Three missions to Mars are now under way

Don Barrett

With yesterday’s launch of NASA’s Perseverance Mars rover, the three Mars missions being attempted in this year’s “window” of efficient access to the red planet are off successfully. Perseverance joins the Chinese Tianwen-1 orbiter/lander/rover mission, launched on July 23, and the United Arab Emirates/US Hope orbiter, launched July 19.

Mars presents favorable circumstances about every 26 months for missions from the Earth. This is the same interval as between “oppositions,” where the two planets reach their closest approaches, Mars in a near line outwards from the Sun to the Earth. Launch windows occur about two months before the close approaches, with travel time about 8.5 months before spacecraft reach Mars.

It has been 60 years since the first exploited launch window, in 1960, saw a pair of Soviet spacecraft sent on their way. Around 50 missions have used the 27 subsequent launch windows until the present one. Only in the last two decades have successes overtaken failures: more than half of attempts to reach Mars to date have failed.

Artist's impression of Perseverence on Mars. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

Prior to the spacecraft age, each Martian opposition was the source of intense Earth-based telescopic exploration. Even at these close approaches, however, Mars is 150 times the distance of our own Moon, and the features easily visible through a telescope on the Moon, its mountain chains and craters, were invisible from Earth-bound telescopes. As a result, much of what we now know about Mars is the product of the past 60 years of “up close” exploration with our robotic probes.

What was known within the first century after Galileo turned the telescope into an astronomer’s instrument was that Mars had bright white spots that appeared at its poles, correctly interpreted as icy polar caps (that the ice is substantially carbon dioxide would not be suspected until much later). While several wealthy amateurs in the late 19th century would begin several decades of feverish promotion of the idea that Mars had a system of “canals,” supposedly visible through the telescope and representing signs of a civilization, sober scientists deployed new technologies as they became available and, laboring largely in public obscurity, laid the groundwork for the Mars science of today.

Thus by the turn of the 20th century the astronomical spectroscope suggested a closer similarity of Mars to the Moon rather than the Earth, 1920s measurements of radiated heat showed very cold (-85C–7C) surface temperatures, and 1930s measurements showed that oxygen, if present, could not be more than one percent of Earth levels. An early 1970s measurement from a high-flying plane, above most of Earth’s atmosphere, also recorded the signature of chemically-bound water on the Martian surface, suggesting a different and wetter past.

Part of Jezero Crater with apparent ancient river delta. Perseverence landing site is within the flat area at bottom right. Imagery from Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS/JHU-APL

Only with the first successful Mars spacecraft, the July 1965 flyby of Mariner 4, was the heavily cratered surface of Mars revealed, and the entire surface was finally mapped by Mars’ first successful orbiter, Mariner 9, in 1971.

Generations of spacecraft since have derived their design from scientific questions raised by the results of prior missions, together with the immense growth of technology over the last half century.

The first missions largely carried out basic mapping, using crude television technology, and measurements of the Martian atmosphere and surface conditions over the considerable vertical relief of the planet. With the two Viking landers of 1976, the first detailed images of the Martian surface were returned, and chemical measurements of the Martian soil were made, including a crude attempt to detect a signature of possible life.

More than five launch windows passed without a mission until attempts resumed in 1988. The thrust of the following decade was to prepare far more detailed studies of the surface from orbit, and to begin testing new technology for landers on the surface, including roving capability.

In the last twenty years, both of these areas have been revolutionized, with stunning imagery from orbit suggesting a rich geological history, including wind- and water-shaped terrain, and from an increasingly sophisticated series of roving explorers on the surface, filling in the details of this picture from geological exploration of rocks and exposed cliff faces from meteoritic impacts.

Artist's impression of Tianwen-1 lander with rover about to debark.

With the geology now firmly in hand, confirming that Mars had for some sustained early part of its history a warmer surface with flowing water—conditions with parallels to those that spawned life on our own planet—more recent missions have focused on addressing the extraordinary question raised by that parallel.

Of the three missions on their way (a fourth European mission which was to have joined them has been deferred until the next launch window in 2022), the first launched is a relatively modest mission jointly undertaken by the United Arab Emirates in collaboration with three American universities, the University of California, Berkeley, the University of Colorado, Boulder and Arizona State University.

The “Hope” orbiter, launched from a Japanese H-IIA rocket in Tanegashima, Japan, has been described as Mars’ “first true weather satellite,” though it is adapted toward the very different variations displayed by the Martian atmosphere as compared to Earth’s. In particular, it carries scientific instruments which can study the process by which Mars loses atmosphere to space, a process which, thanks to Mars’ lower gravity and lack of a substantial magnetic field, is much more rapid than Earth’s loss, and also thought to be more complex.

A better understanding of this process will likely give a better understanding of the evolution of Mars’ geology and how long conditions compatible with the genesis of life were sustained.

The second mission launched, China’s Tianwen-1 (“heavenly questions”), is China’s first independent interplanetary mission. It will both build an independent Chinese orbital capability to study the surface and relay radio communications from it, as well as land a rover modeled to some extent on, but with more contemporary technology than, the twin US Mars Exploration Rovers (MER) Spirit and Opportunity of 2003.

Unlike those missions, which did not include an orbiter component, Tianwen-1 will not proceed directly to a landing, but rather enter orbit and begin studies to select from several preliminary sites, and only then will the lander separate and make its way to the surface. Like the MER rovers, this one will use a combination of atmospheric braking, a large parachute, retrorockets, and finally a set of airbags to cushion its impact on the Martian surface. A likely landing site will be near the Viking 2 landing of 1976, Utopia Planitia, a low-elevation area thought to be reshaped by mud flows in the Martian watery past, where biosignatures may still survive from possible past life.

The most ambitious mission of this group is the US “Perseverance” rover, at $2.1 billion somewhat cheaper than its predecessor Mars Science Laboratory “Curiosity,” only because its instrumentation is built upon a framework consisting of many spare parts from that former mission. Like its predecessor, it relies on nuclear power rather than solar, and will thus be immune to the dust storms and seasonal variations that played havoc with prior rover missions.

As an aside, much is being made in the American press of this second nuclear Mars mission being powered by “US-made” plutonium-238, production of which recently began again for the first time since 1988. But in fact, most of the plutonium onboard originates in the declining NASA reserve bought from Russia prior to it suspending sales in 2010, with American production still at low levels.

Past and future landing sites for Mars missions. Credit: Wikipedia

With 23 cameras and a wide suite of scientific instruments, Perseverance will be the most capable Mars rover to date in the capacity to undertake a broad study of Martian minerology, and in particular the study of organic or carbon-containing molecules that may indicate both the signature of past life and the tracers that conditions fertile to its formation were once present.

A key driver of the design of Perseverance’s instruments has been to assess the inventory and environment of life-associated elements in the geology it will explore. Like its predecessor Curiosity, it can make observations at a distance by using a laser to vaporize a bit of rock the size of a period from more than 20 feet away, studying the light emitted in the flash to determine the composition and properties of the material. But it also has, for the first time on a rover, a device called a Raman spectrometer that can analyze the minerology and organic chemistry of individual grains on a rock reachable to the rover’s robotic arm.

Perseverance will carry two other novelties: first, a small solar-powered helicopter, that can travel up to 2,000 feet per flight and image the possible driving route, and secondly, a ground-penetrating radar (a first also shared by the Tianwen-1 rover), to study what no lander yet has in detail, the depths beneath the Martian surface. Perseverance will also test from the Martian surface a technology to manufacture oxygen from the largely carbon dioxide atmosphere, a necessity for future hopes at human exploration or even for more efficient fueling of Mars return rockets from supplies generated locally, rather than brought from Earth.

And towards that end, Perseverance is also equipped to encapsulate up to 30 samples it retrieves from the surface, or cores it drills from the soil, and deposit them in caches along its route where a future mission might gather them and ship them to Earth. There, laboratories far more sophisticated than what can be packed in a Martian rover could mine them for clues. It is hoped that this may happen within a decade: the technology is not the limiting factor, as with most fundamental questions today, it’s access to funding.

Perseverance will rely on the same “sky hook” concept for landing as Curiosity, the “seven minutes of terror” necessary for landing heavier items, in which a highly choreographed sequence takes place including the use of a parachute, and ending with the deployment of a hovering rocket platform from which the rover is literally winched to the surface on a cable and freed in the final seconds. This will take place directly on the arrival of Perseverance at Mars, its landing site already selected. That site, Jezero Crater, is another area which orbital imagery suggests was once a river delta into a shallow sea, fertile grounds for microbial life or more.

While Mars is much smaller than the Earth, its surface is only a little smaller than the total area of Earth’s dry land, so only a tiny range of the diversity of the Martian surface has been reached from the ground. Both of these rovers and the European one to hopefully join them at the next launch window, together with the Chinese and Emirati orbiters, the suite of robotic explorers still at work in Martian orbit and the surface, will continue to tease out the detailed history of the red planet. From their results, and in particular from the questions raised by these, the next generations of exploration will be defined, first robotic, and eventually—human.

New Zealand suspends extradition treaty with Hong Kong

John Braddock

New Zealand’s Labour Party-led government has suspended the country’s extradition treaty with Hong Kong, saying it could no longer trust that the city’s justice system is independent of China. New Zealand will no longer deport any citizen to Hong Kong if charged with a crime.

Foreign Minister Winston Peters, who leads the right-wing nationalist NZ First Party in the governing coalition, said New Zealand would also change how it controls the trade of sensitive goods—such as technology that could have military applications—with Hong Kong.

Australia, Canada and the UK—all members of the US-led Five Eyes intelligence-gathering network along with NZ—had suspended their extradition treaties with Hong Kong earlier this month. US President Trump ended preferential economic treatment for Hong Kong and in a highly provocative move shut down China’s consulate in Houston.

Peters told Radio NZ on July 29 that he had not spoken to US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo specifically about the issue, but “he would know exactly what we think, as a country that respects New Zealand’s independent political stance and our willingness to state what our beliefs are.”

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern told media that Hong Kong’s security legislation did not “sit well with New Zealand’s principles,” which she described as the “basic freedom of association and the right to take a political view.”

All this is sheer hypocrisy. The Ardern-led government has strengthened New Zealand’s integration into US war preparations since assuming office. A 2018 defence policy statement labelled China and Russia the main “threats” to the global order, echoing the Pentagon. It has also ramped up military spending and recruitment.

Ardern meanwhile has been leading the call internationally for measures to censor the internet, purportedly to suppress “hate speech.” Nor has the Labour government raised the slightest protest over the Trump administration’s assault on basic democratic rights in Portland and other US cities, which are under virtual martial law enforced by armed federal agents dispatched to suppress protests against police violence.

China’s embassy in Wellington responded to Peters’ announcement by charging the government with a “gross interference in China’s internal affairs,” and describing the move as a “serious violation of international law and basic norms governing international relations.”

The standoff follows rising diplomatic tensions between the two countries, in line with the increasingly aggressive moves by Washington and Canberra to confront China diplomatically and militarily, including in the South China Sea.

At the annual NZ-China Business Summit in Auckland on July 20, Ardern told the 500 delegates that the bilateral relationship was in “good shape.” But she then declared that New Zealand had a “direct and resounding interest” in Hong Kong’s new security law, as well as the situation of China’s Uyghur people and Taiwan’s participation in the World Health Organisation.

This prompted a sharp response from Ambassador Wu Xi, who told the gathering: “Issues related to Taiwan, Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Tibet all touch on China’s sovereignty and security and these are all China’s internal affairs.”

New Zealand’s ruling elite is caught between the demands of Washington and its militaristic confrontation with Beijing on the one hand, and the importance of the Chinese trading relationship, NZ’s largest export market. Referring to these tensions, Wu warned “the future lies in cooperation rather than confrontation.”

Underpinning the deepening rift, a long-running anti-Chinese propaganda campaign continues to gather momentum. A July 21 car crash on a highway near the town of Tokoroa that killed two Chinese dissidents was seized upon by their supporters to raise accusations of “sabotage” against Beijing, without the slightest evidence.

The collision killed Xi Weiguo, Federation of Chinese Democracy NZ chair and Wang Lecheng, a member of the Independent Chinese PEN Centre. A third victim, Yu Hongming, is in Waikato Hospital along with two New Zealanders from another car. The three men were among a group of 10 “activists” travelling to Wellington to petition parliament over so-called “infiltration” by the Chinese Communist Party in New Zealand politics.

Police said their initial assessment indicated that a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction had crossed the centre line, glanced a second car and collided head-on with the vehicle containing the Chinese occupants.

Chen Weijian, publisher of a Chinese-language newspaper Beijing Spring, called the men “martyrs of democracy and freedom,” while Falun Gong practitioner Daisy Lee said the deaths and injuries would cause “vital damage for the Chinese democracy movement organisations in overseas China.”

Pro-US academic Anne-Marie Brady, from the University of Canterbury (UC), wasted no time upping the ante. She told parliament’s Justice Select Committee two days later that people were “very, very worried that there could have been sabotage involved in the accident” and demanded the Security Intelligence Security (SIS) investigate.

Brady’s previous allegations, heavily promoted in the media, that Chinese agents “sabotaged” her own car and broke into her office have not been substantiated by police.

Security analyst and former US State Department operative Paul Buchanan also joined in. He told Radio NZ that “independent Chinese voices in NZ regularly experienced intimidation by pro-Beijing groups”, and it was legitimate for them to suspect “more sinister causes than a mere accident.”

On July 27, Buchanan went on to target UC over its partnership with a Chinese institute that he claims has military links. In 2018, the university signed an agreement with Harbin Institute of Technology to collaborate on teaching and research on renewable energy generation, marine science, engineering and international finance and trade. In May, Washington targeted Harbin for tighter “controls” over its activities.

Brady recently published a paper attacking UC and every other New Zealand university for collaborating with Chinese institutions on research that “may have potential military applications.” The same paper notes approvingly New Zealand’s much more extensive military collaboration with NATO and the US, including its membership in the Five Eyes intelligence network.

Prior to the 2017 election, Brady branded National Party MP Jian Yang and Labour MP Raymond Huo, without any evidence, as Chinese Communist Party “agents.” Both MPs recently announced that they will retire from politics after the September 2020 election, following an intense campaign particularly against Yang by Brady, NZ First, much of the corporate media, the trade union-backed Daily Blog and the fascist group Action Zealandia.

In fact, the influence wielded by individuals such as Brady and Buchanan points to the fact that the most significant “interference” in New Zealand politics comes not from China but from the US and its allies. Ardern’s government was formed in 2017 as a coalition with NZ First following the unprecedented intervention of US Ambassador Scott Brown who publicly indicated that Washington wanted the next government to take a firmer stand against China.

Australian COVID-19 surge continues as epidemiologists urge stricter lockdown

Patrick O’Connor

Australian health authorities reported more high coronavirus figures, following yesterday’s record number of daily cases.

In Victoria, there were another 627 new cases, following the pandemic-high 723 infections yesterday. The state today surpassed 10,000 total infections. Community transmission is increasing in regional areas, where there are a total of 255 cases, with 159 of these in and around the regional city of Geelong.

Eight more deaths were reported, with half of these from aged care facilities. The protracted underfunding and neglect of Australia’s privatised aged care system has produced a disaster. There are 928 active cases in Victoria’s aged care homes, and according to the Guardian, all but five of these are in for-profit facilities.

Daily and cumulative COVID-19 cases (Credit: Australian government, Department of Health)

There is still no government plan to evacuate all residents from infected sites. Epping Gardens Aged Care Facility in Melbourne’s north is among the worst affected, with 90 infections; one of the deceased residents was photographed by the media being removed while appearing to be wrapped up in a roll of carpet. Doctors and health sources reportedly told the Australian that several residents were left dead in their beds for hours on end this week.

In New South Wales, 21 new cases were reported today, two from quarantined return overseas travellers and one person who came from Victoria. The other 18 cases were locally transmitted, six from the wealthy inner-Sydney suburb of Potts Point, some of the others from working-class suburbs Bankstown and Wetherill Park.

There was one new case announced today in Queensland, bringing the state total to 11 active cases.

The surge in infections in Victoria has overwhelmed the limited contact tracing infrastructure developed by the state Labor government. The number of cases classified as “under investigation” totals more than 3,500. During the initial wave of infections this number was never higher than 70 cases.

A sharp divergence has emerged between government policy and a growing consensus from epidemiologists and medical scientists that more stringent lockdown measures are required.

In April, the federal Liberal-National government of Prime Minister Scott Morrison and every state government, Labor and Liberal, jointly rejected a strategy aimed at eliminating coronavirus infections. Morrison bluntly acknowledged that the key consideration was to reduce the impact on businesses. In May, limited restrictions on economic activity that had been in place were lifted. As a consequence, in June and July coronavirus infections surged beyond the peak levels of the first wave.

State and federal leaders nevertheless remain adamant that there will be no imposition of measures adversely affecting corporations, such as school closures and the shutdown of non-essential industries. The Australian ruling elite has chosen to protect profits over lives.

Increasing numbers of epidemiologists and medical experts are speaking out in protest.

The Australian Medical Association (AMA) has urged more stringent lockdown measures. “Pharmacies, supermarkets, medical facilities, they clearly remain essential and it’s extremely important they remain open,” AMA President Tony Bartone said. “After that we really need to produce a very strong, clear reason why we should be having any activity in that sector. We need to move to the next level.”

Tony Blakely, head of the University of Melbourne’s Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, was lead author of a report published in the Medical Journal of Australia that modelled the likely impact of different lockdown measures. He concluded that there was a 50 percent chance of eliminating coronavirus infections in Victoria within six weeks, if stringent restrictions were imposed.

The report recommendations included, “close all schools,” “tighten the definition of essential shops to remain open […] department stores, hardware stores, and such like should be closed,” and “tighten the definition of essential workers and work.”

Blakely told the ABC: “If you’ve got ‘essential’ industries open that aren’t really that essential, it’s quite likely that in two weeks’ time that may be where the virus is propagating. So I would recommend at this point in time that industries that aren’t really essential, footwear stores, that type of thing, are closed so we’re moving to a tighter definition of what is an essential worker or essential workplace. That would see the department stores that sell shoes, clothes, construction sites closed; it would only allow industries open that are essential to us. So that’s food, healthcare, pharmacists and the aged care facilities.”

The government has flatly refused such measures. Morrison has repeatedly insisted that everyone who has a job is an “essential worker.”

Victorian authorities reported earlier this month that 80 percent of all infections are occurring in workplaces. Among the worst affected are the Bertocchi Smallgoods meatworks in Thomastown (121 cases), Somerville Meats in Tottenham (106 cases), and the Woolworths warehouse in Mulgrave (30 cases).

A new cluster emerged today at a major construction site in Melbourne’s central business district. Twelve workers at the Multiplex Premier Apartments site on Spencer Street have reportedly tested positive, and the site has been temporarily closed for cleaning.

James Trauer, head of Monash University’s Epidemiological Modelling Unit, wrote a comment for policyforum.net titled, “Australia’s pandemic policy made a second wave inevitable.”

He explained: “When looking to the Melbourne-centred second wave of coronavirus infections, Australians should only really be surprised that outbreaks of the same scale haven’t occurred elsewhere in the country. Given the government’s response to the pandemic, this was equally foreseeable just a few weeks ago. The fundamental problem with Australia’s COVID-19 response has been that its stated goal was to achieve suppression, but it failed to put in place an approach that recognised the realities of this strategy.”

Bill Bowtell, University of New South Wales adjunct professor, has also condemned government policy. On Twitter today he stated: “What is happening in Victoria is the regrettably entirely foreseeable outcome of flawed strategies set down in March evidently acting on ‘expert medical advice’ at all stages. This advice is secret but clearly did not demand governments secure quarantine, strengthen aged care facilities, mandate masks coming out of first lockdown or communicate properly with the people. This advice rejected NZ elimination objective in favour of ‘living with COVID-19.’ Today’s crisis is what we created on the basis of poor decisions.”

Consol cuts 233 jobs as US coal production falls to 1973 levels

Samuel Davidson

Two hundred and thirty-three coal miners in southwestern Pennsylvania will be permanently laid off at the end of next month, joining the growing number of layoffs throughout the industry as demand for electricity and steel continue to decline.

The miners, who work at the Consol Energy Inc.’s Enlow Fork mine, had been on temporary layoff since April 15, when the company closed their mine due to the economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Enlow Fork is one of three mines that make up Consol’s Pennsylvania Mining Complex. The company can operate as many as 11 long wall machines throughout the three mines and production is the company’s number one concern. Long wall mining is a technique in which a massive machine mines coal along the entire face of the section, often 1,500 feet long, with the coal pulled off on conveyor systems while the mountain collapses behind as the machine moves forward.

Earlier this month, Consol sent WARN (Worker Adjustment and Retaining Notification) notices to the miners, who comprise about 40 percent of the workforce, informing them that they will be permanently laid off August 31. Both federal and state law requires companies with greater than 100 employees to give 60-days notice of closings or layoffs of more than 50 people.

In announcing the layoffs at the Enlow Fork mine, Consol said in a prepared statement:

“In these unprecedented times, it is extremely difficult to predict when our production at Enlow Fork Mine will return to normal capacity, as it is always our intent to run our operations based on market conditions.”

“We all knew it was coming, coal is on the way out, but it doesn’t make it any easier,” said the wife of a miner who has worked there for nearly 20 years.

“Things are going to be real hard. He gets unemployment and of course that $600 [in weekly federal unemployment benefits] so we can get by.” However, this temporary boost to unemployment is being allowed to expire by both Democrats and Republicans in order to force people back to work. “We own our house, but with mortgage, taxes and bills it is going to be very hard. One of our kids is grown, but the other is still in High School. We don’t know if that is going to open or not.

“We don’t know what is going to happen with unemployment and health care. There are no jobs. I work in the checkout line at the Giant Eagle [grocery store], but that is not very much.

“All the politicians promise a lot, but they don’t keep their promises.”

Consol had been operating at near capacity for the last four years producing record amounts of coal in 2017, 2018 and 2019. This is in spite of falling demand caused by power companies switching to cheaper natural gas and renewable energy sources, which had already driven less profitable coal mining operations into bankruptcy. Last year, US coal production fell to the same levels as in 1978, when coal miners battled the coal operators and government in a 110-day national strike.

Many Consol miners believed that the company was only trying to get as much money out of the mine as it could before shutting it down. One coal miner at another mine at the Pennsylvania Mining Complex told the World Socialist Web Site last year that this speedup was creating the conditions for a major accident: “It is all production, production, production but they are creating the conditions where something can happen.”

Later that year, 25-year-old Tanner Lee McFarland was killed when the wall of the mine gave out and crushed him. The company only received token fines.

This year, coal production is set for a further drastic decline. April coal production plunged 30 percent from last year to its lowest levels in nearly a half-century, 19 percent less than in April of 1973.

Murray Energy, the largest underground miner in the country, with 7,000 miners, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy last year. Last month the company laid off over 1,500 coal miners in the Ohio Valley region of West Virginia for one day as the workers were transferred from one company to another. With the company still in bankruptcy, more layoffs are possible.

Tennessee-based Contura Energy, which has already laid off many of its coal miners throughout West Virginia, announced plans to sell its Cumberland mine. The southwestern Pennsylvania mine employs 700 miners, whose jobs are now threatened. The company also announced that it will no longer build a $60 million coal-refuse impoundment for the mine.

The Powder River Basin of Wyoming and Montana, the largest coal producing region in the United States, has also seen job cuts. Arch Coal has cut more than 560 jobs after posting a net loss of $49.3 million for the second quarter. Production at its Black Thunder and Coal Creek mines fell to just 10.6 million tons this quarter, down from 17.1 million last year.

Coal miners responded to the downturn last year with a growing wave of resistance. Miners at several sites blockaded shipments out of the mines to demand thousands of dollars in unpaid wages. These protests began over the summer at Blackjewel’s Cloverfield Mine in Harlan County, Kentucky, and quickly spread to other facilities throughout the region.

Last fall, 2,000 copper miners in the American Southwest launched a strike against mining company Asarco. The strike lasted for nine months before being betrayed by the United Steelworkers, who sent strikers back under an “unconditional offer” to the company to return to work.

The United Mine Workers (UMWA) has no policy to fight these layoffs and protect miners’ jobs and wellbeing. After decades in which it has deliberately isolated and betrayed one struggle after another, the union is only a shell with fewer than 8,000 active miners, functioning only as a political prop for the Democratic Party. The bankrupt Murray Energy is the last remaining large unionized coal company.

Salaries for top union officials, however, remain at historic highs. Union president Cecil Roberts made more than $200,000 in 2015.

Trump administration suspends DACA applications and renewals

Sam Dalton

On Tuesday, July 28, Chad Wolf, the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), announced a new round of attacks on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. He declared the agency would not accept new applications and would only grant one-year extensions to the current recipients on a case-by-case basis. Some 66,000 children and young people who would have been eligible to apply this year are now facing deportation.

Wolf said the program “presents serious policy concerns that warrants its full rescission” (i.e., its complete destruction), a step that requires “additional careful consideration.” Wolf went on to absurdly frame the vicious attacks as a cautious move while the DHS considers its next steps. In reality, the DHS is only postponing mass deportations of tens of thousands of young people, most of whom have lived nearly their entire lives in the United States, until after the November 3 election.

Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf speaks with the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security regarding the FY21 budget. (Credit: DHS/Tara A. Molle)

Instituted through an executive order by Barack Obama at the end of his first term in 2012, the DACA program offered limited rights to around 700,000 undocumented immigrants who were brought to the US as children. In order to qualify, immigrants must have been under 16 at the time of arrival, have lived in the US for the previous five years, have been enrolled in or graduated from high school or served in the military, and not have committed any serious crimes.

The program provides eligible youth a temporary immigration status that protects them from deportation and gives them the right to hold a job or go to college. Depending on the state they live in, DACA recipients could be eligible for drivers’ licenses, pay tuition rates charged to in-state residents, and receive state-funded educational grants and loans, as well as state-subsidized health insurance. Once obtained, DACA status has to be renewed every two years.

At its inception in 2012, the program was cynically conceived as a vote-catching device for the Obama re-election campaign, giving a pro-immigrant veneer to a reactionary Democratic administration that had accelerated anti-immigrant policies, as Obama deported more undocumented immigrants than any previous president. Significantly, DACA offered no pathway to citizenship and meant that the 700,000 youth who registered with the federal government were at the mercy of the capitalist state. Under the impression they were forging themselves a future in the US, the recipients of DACA status had to supply the government with their address, employment status, and other basic information, to be used against them when a new administration took office.

After initially declaring support for the program in early 2017, President Trump sought to use DACA as a bargaining chip in his wrangling with the Democrats over funding for the border wall and other attacks on immigrants and refugees. In September 2017 he rescinded Obama’s executive order, but immigrant rights groups filed suit, claiming, among other things, that the DHS had violated federal administrative procedures in its haste to put DACA recipients in jeopardy.

Currently 450,000, or 2 percent, of students in the US are undocumented, and around half of those are eligible for DACA. Without these protections, many students might be deported before they finish their studies. It is also estimated that around 15,000 educators in the country are able to work on account of their DACA status.

During the pandemic many undocumented students and workers, including applicants and previous recipients of DACA status, have been illegible for government relief. The latest coronavirus relief package proposal unveiled by Senate Republicans on Monday will continue to exclude undocumented students from aid.

The administration’s latest move against DACA also leaves many immigrants fearing separation from their families. Many of those who are currently on the DACA program have children or partners who are citizens, and without a renewal of their status they face the prospect of being forcefully stripped away from their loved ones.

The latest attack comes little over a month after a Supreme Court ruling nominally protected DACA from the administration’s attacks. In June, the Supreme Court blocked the DHS’s plan to “immediately end” DACA in a 5-4 majority opinion. However, the majority opinion, authored by conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, despite describing the DHS’s plan as “arbitrary and capricious,” rejected the move primarily on the basis of administrative mishandling. This meant that the Trump administration could revisit the issue and make a new attack on DACA as long as it followed the proper procedures.

At that time the WSWS warned:

“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.”

With the Supreme Court’s limited administrative ruling opening the door for the fascistic Trump administration to ramp up its attacks, the DHS has wasted little time. Despite the fact that the ruling should have compelled a return to running the program as it had been in early 2017, the Los Angeles Times reported the government continued to reject applications in the days immediately following the decision. Since July 22, nearly a week before Wolf’s announcement, the DACA website declared that the program “is not accepting requests from individuals who have never before been granted deferred action under DACA.”

Under the cover of the COVID-19 pandemic and with the crucial support of the Democratic Party and US legal system, the Trump administration continues its unrelenting assault on immigrants’ rights in the US. Since the beginning of the pandemic, the Trump administration attempted to deport international students who were unable to attend in-person classes this fall, suspended applications for H1B work visas and Green Cards, a Supreme Court ruling that left asylum seekers with no right to habeas corpus or due process, and continued attacks on Chinese students.

The right of all immigrants regardless of the circumstance of their birth to full citizenship in any country, including full rights to education and work, must be defended. DACA recipients should not only have their status protected but should be given full citizenship rights immediately.

At least 735 COVID-19 deaths confirmed in US prison system

Sam Dalton

As of July 28, throughout the US incarceration system, including all federal and state-run prisons and jails, at least 735 inmates have died from COVID-19 and there have been over 82,000 confirmed cases. On any day in the US, there are estimated to be 2.3 million incarcerated individuals.

Approximately 12,000 cases were added in the last week alone, a 16 percent increase from the total on July 21. This is nearly double the worst week during the April peak of the virus and an increase of nearly 10,000 compared to the week of June 16.

The exponential growth of the infection and death-rates in prisons is intimately tied to COVID-19’s spread in the wider community. The states which have experienced the deadliest resurgences following deadly economic reopening overseen by Republican and Democratic governors have seen the highest number of deaths and infections in their prisons and jails.

In the last three days alone, as the state passed 450,000 infections overall, 10 inmates in Florida prisons died from COVID-19, bringing the state’s total to 46 prisoner deaths. At the Columbia Correctional Institute in Lake City at least three men have died. The Florida Department of Corrections refused to publicly recognize any inmate deaths before a local medical examiner leaked them to the News Service of Florida. Cynthia Cooper, whose husband is incarcerated at the facility, told the Tampa Bay Times, “I never thought I’d see the day when I was afraid of something more than him just being in prison. But it’s come to that.”

The accelerating crisis in the state is a product of the criminal response of state authorities to the virus. Despite a population of over 96,000 inmates, statewide only 43,272 COVID-19 tests have been administered since the beginning of the pandemic. Furthermore, health and prison experts’ recommendation that all non-violent and at-risk criminals be immediately released has been ignored. On April 2, Republican Governor and Trump acolyte Ron DeSantis responded to desperate pleas to reduce the prison population to slow the virus’ spread, stating, “I don’t see how in a time of pandemic, where people are on edge already, [that] releasing felons in society would make a whole lot of sense.”

The reluctance is undoubtedly tied to the profitability of Florida’s prison labor. Every year, 3,500 inmates in the state perform unpaid work, logging 17.7 million hours in the last five years and generating around $450 million in value according to the Florida Times-Union. This does not take into account the state’s thousands-strong share of the US’s “paid” prison workers who typically earn between $0.14 and $1.50 an hour.

In California, where there have now been over 475,000 confirmed coronavirus infections, prisons have also seen an intensifying death rate. The California Institute for Men in Chino has 1,047 confirmed cases and 19 deaths. While at the infamous San Quentin prison, at least 19 inmates have died from the virus, including 10 who were on death row. Despite Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom’s March 2019 moratorium on executions, the state has allowed the virus to do its dirty work.

In response to the outbreak at the prison, the state has converted a building at the prison into a 110-bed alternative care site. An external vendor has also been hired to give the prison a one-time deep clean. This is too little, too late. Of the prison’s 3,800 inmates, 2,185 have tested positive for the virus.

The hardest hit section of the prison system in the country is in Texas, which has seen over 100 deaths at just state-run facilities. The state now has over 400,000 confirmed cases, and in recent days revised its death count up 12 percent after changing its reporting. The federal prison at Fort Worth has also seen 12 deaths. State authorities continue to refuse to release more specific data on the numbers of deaths and infections at individual facilities.

Ohio, which now has at least 88,000 cases, is home to the Pickaway Correctional Institute, where 36 inmates have died from the virus. Also in the state, Marion Correction Institute has seen 13 deaths. Two other prisons in the state, Belmont Correctional Institute and Franklin Medical Center, have had over 10 deaths each. The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)-run Elkton Correction Institute, has also had 10 deaths. These deaths mostly occurred during the April/May peak. With the virus again surging in the state and daily cases now exceeding their April peak, a second spike in Ohio prison deaths is on the horizon.

Although the information coming out of prisons is often sparse due to heightened restrictions on visitation and phone access nationwide, it is clear that prisoners are beginning to fight back. On July 23, prisoners at the Whetstone Unit in Tucson, Arizona, staged a walkout following the spread of COVID-19 in the facility. At the Tucson facility, over 100 inmates have tested positive for the virus. Cases in the state surpassed 168,000 on Thursday.

In the past week, BOP facilities passed the grim milestone of 100 deaths. The federal prison system had over 129,000 inmates before the pandemic. Despite an order from Attorney General William Barr for the mass release of federal prisoners, the BOP has released just 7,000 inmates since the beginning of the pandemic. Similarly, well-publicized executive orders for prison releases from both Democratic and Republican governors have not resulted in necessary releases.

There are many reasons to believe the current figures are a huge underestimate of the actual toll of the virus. In one recorded incidence, a prison staff member died from COVID-related symptoms but was only tested post-mortem. Despite the positive result the death was not classified as a COVID-19 death. Across all facilities in the US, at least 59 prison staff have died from the virus.

There also seem to be huge statistical anomalies when states’ prison death-rates are compared. It remains unclear how, for example, the gulf between the death rates of New York and New Jersey is so large. These two adjacent states were among the hardest hit during the April/May peak, and while New Jersey has a death rate of 27 per 10,000 inmates, New York has just four per 10,000. This came despite Rikers Island Jail in New York City having the highest rate of infection for any defined population worldwide during April. Other states that were hit hard during the same period have death rates comparable to New Jersey; for example, Ohio and Michigan both have 18 deaths per 10,000 inmates.

The unabated spread of the virus in prisons is a violation of inmates’ basic rights to quality medical care and freedom from cruel and unusual punishment. The vast majority of those incarcerated are non-violent and should never have seen the inside of a prison cell. Nonetheless, they now face a death sentence. The failure to take basic measures to fight against the virus in prisons has also allowed them to become vectors for the disease’s spread, leading to an incalculable acceleration and expansion of community transmission throughout the US.

These deaths have no innocent explanation. They are a product of the ruling class’ conscious subordination of human life to the profit system. In the case of prisons, the need for the continued incarceration of prison laborers, the use of prisons as a deterrent to keep the working class in check, and the deliberate decision to not provide adequate resources to combat the virus in prisons—as in the country at large—has led to otherwise preventable deaths. Without immediate emergency measures, thousands more lives both in and outside of prisons will be lost.

Report backing Johnson’s ending UK lockdown concludes: More “deaths and misery” are inevitable

Robert Stevens

Figures were released yesterday by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) showing that England had the “the highest levels of excess mortality in Europe” from January 3 (Week 1) to June 12 (Week 24) of the pandemic.

The ONS analysed all-cause mortality patterns during the first half of 2020 for 29 European countries. It found that although Spain and Italy had the highest “peaks” at one singular point, England endured the longest continuous period of excess deaths. The three countries with the highest cumulative excess mortality after England were Spain, Scotland, and Belgium.

The response from Prime Minister Boris Johnson speaking to the press in Northallerton, North Yorkshire, was to claim that his government had achieved a “massive success” in reducing the number of deaths. Even as he acknowledged a surge of cases in UK, which he described as coronavirus “bubbling up” in up to 30 areas across the UK, he boasted that “we’ve got it under a measure of control. The number of deaths are well, well down. But I have to tell you that we’re looking at a resurgence of the virus in some other European countries. You can see what’s been happening in the United States.”

Johnson wants everyone to look at what is happening everywhere but the UK, and to forget what happened over the past six months.

Behind his stonewalling are definite economic calculations. Mentioning the danger of a second wave, Johnson said this would have “real, real consequences, not just medical, but also for the economy. …”

The naked commercial concerns animating Johnson’s response to the pandemic are underscored by a document published Wednesday by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR). The NIESR is funded by “government departments and agencies, the research councils, particularly the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), charitable foundations, the European Commission, and the private sector.”

The report "Living with covid-19: balancing costs against benefits in the face of the virus" by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research

“Living with covid-19: balancing costs against benefits in the face of the virus,” is published in the August edition of the National Institute Economic Review. It is authored by David Miles, a professor of financial economics at Imperial College Business School, a member, between May 2009 and September 2015, of the Monetary Policy Committee at the Bank of England and Chief UK Economist at Morgan Stanley from October 2004 to May 2009; Mike Stedman, of the RES Consortium; and Adrian Heald of the University of Manchester’s School of Medicine.

RES Consortium describes itself as a “Performance improvement organisation working in partnership with industry and the NHS [National Health Service].” Stedman was previously a “supply chain director for large FMCG [Fast-moving consumer goods] company working across Europe. Focus on real world data modelling, online systems, commissioning systems, online care pathways and business frameworks.” His CV notes 16 years at the Unilever conglomerate (revenue in 2019 nearly $52 billion), including being supply chain director at Unilever Turkey.

The study outlines the economic rationale for the Tory government’s ongoing policy of herd immunity—i.e., doing nothing to seriously combat the spread of the coronavirus.

The report addresses the March 23 lockdown, which Johnson was reluctantly forced to impose due to a massive public backlash at the escalating spread of the virus in Europe and the UK. Just days before the lockdown, leading epidemiologists, including Professor Neil Ferguson, warned that if a lockdown wasn’t put in place “in the order of 250,000 deaths” could take place in Britain, with up 500,000 deaths a possibility.

The paper’s preamble states bluntly, “This paper analyses the costs and benefits of lockdown policies in the face of COVID-19. What matters for people is the quality and length of lives and one should measure costs and benefits in terms of those things.”

With the Tory government already ditching the lockdown, “the paper considers policy options for the degree to which restrictions are eased.” It declares, “There is a need to normalise how we view COVID because its costs and risks are comparable to other health problems (such as cancer, heart problems, diabetes) where governments have made resource decisions for decades. The lockdown is a public health policy and we have valued its impact using the tools that guide health care decisions in the UK public health system.”

This section concludes, “The evidence suggests that the costs of continuing severe restrictions in the UK are large relative to likely benefits so that a substantial easing in general restrictions in favour of more targeted measures is warranted.”

Every mention of the lockdown in the report in accompanied by a statement about its grave economic costs in order to insist that there must never be another. One reads, “This [the UK lockdown] served both to slow the spread of the virus and to signal in a very clear way that people needed to change behaviours quickly; but it also generated great costs.”

The report adds, “But whether keeping such tight restrictions in place for three months (until restrictions began to be eased substantially at the end of June) was warranted, given the large costs, is very far from clear.”

Even as the need for any further national lockdown is rejected, the report is forced to acknowledge the effectiveness of lockdowns in halting the disease’s spread.

“New measured cases of the infection and of deaths ascribed to the virus were significantly lower within a few weeks of restrictions being introduced.” It adds, “The slowing in new infections and in deaths has been marked in all countries during late March and into April 2020, though the severity of restrictions and the timing of those restrictions differs.”

It also acknowledges, “While there are reasons to believe that the spread of the infection may have slowed short of a lockdown which kept most people at home, it remains highly likely that this level of restriction did bring the spread down faster than it otherwise would. …

“The fall in deaths soon after lockdowns is so clear across many countries [64 are cited] that it is very unlikely that those severe restrictions had no significant impact at all on lives lost.”

Despite this, in the section, “How effective was the lockdown in the UK?”, the authors state, “There is contradictory evidence on the effectiveness of the three-month lockdown strategy in the UK.”

They assert, “It is hard to be sure of the precise scale of the health benefits: they range from very few lives saved to a high of perhaps 450,000 lives saved (that is the difference between the 500,000 or so deaths projected by Ferguson et al…on the basis of no change in behaviour and the 50,000 or so deaths that might have resulted in the UK by early June 2020). Figures for lives saved in the UK at the extreme ends of that spectrum (near zero or as high as 450,000) seem implausible.”

This conclusion is inserted only to undermine the assessment of Ferguson’s team of researchers at Imperial College and others who backed its findings, as well as from the World Health Organisation, MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis and the Abdul Latif Jameel Institute for Disease and Emergency Analytics.

Miles, Stedman and Heald add that “estimates of net saved lives that are effectively zero…seems very unlikely.” But this is immediately followed by the declaration, “We set the lowest estimated net saved lives well above that and use (rather arbitrarily) a ‘lowest’ estimate of 20,000.”

This is simply nonsense. The authors’ admission that they plucked “rather arbitrarily” a figure of 20,000 lives saved by the lockdown (much closer to zero than a high of 450,000) is worthless from any scientific criterion. It reflects only their prejudice, rather than any actual research.

In calculating the cost of the lockdown, the authors use a formula called the “Quality-adjusted Life Year” (QALY). They note, “The guidelines in the UK…are that [National Health Service] treatments that are expected to increase life expectancy for a patient by one year (in quality of life adjusted years, QALYs) should cost no more than £30,000.”

What follows is a series of calculations and graphs in which the author state, “Our low-end estimate of the (narrowly defined) cost of the March to June lockdown was 9 per cent of GDP—a figure of £200 billion.” They conclude, “For every permutation of lives saved and GDP lost the costs of lockdown exceed the benefits. Even if lives saved are as high as 440,000, each of which means an extra ten years of quality adjusted life—and when the lost output (assumed to be a sufficient and comprehensive measure of all costs of the lockdown) is simply the likely shortfall in incomes in 2020—costs are still over 50 per cent higher than the benefits of a three month lockdown (benefits = £132 billion; costs = £200 billion).”

In backing a “more rapid easing of restrictions” in the coming months, the authors outline three possible scenarios in all of which mass deaths are contemplated—including a scenario that sees deaths “steadily increase back up to levels seen at the height of the UK pandemic.”

This is justified by the ghoulish statement, “These are macabre thought experiments and many will feel uneasy at such calculations. But there are implications in terms of deaths and misery on both sides of the ledger from any policy. To think such comparisons are distasteful is to not face that reality.”

What this number-crunching in fact signifies is that the value of life is determined solely by the interests of the major corporations. If profits are to be made, then the population must get back to work. If lives are lost, including thousands more elderly people, then so be it.

What the report does not say is that the real cost of the lockdown was shouldered by the very working people who are now expected to get back to generating profit. The major corporations were handed over hundreds of billions in loan guarantees, even as the taxpayers footed the bill for 80 percent of the wages of workers employed by these corporations.

Now that this smash-and-grab raid has been accomplished, the ruling class, and its academic lackeys, rail against the “cost” of the lockdown—but only those related to saving the lives of working people. Naturally, if it cost £30,000, £300,000, or £3 million to save the life of just one of Britain’s super-rich oligarchs, this would be considered money well-spent.

Record heatwave in Siberia and the burning danger of climate change

Daniel Jakob

The year 2020 is the hottest in Siberia since measurements began 130 years ago. Russian cities across the polar circle recorded record temperatures. In Nizhnyaya Pesha, a temperature of 30 degrees Celsius (86°F) was measured and in Khatanga, which usually has a daytime temperature of around freezing at this time of year, the temperature reached 25°C (77°F) on May 22. The previous record was 12°C (54°F).

In Verkhoyansk, a Russian city in eastern Siberia, the situation is even more extremer. The small city in the state of Sakha was considered the coldest city in the world. But Twitter posts of meteorologist Mika Rantanen have announced that at a hefty 38°C (100°F), Verkhoyansk has set a record high temperature. Records have been kept since 1885. At least 11 other Arctic weather stations recorded temperatures over 30°C.

According to announcement of the Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S), the May surface temperatures in parts of Siberia were up to 10 degrees Celsius above average. Freja Vamborg, a leading scientist at C3S, said: “It is undoubtedly an alarming sign, but not only May was unusually warm in Siberia. The whole of winter and spring had repeated periods of higher-than-average surface air temperatures.”

Scientists explain that the record heatwave in Siberia is an extreme consequence of global climate change. Martin Stendel of the Danish Meteorological Institute reported that the uncommon temperatures in May would occur once in 100,000 years without anthropogenic contributions to global warming.

According to geomorphologist Anna Irrgang of the Helmholtz Center for Polar and Marine Research in Potsdam, Germany, extreme weather occurrences in this region are not uncommon. What is novel is the frequency of their occurrence. Mika Rantanen likewise warned that the Arctic is warming three-to-four times faster than the global average. Climate scientist Anders Levermann of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research stated: “The novel aspect of this ‘phenomenon’ is that the warming of Siberia is not a short-term observation and as such cannot be explained by the wind system of the jetstream, which can last one or two weeks, but not for five months.”

The thawing of the permafrost ground layer is especially critical. Permafrost covers about half of the Russian landmass and has been warming for some time. A comparative study of the Global Terrestrial Network for Permafrost showed in 2019 that across the board, the temperatures at 10 meters depth rose on average 0.3°C from 2007 to 2016.

Siberia comes in at the high end: There the temperature of the frozen ground measured at individual bore holes warmed 0.9°C. In the Antarctic, the researchers measured an average rise of 0.37°C. According to experts, regions with permafrost, especially in Alaska, Canada and Siberia, are more strongly affected by climate change than are other parts of the world. Based on statements by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the temperatures of permafrost have risen to record levels in the last 40 years, and that after millions of years of maintaining freezer-like temperatures.

The consequences for mankind and nature are dramatic. For years, wooden houses in the east Siberian Yakutsk have been sinking into the softening ground or slowly falling over. On the Yamal peninsula, reindeer have begun bogging down in swamps. The herders complain that they no longer know how to move their animals from winter to summer pastures. In Scandinavian Lapland, reindeer have begun starving because ice, instead of snow that they can scrape aside with their hooves, has prevented them from accessing nourishment.

In December, Russian President Vladimir Putin commented on the unusual warmth: “Some of our cities were built north of the Arctic Circle, on the permafrost. If it begins to thaw, you can imagine what consequences it would have. It’s very serious.”

This, however, is hypocritical. The fact is that the Russian government is doing almost nothing for climate protection, but rather, like its international rivals, sees the warming of the Arctic as a strategic opportunity to access raw materials and open new trade routes. In August 2019, as part of its new “scramble for the Arctic,” the Russian government launched a floating nuclear power plant in the Arctic Sea, raising the danger of a nuclear catastrophe.

The above-average warming in Siberia is also being blamed for the catastrophic oil spill near the city of Norilsk. This is just one more example of how Russia disregards climate protection for the sake of profit. On May 29, an accident at a power plant belonging to the mining company Nornickel near the northern Siberian city led to a massive oil slick. Some 21,000 tons of diesel were released into the environment and contaminated the regional water system, prompting the declaration of a state of emergency.

Another concerning result of the warming is that thawing permafrost will release huge quantities of greenhouse gases that would contribute to further warming. As such, these heat waves are catalyzers for climate change. Among other gases, methane, an exceedingly potent greenhouse gas, would be set free. “Viewed over 100 years, methane affects the climate about 34 times more strongly than CO2, and 86 times more strongly viewed over 20 years,” said Guido Grosse of the Helmholtz Center.

Not only carbon dioxide and methane captured in permafrost will be released, but also the neurotoxin mercury. The polar regions of the Earth harbor huge quantities of heavy metals, transported there on wind currents. Chemical reactions with bromide salts “scrub” the poisons from the atmosphere and deposit them on the surface.

This is how mercury, over thousands of years, has accumulated in the marine food chain, first in aquatic animals and then in seals and polar bears and ultimately to humans who rely on fishing for sustenance.

This is demonstrable in blood samples of seal species that live in the Arctic. How fast this accumulation occurs will depend on how fast the climate warms in the next years. “Predictions range from 30 percent up to 99 percent of permafrost will thaw before the turn of the century. What would take thousands to millions of years in the natural cycle is now happening in a human lifetime,” said Paul Schuster of the US Geological Service.

As a result of the record-setting temperatures, wildfires have consumed hundreds of thousands of hectares of Siberian forest. It is common for farmers to burn their fields in spring to clear vegetation, but a combination of high temperatures and strong winds stoked some fires out of control. Thus, on June 27, an area of 1.4 million hectares, an area larger than Austria, burned. In the previous year, according to estimations of the environmental organization Greenpeace, 150,000 square kilometers burned, an area twice the size of Ireland. For weeks on end the residents of many Siberian cities suffered toxic smoke.

The problem of the subjugation of climate protection to profit interest is not limited to Russia. It is the trademark of all capitalist governments. In order to fast-track construction projects and supposedly to create jobs, President Trump signed an executive order on June 5 to loosen the environmental restriction in the US. Another example are the tragic wildfires in the Ukraine that on April 4 came within 1 kilometer of the infamous Chernobyl nuclear plant, massively raising the levels of radiation near the fires for the first half of April.

Natural catastrophes caused by climate change and reckless destruction of the environment by big business are occurring ever more frequently. The record temperatures and forest fires in Siberia follow just a half-year behind the catastrophic fires in Australia.

At the beginning of the year, the WSWS warned in an important statement: “The last decade was marked by the continued and increasingly rapid destruction of the environment. Scientists have issued ever more dire warnings that without urgent and far-reaching action on a global scale, the effects of global warming will be devastating and irreversible.”

The only hope of limiting global warming and putting an end to the reckless exploitation of nature lies in the fight of the international working class against capitalism. Only by means of a socialist planned economy, focused on human need, rather than private profits and national control of resources and raw materials, can the dangers of climate change be surmounted.

Japan raising tensions with Beijing in the East China Sea

Ben McGrath

As the United States accelerates its war drive against China, the government of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is similarly ramping up its own confrontation against Beijing. On July 22, Tokyo denounced Beijing for sending vessels near the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea for 100 straight days, longer than any time in the past. The islands claimed by China, but administered and controlled by Japan are located in strategic sea lanes. Chinese ships actually entered waters claimed by Japan for a total of eleven days.

Tokyo also announced on July 18 that it would immediately scramble fighter jets to respond to any launch of Chinese planes from the latter’s airbase in Fujian Province. Previously, Japan only scrambled fighters when Chinese planes approached airspace claimed by Tokyo. However, Chinese war planes operating in the region had previously flown out of Zhejiang Province, a greater distance from the disputed islands. From Fujian to the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, it is a 20 minute flight, while it takes approximately 25 minutes for Japan’s Air Self-Defense Force (ASDF) planes to reach the islands from their base in Naha, Okinawa.

Japan Maritime Self-Defence Force (Credit: Destroyer Squadron 15)

Japan will also now send four fighter jets for every Chinese fighter rather than two. In addition, ASDF planes are flying daily patrols over the East China Sea. All of this raises the risk of a military encounter occurring that could escalate into a larger conflict.

Tokyo is attempting to portray its measures as defensive. “The repeated activities are extremely serious. Japan Coast Guard patrol ships have issued warnings and we have protested to the Chinese side through diplomatic channels over and over again,” Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga stated at a news conference last week. Tokyo also claimed that in the 2018 fiscal year, Japan scrambled jets against Chinese military planes 638 times and 675 times over the same period ending this past March.

In another sign of rising tensions, Defense Minister Taro Kono on June 23 took the rare step of announcing the nationality of a Chinese submarine supposedly detected near waters off Japan’s Amami-Oshima Island, which is home to missile batteries. The submarine did not enter Japanese waters and Kono described it as moving “in the direction of China.”

In deciding to announce the submarine’s nationality, Kono stated, “In addition to conditions in the East and South China seas, we’ve seen various events (regarding China), including its rapid military budget increase, rising tensions with India and pressure on Hong Kong’s ‘one country, two systems,’ so we need to infer clearly the intention of the Chinese Communist Party amid these situations.”

Japan’s annual defense white paper released on July 14 accused China of “continuing to attempt to alter the status quo in the East China Sea and the South China Sea” and for the first time describing China’s actions as “relentless.”

An anonymous expert on China in the Japanese government told the South China Morning Post, “It is easy to see a strong determination on the part of the Chinese to change the status quo surrounding the Senkaku islands. This is a long-term strategy, but the present situation is an opportunity for Beijing because the United States, Japan and other countries in the region are focused on dealing with the coronavirus pandemic.”

The US and Japan, however, bear primary responsibility for upending the status quo in the East China Sea. Under US President Obama, longstanding, but minor territorial disputes between China and various other countries in the region were inflamed and turned into pressure points on Beijing.

In 2012, while the Democratic Party of Japan was in office, Tokyo “nationalized” the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands by purchasing them from their private owner, which sharply raised tensions with Beijing.

Furthermore, Tokyo has militarized the region in the past five years, dispatching a radar station to Yonaguni Island and constructing bases with missile batteries on Ishigaki, Miyako, and Amami-Oshima, all of which surround the Senkakus/Diaoyus.

The statements from Tokyo and Washington are dripping with hypocrisy. China is regularly denounced for supposedly attempting to prevent “freedom of navigation” in the South China Sea, with the US conducting operations in waters claimed by China since 2015 under the Obama administration. When Chinese vessels or aircraft sail near Japanese waters, however, it is deemed a threat.

Last week, warships from the US, Japan, Australia, and India (the Quad—Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) held co-ordinated naval war games in the region. The US conducted exercises in the Philippine Sea with Japan and Australia, which neighbors the South China Sea, while also holding joint exercises with India near the Malacca Strait, a key sea lane and “choke point” for shipping.

Patrick Cronin, the Asia-Pacific security chair at the Hudson Institute, stated: “The international naval exercises underway in the Indo-Pacific are just the latest demonstration of India, Australia, and Japan shedding prior inhibitions about multilateral military maneuvers.” In other words, the three countries are more and more falling into line with the US war drive in the region against China.

Washington has also perpetuated the lie that Beijing is responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic by releasing the virus from a Wuhan laboratory; provocatively ordered the closure of China’s Houston consulate with unproven claims of Chinese spying; backed India in its recent border dispute with China; and drawn closer to Taiwan, threatening to overturn the “One China” policy that formally recognizes the island as a part of China.

The danger of conflict breaking out is growing. Last week, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made the case for war with China, stating “we can never go back to the status quo.” The “old paradigm of blind engagement with China” had to be replaced with a new strategy in which the “free world” ends China’s “new tyranny,” he declared.

Washington and Tokyo mix their condemnations of Beijing with professions of concern for regions like Hong Kong and Xinjiang. Their aim has nothing to do with human rights, but is to isolate Beijing and prepare for war as a means of subordinating and undermining a potential rival and deflecting from the immense social and economic crises they face at home.