected to be more often.”
The political establishment is confident that its unsubstantiated assertions will be promoted by a pliant corporate media. For years, the official press has trumpeted McCarthyite claims that Australia is the target of pervasive “Chinese interference,” legitimising the country’s involvement in a US military build-up throughout the region and serving as the pretext for sweeping attacks on democratic rights.
Like the allegations of “Chinese interference,” the claims of a “cyber-attack” are being spearheaded by the intelligence agencies.
This morning, the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD), the country’s electronic spying agency, took the unusual step of issuing a statement to the media, confirming the “sustained targeting of Australian governments and companies by a sophisticated state-based actor.”
According to Nine Media, the ASD identified the techniques used as including “links to fake websites designed to steal users’ details, links to malicious files, and use of email tracking services to identify when users were opening emails.” The Australian Cyber Security Centre similarly warned of “copy-paste compromises.”
The agencies appear to be describing a phishing operation, where an entity emails a link or attachment under false pretences that activates malicious software if it is clicked upon. Such emails have been encountered by virtually every internet user. They are widely used by private computer hackers and online scammers, further casting doubt on the official insistence that the supposed attack is “state-based.”
The claims are being used to promote Australia’s collaboration with US-led intelligence networks. Morrison stated that he spoke to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson about the operation last night and had “sought cooperation from Australia’s Five Eyes intelligence partners, the United States, Canada, New Zealand as well as the UK.”
His announcement dovetails with similarly unsubstantiated warnings last month from the US Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigations that American government institutions and companies were being hit by malware originating in China.
The Australian intelligence agencies, including the ASD, are fully-integrated into the US-led Five Eyes network. As revealed by Edward Snowden, they collaborate on a daily basis, including in mass spying operations and other illegal activities, such as computer hacking, targeting ordinary people and foreign governments alike.
The timing of Morrison’s announcement and the ASD statement coincides with a major ratcheting-up of US rhetoric against China. It will doubtless be cited by Trump administration officials as further evidence of the threat that China poses to the US-led “rules-based order.”
Foreign Minister Marise Payne (Credit: Australian National University)
Foreign Minister Payne’s Tuesday address to the Australian National University’s National Security College, which is closely connected to the intelligence agencies, was along similar lines. She vaguely asserted that China had “carried out targeted disinformation campaigns seeking to undermine democratic debate and exacerbate social polarisation, and improve their own image in the COVID-19 context.”
Payne favourably cited Twitter’s recent suspension of 32,000 accounts that it claimed were “state-linked.”
As with the fraudulent claims of Russian-interference in the 2016 US election, the Australian political establishment will use allegations of Chinese-interference to intensify online censorship. The government is establishing a task force to combat “online misinformation.” This is a prelude to the branding of social and political opposition, above all from the working class, as being the result of “foreign” efforts to “exacerbate social polarisation.”
Payne appeared to walk back earlier threats from Morrison to “disengage” from international institutions. Morrison, who has sought to identify himself closely with Trump, denounced “negative globalism” in terms similar to those of the US president earlier this year.
Payne restated the longstanding consensus of the Australian ruling elite that it would seek to prosecute its own predatory interests and “punch above its weight” through “multilateral engagement.” She “affirmed...that international standard setting bodies create rules that are vital to Australia’s security, interests, values and prosperity.”
Payne made clear that she was not calling for some form of peaceful global collaboration, but that Australia would aggressively intervene in international institutions. She stated: “There are times to pursue quiet diplomacy behind the scenes. But there are also times to voice our concerns and persuade others of the need for a course of action.”
The context of her speech, and her earlier allegations of Chinese “misinformation,” demonstrated that such “action” would be directed against Beijing.
Yesterday, the Australian revealed that Australian defence chiefs and their American counterparts were in the “early stages of planning joint exercises in the strategic western Pacific outpost of Guam, home to the US Andersen Air Force Base.”
It reported that already on Monday, the HMAS Anzac, Ballarat and Arunta left Fleet Base West in Sydney to participate in “various exercises” in the Pacific. On Tuesday, the HMAS Canberra, Hobart and Stuart departed for “training and maritime surveillance operations.”
Australia was also “awaiting an invitation from India to join the Malabar naval exercises in the Bay of Bengal later this year alongside the US and Japan.” Such an exercise would be particularly provocative, cementing a “quadrilateral alliance” strongly opposed by Beijing because it involves four of the largest military powers in the region.
Australia will also participate in the August RIMPAC exercises, hosted by the US in Hawaii, which is the biggest marine warfare drill in the world.
The recent movements of Australian warships follow major US provocations threatening military conflict with China, including last week’s deployment of three aircraft carrier strike groups to the Pacific.

US escalates trade and economic conflicts

Nick Beams

As the COVID-19 pandemic sends the world economy into its deepest downturn since the Great Depression, the United States has signalled there will be no let-up in the trade and economic warfare it is prosecuting against its rivals.
On Wednesday, the contents of a letter sent by US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin last Friday to four European countries were revealed in which he declared that the US was pulling out of negotiations over a global tax system to cover major internet and technology firms.
On the same day, US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer delivered a broadside against the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in a Congressional hearing and indicated that negotiations with the European Union over a trade deal were going nowhere.
Trucks hauling shipping containers drive near containers stacked five-high at a terminal on Harbor Island in Seattle [Credit: AP Photo/Elaine Thompson]
In his letter to counterparts in the UK, France, Italy and Spain, Mnuchin said discussions on the taxation measures covering digital companies, organised through the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), had reached an “impasse” and the US was not able to agree even to changes in global tax law on an interim basis.
Last week, French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said the US was the only holdout against an interim OECD framework for taxing digital companies.
The negotiations were organised earlier this year after moves by France to impose taxes on Google, Facebook and other digital firms, covering the billions of dollars of revenue they raise in the country, were met with a threat by the US to impose tariffs on French goods. The UK has also proposed similar tax measures together with Italy and Spain.
In the letter Mnuchin sought to use the pandemic as the pretext for pulling out of the talks, saying they were a distraction from “far more important matters” and “governments around the world should focus their attention on dealing with the economic issues resulting from COVID-19.”
The Mnuchin letter came in the wake of a decision at the beginning of this month by the Office of the US Trade Representative to begin an investigation into taxes on internet commerce.
The investigation was launched under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act which gives the administration wide powers to impose tariffs as were deployed against China.
Announcing the investigation, Lighthizer said President Trump was concerned that “many of our trading partners are adopting tax schemes to unfairly target our companies” and the US was “prepared to take all appropriate action to defend our businesses and workers against any such discrimination.”
The threat was repeated in Mnuchin’s letter.
“The United States remains opposed to digital services taxes and similar unilateral measures,” he wrote. “As we have repeatedly said, if countries choose to collect or adopt such taxes, the United States will respond with appropriate commensurate measures.”
Lighthizer’s testimony to the House Ways and Means Committee made clear that the escalation of trade war by the Trump administration goes far beyond digital taxation. He said the World Trade Organisation (WTO) was a “mess” that had “failed America and failed the international trading system.”
The WTO is in the process of finding a new director-general after the present head Roberto Azevêdo announced last month that he would step down a year early.
Lighthizer said the new head had to press for “fundamental reform” of the WTO and be ready to take action against China.
“I think we need a director-general that understands the fundamental problem that an extremely large state-run economy cannot be disciplined into the current WTO rules,” he said, adding that if any candidate had displayed a “whiff of anti-Americanism” in past actions then he would use a veto to block the appointment.
The threat is not an idle one. The WTO’s appellate body, the highest authority in its disputes-settlement procedures, has been rendered inoperable since the end of last year because of the US refusal to back the appointment of new judges to replace those who have retired.
In his remarks on Wednesday, Lighthizer made clear the US had no intention of changing course. “If it never goes back into effect, I think that would be fine,” he said.
Lighthizer also commented on the digital tax issue. “We have a situation where a variety of countries have decided the easiest way to raise revenue is to tax somebody else’s companies, and they happened to be ours,” he said.
Kevin Brady, the top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, took the same line during Lighthizer’s testimony, saying the issue was “not simply one of fairness, but of other countries undermining our tax base.”
Lighthizer told the committee that the “phase one” trade deal with China, signed in January under which Beijing agreed to buy an additional $200 billion worth of American products, was going well and despite COVID-19 it appeared “they are going to do what they say.”
The chief focus of his remarks was relations with Europe and the negotiation of a trade deal under which the US is demanding that the European Union and the UK open their markets to US agricultural products.
The negotiations have been fraught from the outset because EU representatives have insisted that agriculture was not included in the agreement reached between Trump and former European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker in July 2018. Trump openly boasted that he had secured negotiations after threatening to impose tariffs on European car imports.
Asked to comment on the state of negotiations with the EU and the UK by members of the House Committee, Lighthizer said there were difficulties over agricultural issues.
“There is a sense in Europe, which I think is shared—hopefully not as deeply with the UK as it is with Europe—that American food is unsafe. I think that it’s thinly veiled protectionism. I often comment that using standards as protectionism has risen to the state of a high art in Europe.”
He said that state of negotiations was “not looking good in the short run” and warned that the US was “not going to compromise” on the issue of “fair access for agriculture,” and the administration was prepared to use the tariff weapon.
“The president will use tariffs if he has to get a fair shake for American businesses,” he said.
Lighthizer also made significant comments in relation to the issue of tariffs on Chinese-made medical equipment and protective gear used in hospitals to treat people with the coronavirus.
He said keeping tariffs on these goods would encourage US manufacturers to begin making them and that he was a “firm believer” that things needed to fight the current pandemic and the next one “should be made in America.”
This is line with the broader agenda of both the Trump administration and the Democrats that there has to be a process of “deglobalisation” in which key areas of manufacturing are brought back to the North American continent so the US can better pursue its deepening conflicts with its global rivals.

India and China remain on knife edge as war tensions continue

Shuvu Batta & Keith Jones

Four days after Indian and Chinese troops fought a bloody battle on rugged Himalayan terrain that left dozens dead, tensions between New Delhi and Beijing remain acute.
Both governments and their militaries continue to insist that they want to de-escalate their most serious border crisis since they fought a limited, month-long war in 1962.
However, each has accused the other of provoking Monday night’s clash, which saw Indian and Chinese troops attack each other with stones, knives, and iron rods laced with barbed wire at high altitude, near the “rooftop of the world.” And each continues to insist that the other must stand down, by pulling back forces that have traversed at multiple places onto “their side” of the Line of Actual Control (LAC)—the un-demarcated, temporary border to which New Delhi and Beijing have agreed to adhere, pending final settlement of their rival territorial claims.
Indian army officers wearing masks as a precaution against the coronavirus walk past the funeral pyre of their colleague Colonel B. Santosh Babu, at Suryapet, about 140 kilometers (87.5 miles) from Hyderabad, India, Thursday, June 18, 2020. (AP Photo/Mahesh Kumar A.)
To back up their opposed demands, both India and China are pouring additional military personnel and war materiel into their border regions. India has placed all Army and Airforce units deployed to police its 3,500-kilometer (2,175 mile) border with China on “the highest alert.”
According to news reports, following consultations with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, the Indian military’s high command has instructed its border forces to aggressively repel any Chinese “incursions” onto territory India claims falls on its side of the LAC. The “days of walk-in options for the (Chinese) People’s Liberation Army (PLA) are over,” official sources told the Times of India. “Our soldiers will not move back. There will be no compromise on our territorial integrity.” The PLA, the sources continued, will be forced to “bear losses” for “every attempt it makes to grab territory.”
New Delhi is also reportedly considering repudiating a decades-old agreement with Beijing that firearms shall not be used in the event of an encounter between their border forces. From all accounts, neither side breached this agreement during Monday’s six-hour skirmish, which left 20 Indian and an undetermined number of Chinese soldiers dead.
In what was clearly meant as a message for New Delhi, the PLA’s Tibet Military Command announced Tuesday that it had conducted a series of war drills near the border with India. Citing a PLA news release, chinanews.com reported that “live-fire drills recently took place” in the Tibetan Plateau, “featuring multiple types of combat forces including long-range artillery systems, ground-to-air missile systems, special operative forces, army aviation troops, electronic countermeasure forces and engineering and anti-chemical warfare troops in a joint operation group.”
“Western intelligence officials,” the New York Times reported Thursday, estimate that “the chances of more fighting” between Indian and Chinse forces “remained high, especially with thousands of opposing troops eyeball-to-eyeball along a remote front line that has erupted in violence several times.”
Yesterday evening, according to the Hindu, as per an agreement reached the day before at a meeting between Indian and Chinese military commanders in the Galwan Valley, site of Monday’s clash, China returned 10 Indian military personnel, including a Lieutenant Colonel and three Majors, who had been captured during the bloody skirmish.
India’s and China’s foreign ministers, who had a testy telephone exchange Wednesday, also announced yesterday that a previously-planned trilateral meeting with Russia’s foreign minister will go ahead on June 23.
Beyond pro forma remarks about the desirability of de-escalation, Washington has been conspicuously silent about the eruption of fighting between India and China. In the weeks prior to Monday’s clash in the Galwan Valley, however, Washington had visibly intruded into the border dispute, with both the Trump administration and leading Democrats publicly denouncing China for aggression.
While the Sino-Indian border dispute is decades old and tensions have waxed and waned, undoubtedly the principal factor driving the current crisis is India’s integration over the past decade-and-a-half into US imperialism’s incendiary and rapidly escalating military-strategic offensive against China. Building on the Indo-US “global strategic partnership” struck by the previous Congress Party-led government, Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) regime has enmeshed India in an ever-expanding web of bilateral, trilateral and quadrilateral military-strategic ties with the US and its principal Asia-Pacific allies, Japan and Australia.
Moreover, in response to the global economic crisis triggered by the pandemic and the consequent surge in geopolitical tensions, above all between the US and China, the Modi government and the Indian bourgeoisie have made clear they intend to expand their anti-China alliance with US imperialism. Last month, as the border crisis with China was developing, Modi announced that a key element in his government’s economic “revival plan” will be to work with the Trump administration to persuade US companies, under pressure from Washington, to “de-couple” from China and make India their alternate production chain hub. He also announced the scrapping of all limits on foreign investment in defence production, with the aim of attracting US arms manufacturers to use India as a cheap-labour platform.
Washington likely was taken aback by the speed with which events on the Sino-India border have spun out of control, raising the prospect of war between the world’s two most populous countries and rival nuclear powers. Such a war, even were it to remain limited to border areas—far from a certainty—would have a momentous impact on world geopolitics.
But Washington also likely calculates that by remaining silent, at least for the present, it can reap dividends.
Powerful sections of India’s military-security establishment and corporate elite have been pressing for New Delhi to abandon any pretense of “strategic autonomy” and formally align with Washington in an anti-China security grouping. These forces are now using the India-China border clash to seek to overcome widespread popular opposition, above all in the working class, to harnessing India to US imperialism.
The Hindustan Times urged New Delhi Wednesday to “double down on its partnership with the US,” and make the Quad (a US-led security dialogue involving India, Japan, and Australia) “a more permanent arrangement, and be a part of any club that seeks to contain Chinese power.”
One day after calling for India to hit back against China economically, diplomatically and militarily, including by responding “to Chinese encroachments with its own cross-LAC manoeuvres,” the Time s of India yesterday declared, “If India definitively joins the (US) camp, it will be Beijing’s loss not New Delhi’s.”
The BJP government has already begun to draw up a list of economic reprisals against China. Meanwhile it is seeking to whip up a bellicose mood, organizing, along with its Hindu right allies and former military officers, anti-China protests, including boycotts of Chinese goods.
Due to the incompetence, negligence and class avarice of the BJP government and the Indian bourgeoisie, the country is facing a twin social catastrophe: a COVID-19 pandemic that is growing like wildfire, and more than 100 million unemployed. Modi is desperately seeking to use the war crisis to whip up chauvinism, so as to deflect social tensions outward, promote reaction, and confuse and divide the working class,
The Congress Party and other ostensible opposition forces are entirely complicit in this. The Congress has responded to the war crisis with vitriolic denunciations of China and accusations that the BJP government has failed to “defend” India and allowed “unarmed” troops to be killed by the PLA. Meanwhile, their close allies, the Stalinist Communist Party of India (Marxist) and Communist Party of India will demonstrate that they stand with the Indian state by participating in an all-party meeting today, convened by Modi and his BJP.

Turkish army launches ground attacks into Iraqi Kurdistan to target PKK

Ulaş Ateşci

Amid growing international conflicts over Libya, the eastern Mediterranean Sea and Syria between great powers and regional powers, the Turkish Armed Forces have invaded Iraqi Kurdistan. They reportedly aim to destroy Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) militias in Shingal in Nineveh province, and Makhmour, Qarachogh, Mount Qandil, Khuakurk, and Zap across the Kurdistan region.
After launching airstrikes on regions of northern Iraq controlled by the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), code-named “Operation Claw-Eagle,” on early Monday, the Turkish Defense Ministry announced on Wednesday on Twitter that a new “Operation Claw-Tiger” has begun. Commando forces are already in Iraq’s Haftanin region, it said, “to neutralize the PKK and other terrorist elements that threaten the security of Turkish people and borders.” Yesterday, according to Turkey’s state-owned Anadolu Agency, “Turkish forces hit over 500 targets of the PKK” with F-16 jets, howitzers and multiple rockets.
The Turkish invasion of Iraq comes after a series of operations against the PKK in Turkey and against its Syrian section, People’s Protection Units (YPG) in Syria, since the Trump administration green-lighted a Turkish offensive targeting YPG last October.
Turkish soldiers conduct patrol on outside Manbij, Syria. (Wikimedia Commons)
The Turkish Interior Ministry claimed that there are only 438 PKK militants in Turkey now, and that this number was around 2,780 in 2016. This month, the government accused the PKK of killing six road construction workers in two separate attacks in Van and Şırnak with roadside bombs.
After the Turkish airstrikes, Baghdad summoned Turkey’s ambassador to Iraq, Fatih Yıldız and gave him a formal memorandum, asserting that “the airstrikes contravene international law and principles of mutual respect,” according to Iraqi Kurdistan’s Rudaw agency.
However, Iranian forces have carried out their own air strikes into Iraq simultaneously. Yesterday Iraqi Foreign Ministry summoned both the Turkish and Iranian ambassadors in Baghdad over airstrikes. “We stress that Turkey must stop its bombardment and withdraw its attacking forces from Iraqi territory,” the ministry’s statement said on Thursday, calling the invasion a “provocative action.”
“We deplore the penetration of Iraqi airspace by the Turkish planes which—at a depth of 193km from the Turkish border inside the Iraqi airspace—targeted a refugee camp near Makhmour and Sinjar,” Iraq’s Joint Operations Command said in a statement.
“Turkish jets struck the Khinera area in Sidakan sub-district, killing a shepherd named Abbas Maghdid, aged 30,” the mayor of the Sidakan district told Rudaw on Thursday. Maghdid was the first reported civilian casualty.
Although there have been no official statements from Ankara or Tehran about a joint military operation against PKK militias in Iraq, several reports have suggested that it is a coordinated offensive. Rudaw cited a report from ISWNEWS, stating, “The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has shelled positions of groups of PJAK [Iranian section of the PKK] and PKK in northern Iraq.”
The air and artillery strikes into Iraq came immediately after an official visit to İstanbul by Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif last weekend. Both the Turkish and Iranian bourgeoisie fear that a potential Kurdish state in Iraq or Syria could promote similar sentiments among Kurds living within their borders.
As a result—even though Ankara has supported the NATO war for regime change against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who has the backing of Russia and Iran—Turkey and Iran have an unstated agreement on the need to prevent the YPG from building a US-backed Kurdish state inside Syria.
While this unofficial joint military operation by Turkey and Iran against the US-backed Kurdish nationalist forces in Iraq is doubtless closely followed by the United States and the European imperialist powers, they have made no official statement so far, even though a NATO defense ministers’ summit took place on Wednesday.
There are growing tensions between France and Turkey in particular over Libya, the eastern Mediterranean and Syria. Although Paris has not made any statement on the Turkish invasion of Iraq yet, on Wednesday the French Foreign Ministry accused Turkey's navy of “acting in a hostile manner towards its NATO allies” in the Mediterranean to keep them from enforcing a UN arms embargo on Libya. France and Turkey support rival factions in the Libyan civil war.
Last month, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu accused Paris of wanting “to help YPG elements carve out a terror state in northern Syria.”
As a clear confirmation that Turkish state’s growing attacks on Kurdish nationalists in Syria, Iraq and inside the country are bound up with these broader geopolitical conflicts, the United Arab Emirates, a French ally in Libya, denounced the Turkish and Iranian military operations in Iraq in a statement. It said that they “constituted a violation of the sovereignty of a sisterly Arab country and led to intimidation and the spread of terror among innocent civilians.”
On June 8, President Erdoğan called his American counterpart, Donald Trump, in particular over Libya. Afterwards, Erdoğan declared “we had some agreements during our conversation,” but did not give any details.
The Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK), an umbrella group including the PKK, the Democratic Union Party (PYD) in Syria, and the PJAK in Iran, recently issued a statement. It accused not only Turkey but also Washington and its imperialist allies, the Iraqi government, and the major Kurdish bourgeois parties in Iraqi Kurdistan, the KDP and PUK, of backing the military operation. It stated: “The coalition forces led by the USA and the Iraqi state are responsible for the airspace of the attacked areas… The coalition forces led by the USA approve these attacks and have become a partner in the Kurdish genocide.”
However, almost at the same time with Turkish ground operation against PKK militias in Iraq, Kurdish parties in Syria announced an initial political agreement towards “Kurdish national unity” under US auspices on Tuesday. The agreement has been made between Syrian Kurdish National Council, an affiliate of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) led by the Barzani family in Iraqi Kurdistan, and the Kurdish National Unity Parties (PYNK) led by the PYD.
In their statement, US-backed Kurdish nationalist parties declared that this agreement was reached “under anti-ISIS international coalition’s representative William Reubuck’s watch,” adding: “We would like to thank the United States for its contributions to a democratic future that will include the rights of all organizations.” On Wednesday, the US embassy in Syria welcomed the agreement with a Tweet.
On the other hand, the Turkish government continues its crackdown on the legal Kurdish nationalist Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), which received about 6 million votes in the elections. At the beginning of the month, two HDP deputies were stripped of their parliamentary mandates. Dozens of HDP majors have been dismissed by the government since the March 2019 local elections.
Organizing a “democracy march” against these growing attacks, the HDP is oriented not to the working class, the only social base of a struggle to defend democratic rights, but to the bourgeois Republican People’s Party (CHP), a traditional Turkish-nationalist party that has always supported oppression of the Kurdish people and wars in the interests of the Turkish ruling class. What brings these parties together is their common orientation to NATO and to imperialism, and to installing a new government more directly aligned with these forces.
Amid rising international geopolitical conflicts that could easily erupt into war, and growing working class struggles globally amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the only way to oppose war and defend democratic rights across the Middle East is to build a united, international working class movement against both the imperialist powers and the local bourgeois factions in a struggle for socialist workers’ power in the region and internationally.

Supreme Court blocks Trump administration’s plan to “immediately end” DACA

Meenakshi Jagadeesan

The Supreme Court has blocked the Trump administration's plan to put an “immediate end” to the “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” (DACA) program. A 5-4 majority led by Chief Justice John Roberts cited the administration’s failure to provide a “reasoned explanation” for the termination as the basis for its judgment.
This is a second major setback for the Trump administration on the legal front this week, following Monday’s ruling which held that an existing landmark Civil Rights law protects gay and transgender people against workplace discrimination.
DACA, instituted through an executive order by Barack Obama at the end of his first term, provided limited rights to some 700,000 undocumented immigrants who were brought into the United States as children. To be eligible for DACA, immigrants had to show that they had arrived in the United States before they turned 16 and that they were now no older than 30, had lived in the United States for at least the previous five years, had committed no serious crimes and were enrolled in a high school or already had a diploma or GED, or had served in the military.
Groups gathered from all across the U.S. to demonstrate support for DACA. (Flickr/Bread for the World)
The program allowed eligible youth to apply for a temporary status that protected them from deportation and provided them with work permits. What this meant was that those eligible for the program could, depending on the states in which they lived, qualify for drivers’ licenses, in-state tuition, state-funded educational grants and loans, and state-subsidized health insurance. DACA status, once obtained, was not permanent and had to be renewed every two years.
A politically motivated gesture by Obama during the lead-up to the 2012 election, DACA was carefully calibrated to put a gloss on an abysmal anti-immigrant record that was already earning the Democratic president the title of “deporter-in-chief.” It targeted a section of immigrants who enjoyed wide public sympathy, since those who were brought to the country “illegally” as children had clearly not committed the law. And it made only limited concessions, with no pathway to citizenship. Despite these limitations and the stringent requirements, the program attracted over 700,000 youth, who registered with the federal government and were therefore at the mercy of the future good will of the capitalist state.
Trump, whose administration carried out a series of vicious anti-immigrant measures, had initially been equivocal about his stance on DACA. In 2017, claiming to support the program and wanting to preserve it, Trump tweeted: “Does anybody really want to throw out good, educated and accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military?”
This changed within a very short period, however. In September 2017, after what has been widely reported to be a contentious debate within the administration, in which the fascistic Stephen Miller and then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions prevailed, Trump announced that he was terminating DACA. In his formal statement, he declared: “I do not favor punishing children …[but] the program is unlawful and unconstitutional and cannot be successfully defended in court.” More informally, Trump defended his position in language that has become quite familiar. In a tweet last year, he declared: “Many of the people in DACA, no longer very young, are far from ‘angels’... Some are very tough, hardened criminals.”
The attempt to terminate DACA immediately provoked widespread national protests, as well as legal challenges that wound their way to the Supreme Court. Immigrant rights groups, as well as the initial lawsuit filed by the attorneys general of 15 states and the District of Columbia, argued that the Trump administration’s decision reflected “racial animus” towards a group that was more than 80 percent of Mexican origin. By that time, Trump was already on record disparaging Mexicans as “rapists, criminals, thugs and ‘bad hombres.’”
The Supreme Court’s ruling, however, does not engage with either the motivations behind the ending of DACA or the substance of the policy. Instead, it narrowly focuses on a procedural point raised by the plaintiffs, that the Trump administration had violated federal procedures in promulgating the executive order rescinding DACA.
Chief Justice Roberts reiterated this in his majority opinion: “We do not decide whether DACA or its rescission are sound policies…We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action.” The five justices, he stated in his ruling, found that the justifications given by the administration were insufficient, and therefore did not constitute sufficient grounds for terminating the program. However, nothing in the ruling prevents the administration from trying again to shut down the program with “adequate reasons.”
In his dissenting opinion, Clarence Thomas, joined by Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, declared: “Today’s decision must be recognized for what it is: an effort to avoid a politically controversial but legally correct decision…[this ruling] has given the green light for future political battles to be fought in this court rather than where they rightfully belong—the political branches.”
In typical form, Trump responded to the ruling with a series of tweets that managed to both personalize the decision, while using violent rhetoric to incite his base: “Do you get the feeling that the Supreme Court doesn’t like me?...These horrible & politically charged decisions coming out of the Supreme Court are shotgun blasts into the face of people that are proud to call themselves Republicans or Conservatives. We need more Justices or we will lose our 2nd. Amendment & everything else. Vote Trump 2020!”
The claim that political considerations swayed the Supreme Court’s ruling is undoubtedly correct. It is worth noting that these considerations in fact reflect the ratcheting up of factional strife within the ruling class, particularly in the face of intensified protests around the country. In late November 2019, when the court held oral arguments on the DACA case, comments made by the justices were interpreted to mean that the administration’s action would be upheld by a 5-4 majority. Roberts, who shapes the court’s rulings as both chief justice and swing vote, seems to have switched sides in view of the changed political climate.
The growing unrest amongst masses of workers and youth, fueled by the coronavirus death toll and the accompanying economic depression, and triggered into open protest by stark instances of police brutality, has hardly gone unnoticed by the ruling elite. As in the LGBT decision issued Monday, it is likely that Roberts, as a class-conscious representative of the financial aristocracy, is concerned about pouring more gasoline on the fire by backing Trump’s unpopular and bigoted attacks on gays and lesbians and undocumented youth.
In both the LGBT and DACA cases, Roberts, as chief justice, assigned the writing of the main opinion to the most right-wing justice available—Gorsuch for the LGBT ruling, himself for DACA. Far from using these cases as an opportunity to expand the struggle for democratic rights, the majority opinions are framed in such a way as to block the most reactionary aspects of the Trump administration’s policies in the narrowest possible fashion.

US jobless disaster intensifies as 1.5 million filed for unemployment last week

Shannon Jones

New claims for unemployment insurance continue at historically unprecedented high levels despite the lifting of lockdown orders all across the United States.
According to the US Labor Department, there were 1.51 million claims filed for the week ending June 13. Forty-six states reported another 760,526 initial claims for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA), which has been made available to the self-employed, traditionally ineligible for unemployment aid
The number of unemployment claims last week was a drop of just 58,000 from the revised level of the previous week. The four-week average stands at 1.77 million weekly claims, far in excess of the previous record set back in 1982 of 695,000.
Hundreds of people wait in line for bags of groceries at a food pantry at St. Mary's Church in Waltham, Mass., Thursday, May 7, 2020. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)
There have been 45 million new unemployment claims filed since the start of the pandemic. While some of those may represent duplicate filings by workers seeking assistance in more than one program, it is still an astronomical number that indicates deep economic distress across the country.
Through the week ending June 6, continuing claims for unemployment benefits stood at 20.5 million, only a slight decrease from the previous week. In addition, there were 9.3 million self-employed and gig-economy workers receiving benefits under the federal PUA program and another 1 million receiving a continuation of benefits under the Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation program.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, only about 1 in 10 jobs cut in April were restored in May, and even that number is in dispute, as is the claim that the official unemployment rate declined last month to 13.3 percent. In fact, the real rate stood at 16.3 percent due to an under-counting error. Prior to the pandemic the highest weekly number of those receiving unemployment benefits was 6.6 million, in 2009.
The persistence of such shocking numbers despite the reopening of the auto industry and the recall of millions of workers from temporary layoff due to the coronavirus pandemic points to a general collapse of the economy and the start of a deep, perhaps prolonged depression, one to rival the Great Depression of the 1930s.
Layoffs have spread well beyond the industries initially impacted by the pandemic, and others have been made permanent. Hilton Worldwide said it is eliminating 2,100 corporate jobs worldwide while AT&T plans to eliminate 3,400 technician and clerical jobs in the US and will permanently close more than 250 stores. In another casualty, the gym chain 24 Hour Fitness filed for bankruptcy and is permanently closing more than 100 locations.
After losing 1.4 million jobs in April the healthcare industry is seeing further cuts, with Tower Health in the Philadelphia area cutting 1,000 jobs after suffering $212 million in losses.
A report Thursday in the New York Times quoted several economic experts who predicted a surge in bankruptcies this year, eclipsing any previous period. The Times cited Edward Altman, who developed the Z-score formula for predicting bankruptcies, who projects 2020 will set a record for filings by companies with $1 billion or more in debt.
Altman also expects to see a record number of bankruptcies by companies with less than $100 million in debt. Fueling the surge is an “explosion” of corporate debt that reached a record $10.5 trillion by the end of March. Another expert predicted a “Covid cliff” of bankruptcy filings when federal subsidies end.
Compounding the distress, many workers who have filed for unemployment benefits are still waiting for payments due to delays in processing claims, bureaucratic snafus or “fraud prevention” efforts. On Wednesday hundreds of frustrated claimants lined up outside the Kentucky state capitol in Frankfort for an 8-hour wait for help with their benefit claims. Tens of thousands in the state have had trouble with their filings.
On Friday the state of Michigan said that it was restoring unemployment payments to 140,000 workers who had been falsely suspected of fraud. In a case of guilty until proven innocent the state has held up payments to 340,000 claimants while it investigates fraud allegations, a significant portion of the 2.2 million who have filed.
Nearly 24,000 Ohioans have been told to pay back unemployment benefits which they have received, as a result of “overpayment” by the state.
In Wisconsin 651,463 people applied for unemployment benefits between March 15 and June 13. Another 850,000 weekly claims were either rejected or are still pending. More than 15 percent of claims are still awaiting resolution.
Similar stories are playing out across the US, as understaffed state agencies relying on outmoded technology try to deal with record numbers of claims week after week.
Heidi Shierholz, director of policy at the Economic Policy Institute, told the New York Times, “It’s a sustained hemorrhaging of jobs unlike anything we’ve seen before.”
Martha Gimbel, Senior Manager of Economic Research at Schmidt Futures, told the Times , “What you’re seeing right now is economic scarring starting to happen.” She continued, “Layoffs that happened at the beginning of this likely were intended as temporary. But if you’re laying off people now, that’s probably a long-term business decision.”
The full impact of the recession has been mitigated to some degree by the expansion of unemployment benefits, including the $600 weekly federal supplement. But those payments are set to expire at the end of July and the Trump administration is opposed to their renewal. When those payments end, the economy could see a further jolt.
Facing the possibility of a tidal wave of home foreclosures next month, on Wednesday the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) announced it would extend foreclosure and eviction moratoriums through August 31. The decision affects borrowers with FHA single-family home mortgages. The current moratorium was set to expire on June 30.
Moratoriums on evictions have ended in a number of states, including Texas, where the courts ruled that landlords could start eviction proceedings May 26. One attorney who handles evictions told a local media outlet that the court dockets in Texas were “packed.” In many cases moves against tenants have been delayed due to the closure of courts where eviction hearings are held, but proceedings will likely begin later this month.
With lockdowns ended, new COVID-19 infections are rising in at least 20 states. Customers fearful of contracting the virus are staying away from restaurants and other businesses that have newly reopened.
According to a study by Jed Kolko, chief economist at the Indeed Hiring Lab, job postings were down 34 percent from 2019. Hiring for white-collar jobs, such as software development postings, were down 36.3 percent, and banking and financing job postings are down 51.3 percent.
Pay cuts are hitting many managerial and professional employees as companies seek to use the pandemic and the threat of layoffs to leverage cost-cutting. A similar process is likely to follow in manufacturing and other production-related jobs.
About 60 percent of workers at Northern Arizona University will take a pay cut starting July 1 to cover a budget shortfall. Scores of hospitals and healthcare providers have implemented pay reductions and pay freezes, the latest being Mass General Brigham, formerly Partners HealthCare, the largest healthcare provider in Massachusetts.
The persistence of unprecedented levels of new unemployment filings three months after the beginning of mass lockdowns points to a deeper systemic crisis of the capitalist system, for which the spread of COVID-19 was only the trigger. The response of all factions of the ruling elite has been to shovel unlimited amounts of cash into the financial markets while stoking up trade war and preparing for world war. Capitalism offers no progressive way out of this impasse. This fraught situation poses the necessity for the independent intervention of the working class based on a socialist and internationalist program.

A History of Prejudice: COVID-19 and Domestic Work in India

Akanksha Khullar

Domestic workers in India have historically struggled for visibility and formal recognition of their service category. While the challenges they face are long-standing, the COVID-19-related lockdown has brought these into sharper focus.
Ambiguous Guidelines
In the nearly two-month lockdown, anecdotal evidence reveals that many domestic workers have been abruptly dismissed, received pay cuts, have faced harassment or eviction from their rented accommodation due to inability to pay rent, and have subsequently lost their livelihood sustenance.
However, even with lockdown relaxations on physical movement now underway, many domestic workers continue to confront an uncertain future. This is largely because the lockdown guidelines issued by the central government did not clearly mention whether domestic workers could resume work, nor did they disallow it explicitly.
Admittedly, the government's focus—at both the central and state levels—is, as it ought to be, on containing the spread of the virus, and addressing the severity of a crisis that has been compounded by resource scarcity. They are not expected to outline all specificities, and in a federal structure such as India's, decision-making on secondary issues, in this, case domestic work, must be delegated. At the same time, it is important to acknowledge that it is precisely this lack of clarity that disproportionately disadvantages domestic workers. The guidance that anything not explicitly prohibited can be considered permissible leaves too much room for interpretation by local authorities to undertake their own measures.
As a result of the ambiguity, Residents Welfare Associations (RWAs) in several cities have been undertaking their own decisions regarding resumption of work for domestic workers. This pandemic is a unique situation, and once again, most of these RWAs are prioritising their own personal safety. They are acting within their right to interpret the guidelines as per their understanding. However, this is not to say that all their measures are reasonable, in keeping with governmental guidance, or uniform.
Some RWAs have imposed a ban on the entry of domestic workers into their localities even if all precautionary protocols are being followed. Others are allowing only those domestic workers travelling from green zones. In some cases, domestic workers are not allowed in unless they have downloaded the Aarogya Setu app on their phones, which fails to take cognisance of the fact that those currently not even making daily wages can ill-afford to purchase or own smart phones.
This then becomes a handover of responsibility, from the centre, to the states, and thereon to RWAs and individual employers.
A History of Prejudice
The vulnerability of domestic workers that has come to light during this lockdown in fact has a long history. This sector remains deeply steeped in a culture of servitude across South Asia, rather than employment of a contractual nature.
Most jobs that entail domestic work do not in practice involve formal employment contracts. This essentially leaves domestic workers outside the sphere of most regulatory frameworks of the sort that govern the organised sector. The 2008 Unorganised Workers Social Security Act which was intended to provide welfare and social security to unorganised workers has been found insufficient in terms of design, government implementation, and so on.
Currently, regulation is from the perspective of monitoring the domestic worker—such as police verification—and not necessarily to guarantee the worker his/her rights and protections. Some may be in possession of Aadhar Cards, but there is no clear data available on whether this is a significant number. A section of this workforce are migrants who moved from rural to urban areas in search of employment; some may be entirely undocumented. A majority live in rented premises without court registered leases, and thus lack valid residence proof, which is crucial for the issuance of almost every identity document, including ration cards.
Domestic work takes place in an unconventional setting, i.e. the household, unlike most other forms of labour market activities. Thus, the implementation of legalities that otherwise inform any kind of contractual employment poses an additional challenge. As a result, domestic workers often have to rely on the generosity of the employer. These circumstances can, directly or indirectly, make them vulnerable to poor working conditions, extended work hours, lack of job security, sexual or physical abuse, etc.
Another serious challenge for the promotion and protection of domestic worker rights is the historic economic devaluation of their work. Simply put, domestic work is not viewed as ‘real’ work. Instead, it is largely perceived as an extension of household chores that are not accounted for as contributors to a country’s economic growth.
Domestic workers have always been in a uniquely disadvantaged position in India, and South Asia. They continue to face hardships stemming not only from the informal nature of their employment, but the cultural prejudice towards this kind of work, and the subservience expected of those who undertake it. These issues predate COVID-19—the lockdown guidelines only served to exacerbate them, and bring them into greater focus. But, while there may be no villain in this specific case, there is a clear victim.

18 Jun 2020

GroundTruth Project Preserving Democracy & Voting Rights Fellowship 2020

Application Deadline: 22nd June 2020 at midnight PST. 

About the Award: Building upon previous coverage of voting rights and threats to democracy worldwide, we’re looking for story proposals that examine how these threats are unfolding at the local level, and how individuals, organizations and communities are responding.
Along with the original themes of the project, we’re also welcoming applications centered around the targeting of Black, Hispanic and Native communities in voter disenfranchisement efforts, along with voter mobilization campaigns in those same communities.
With support from the Jesse and Betsy Fink Charitable Fund, Solutions Journalism Network, MacArthur Foundation and Henry Luce Foundation, GroundTruth will offer fellowships in as many as 10 U.S. states and five countries with a focus on what America at large can learn. Given the realities of COVID-19, preference will be given to candidates who are already based in or near the communities they seek to cover, and safety will remain the highest priority throughout the fellowship, which consists of six nonconsecutive weeks between June and October.

Type: Fellowship

Eligible Field(s): Key themes of the project include but are not limited to:
  • The role of technology in the electoral process, or more broadly in the functioning of democratic society
  • The role of women in shaping electoral policy, shaping institutions and/or civil society 
  • The intersection of religion and democracy
  • The targeting of Black, Hispanic and Native communities in voter disenfranchisement efforts, along with voter mobilization campaigns in those same communities.
Eligibility: Reporting will be distributed widely through GroundTruth editorial partners like TIME, The Atlantic, FRONTLINE, The Washington Post, PBS NewsHour, PRI’s The World and USA Today. The fellowship is open to videographers, photographers, writers, audio reporters and data journalists. Experience covering voting rights, politics or threats to democracy is preferred. We particularly seek proposals that integrate compelling human stories with attempted solutions relevant to those stories (whether they have been proven effective or not).

Eligible Countries: Any

To be Taken at (Country): Candidate’s residential country

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award:  Candidates may apply with a partner or partners, and each fellow will receive a total of $5,000 — which will cover all travel expenses and a fee to the fellow.

How to Apply: To apply:
  1. Follow this link to the application on Submittable.
  2. Scroll to the bottom of this initial application page and register with Submittable.
  3. Follow the instructions from there.
  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.
Visit Award Webpage for Details