Peru reopens economy as thousands of miners contract COVID-19

Mauricio Saavedra

The Peruvian government has reintroduced curfews and extended a military-enforced state of emergency and quarantines to 14 of the country’s 25 regions until the end of August following a record number of coronavirus infections. The restrictions of movement, first decreed in March, have not been applied to the lucrative mining sector, which the pro-business government of President Martín Vizcarra agreed to gradually restart when it classified mining as an “essential industry” earlier in May.

Antamina, a large copper and zinc mine located in the Andes, recorded 210 cornavirus cases earlier in the year. (Credit: Energiminas)

With 478,024 coronavirus cases, Peru has the third most infections in Latin America, and with over 21,000 fatalities, it has the highest per capita death toll in the region. The Pan American Health Organization is investigating whether the country failed to count another 27,000 deaths caused by COVID-19, which would raise the death toll to almost 50,000. The Washington Post reported last week that thousands of death certificates listing COVID-19 as one of several causes of death were not included in the country’s official toll “because the victims did not undergo a coronavirus test before dying.”

Underlying this immense suffering and death are the decades of structural adjustment programs prized by finance capital. Initiated by authoritarian president Alberto Fujimori in 1990, the Peruvian masses have been at the receiving end of policies that have been geared to meet the requirements of financial and corporate interests—mass layoffs through privatizations of state-owned industries, the elimination of job security laws and wage indexation, the privatization of social security and pension systems and the elimination of subsidies for basic foodstuffs and consumables. The systematic gutting of health budgets over years has left a nation of 33 million with a total of 1,606 ICU beds in private and public hospitals, and 90 percent of those are in use.

While the consequences of these policies were partially masked due to rapid growth of foreign direct investment in the mining sector during the 2000s as Peru opened up its economy to super-exploitation, the coronavirus pandemic has laid bare their true social cost.

The vast majority of workers are in the informal sector. Millions live a precarious existence without job security, minimum wage protection or access to social security. Lima, the country’s capital of some 10 million, has concentrated the majority of coronavirus cases in its overcrowded and impoverished working-class districts.

In the more isolated regions, where the indigenous and peasant communities reside among immense mining operations run by transnational corporations, extreme social inequality means that there is a lack of access to proper medical facilities and assistance amid an exponential growth of coronavirus cases. Arequipa, the second-most-populated Peruvian city, with 1 million inhabitants, and the commercial and industrial hub of the southern Andes, had just seven cases in March. By the end of the first week of August, Arequipa, now under quarantine, recorded 18,190 infections and 869 deaths.

The WSWS reported that in the first 10 days of the outbreak in March the Andean regions where the large export mining operations are concentrated—including Huancavelica, Ayacucho, Apurímac, Puno, Moquegua and Tacna in the south and Cajamarca in the far north—had recorded not a single coronavirus case. Today, each of these regions has thousands of cases and many hundreds have died: Huancavelica 2,148 infections (41 deaths), Ayacucho 4,603 (81), Apurímac 1,206 (42), Puno 3,211 (98), Moquegua 4,244 (128), Tacna 3,918 (44), and Cajamarca 7,974 (239).

More than 3,000 of these coronavirus cases are among workers in the mining sector, although this figure is incomplete, as the last official recording of cases in the mining industry was from the beginning of July. The Ministry of Energy and Mines has sought to downplay this by stating that the reported infections represent only 2 percent of all workers who have currently returned to operations, but it has sparked fury among mineworkers and local populations:

• More than 300 workers at Pan American Silver’s La Arena mine in the region of La Libertad downed tools to protest the growing number of COVID-19 cases at the mine and a lack of testing. Workers fear they could transmit the disease to their families when they go on break, according to a statement from the FNTMMSP, the national mining and metallurgical workers union.
• The population of Tambo Valley initiated protests opposing the reactivation of Southern Copper’s Tia Maria copper project, in the southern region of Arequipa for fear of further infections and concerns over toxic waste contamination.
• Social organizations and peasant communities denounced an “excessive presence” of trucks transporting minerals for Las Bambas mining company, in the region of Apurimac that exposed workers and communities to COVID-19.

Earlier in the year, the government responded to the economic crisis triggered by the coronavirus pandemic by implementing “Reactiva Peru,” a program worth some 60 billion soles (US$16.9 billion)—an amount equal to 11 percent of GDP. Its main purpose was to prevent a collapse in private credit through establishing a loan guarantee fund for business. Paltry handouts from these large sums were promised to the poorest, as more than one third of the workforce lost their jobs due to the pandemic.

In a spiraling economic and political crisis, President Vizcarra was forced for the second time in less than a month to reshuffle his cabinet after a vote of no confidence by the opposition-controlled Congress last week. Vizcarra replaced pro-mining Prime Minister Pedro Cateriano with retired Gen. Walter Martos, who made clear that his priority will be a continuation of the agenda of reopening the economy under conditions in which Peru’s central bank forecasts a 12.5 percent drop in the gross domestic product this year.

“The economy has to be revived gradually. We have to be very careful, but I think that returning to a total quarantine, at this time, would be very complicated,” Martos told TV Peru.

The Peruvian government, like its counterparts in other Latin American countries heavily tied to extractive industry exports, has sought to keep the mines operational. In March, while the giant domestic and international businesses that exploit Peru were obliged to reduce their workforces, they did not stop functioning. By July, as Vizcarra sought to reopen the economy despite the spike in cases, the Energy and Mines Ministry reported that mining was 90 percent operational.

Mining is the dominant sector of the Peruvian economy. Hundreds of billions of dollars of direct investment have flowed into mining exploration and exploitation over the past 20 years, and another US$58 billion were to be directly invested for FYI 2020-2021 before the pandemic stalled exploration activities. The government has earmarked another 30 billion soles (US$8.4 billion) to reactivate the mining industry.

Peru is among the world’s major producers of mineral commodities, which account for more than 60 percent of the country’s exports and 10 percent of its GDP. Copper and gold are the most important mineral exports by value, but there are also enormous reserves of silver, zinc, lead and tin. The mining sector, directly and indirectly, employs an estimated 1.5 million workers.

China is the largest foreign investor in Peru’s mining projects, but US, Canadian, Australian and British imperialism assert immense influence through the consortiums that control multibillion-dollar mining operations and projects. The most significant global players, including Anglo-American, Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton, Glencore, Freeport-McMoRan, MMG, Newmont, Pan American Silver, Barrick, Gold Fields, Southern Copper, Doe Run Peru, Consorcio Minero Horizonte, and ZINSA, enjoy some of the world’s most lax corporate laws.

Peruvian laws and regulations do not discriminate between national and foreign companies. There are no restrictions on repatriation of earnings, international transfers of capital, or currency exchange practices. The remittance of dividends, interests and royalties has no restrictions. Under a revised fiscal system, mining companies now pay royalties based on their operating profits rather than on sales.

“The fiscal changes introduced were largely supported by mining companies and according to industry analysts they have not adversely affected investment decisions or the degree of Peru’s mining sector competitiveness compared to other countries,” reports a website dedicated to providing investment intelligence for the mining sector.

Such is the dependency that, in the middle of this health and social catastrophe, Vizcarra has sought to facilitate further exploitation of the nation’s untapped riches by modifying regulations for mining activities, dispensing with even a modicum of ecological protection and allowing the consortiums to ride roughshod over the needs of the populations.

Pro-business Gestión reported that an amendment to the Environmental Protection Regulations for Mining Exploration seeks to provide “predictability” in decision-making, reduce transaction costs for mining licensees and help increase investment in the sector. In other words, any exploration project will go ahead with little state interference.

Driving this insatiable and criminal reopening of the economy is the 20.4 percent plunge in copper production in the first half of 2020 compared to the same period in 2019. Gold production fell 34.7 percent and zinc 23.7 percent. Lost profits need to be recouped, no matter the consequences. This is especially pressing today as the price of gold has reached a historic high and copper surpassed US$6,000 a tonne in June, up about 30 percent since March as both China and Europe begin reopening.

Mining activity always poses environmental risks. However, it is possible to scientifically foresee dangers and determine the safest methods of extraction to prevent deadly impacts upon workers, communities and the environment. This does not enter the calculations of the transnational and domestic mining giants or the governments that serve their interests. Countless catastrophic disasters caused by BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto, Barrick, BP et al., due to the anarchy and irrationality of capitalist production for profit, are only a taste of what is to come in Peru and Latin America and the rest of world if the working class does not politically intervene with a socialist program to resolve the political, social and economic crises facing humanity.

King Juan Carlos flees Spain to avoid corruption probe

Alejandro López

Former King Juan Carlos I de Borbón, who reigned from November 1975 until his abdication in June 2014, has fled Spain to evade investigation on charges on kickbacks and fraud.

Last week, the Royal Family posted a letter by Juan Carlos I to his son, King Felipe VI, informing him of his “well-considered decision to leave Spain”, adding: “It is a decision I take, with deep feeling but great calm. I was king of Spain for 40 years, and during all those years I have always wanted the best for Spain and the Crown.”

Now Juan Carlos has fled to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), where he reportedly occupies an entire floor at Abu Dhabi's five-star Emirates Palace hotel, under the protection of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan.

Juan Carlos’ departure is a humiliation for the Spanish ruling class and comes amid mounting infighting in the European bourgeoisie. Backed by Washington and the European Union, he was promoted as a leader who led Spain from fascism to democracy after dictator Francisco Franco’s death in 1975—stopping a military coup in 1981 and serving as head of state for nearly 40 years. His decision to flee Spain like a thief, to avoid a corruption probe after Swiss and Spanish prosecutors opened an investigation of his Swiss bank accounts, exposes the entire regime.

The crisis erupted two years ago when a British conservative newspaper, the Telegraph, leaked recordings of Juan Carlos’ mistress, businesswoman Corinna zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn, speaking to retired Spanish police chief José Manuel Villarejo. Villarejo is currently in jail awaiting trial over “Operation Tandem,” an investigation into two decades of illegal phone taps and other invasions of privacy on behalf of wealthy clients, corporations and banks against politicians, businessmen, judges and journalists.

Sayn-Wittgenstein claims Juan Carlos received kick-backs from commercial contracts in the Gulf States for the construction of the €6.7 billion Haramain high-speed railway in Saudi Arabia and kept the cash in a bank account in Switzerland. She also claims the head of the Spanish intelligence threatened her life and those of her children if she spoke of her ties to Juan Carlos.

The Spanish judiciary intervened to shelve the investigation. Prosecutors claimed the activities mentioned in the conversation occurred before Juan Carlos’s abdication, when he was still immune from prosecution. Almost simultaneously, Swiss prosecutors opened an investigation into a multi-million-euro donation received by Sayn-Wittgenstein from a Swiss bank account. She told investigators that the money was a donation from the former Spanish monarch.

In June 2019, Juan Carlos announced his intention to retire from public life in a letter addressed to Felipe. This was the first attempt of the Royal House to distance itself from Juan Carlos.

In March this year, as COVID-19 raged throughout Spain and Europe after decades of cuts in public health care budgets, the Telegraph reported that Felipe VI was a beneficiary with Juan Carlos of a foundation which received €65 million from Abdullah bin Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia.

Soon after, the Royal Household issued a statement claiming that Felipe VI would renounce any inheritance from his father. The former king also reportedly lost his stipend from the State’s General Budget—another attempt by Felipe VI to publicly distance himself from Juan Carlos.

Two months ago, the public prosecutor’s office of the Spanish Supreme Court opened an investigation against Juan Carlos regarding Saudi kickbacks.

In last week’s letter, Juan Carlos makes no statement of guilt or of regret. He claims, laughably, to be fleeing Spain in order “to serve the Spanish people.” His lawyer stated that “he remains at the disposal of the Prosecutor’s Office.” Juan Carlos also reportedly refused the option of settling his back taxes, which would mean handing over 60 percent of his wealth to the state.

Spain’s Socialist Party (PSOE)-Podemos government, the Royal Household and the media have intervened to defend the former monarch and his “historical legacy”. A press release signed by Felipe VI stated: “The king wants to highlight the historical importance that his father’s reign represents, as a legacy, political work and institutional service to Spain and to democracy.”

El País, the leading pro-PSOE daily, stated in an editorial that “the former king’s disappointing and less than exemplary behavior during the last years of his reign must not make anybody forget his irreplaceable contribution to the progress and freedom of all Spaniards during nearly half a century.” It called for national unity: “It is thus irresponsible to fan the flames of this institutional crisis at a time when the country needs stability, and when everyone should come together to deal with a devastating economic crisis that’s already here, as well as with a health crisis that refuses to go away.”

Juan Carlos and Spain’s Transition from fascist to parliamentary rule

In fact, the inglorious flight of Juan Carlos exposes the rotten regime set up by the NATO imperialist powers in the 1978 Transition from the fascist Francoite regime to Spain’s current parliamentary regime.

Juan Carlos was born in Rome in 1938 to the exiled pretender to the Spanish throne amid the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939) launched by the fascist coup of General Francisco Franco. During this three-year war, in which Franco allied with Nazi Germany and fascist Italy, at least 200,000 people died. Another 700,000 to 1 million people passed through nearly 300 concentration camps during and after the war. Another half-million fled Spain as refugees.

Franco restored the monarchy in 1947, and Juan Carlos was groomed as his successor. In 1969, he swore loyalty to the fascist Movimiento Nacional (National Movement); he was crowned two days after Franco’s death in 1975. Amid mass strikes and revolutionary struggles in Spain and across Europe in the 1960s and 1970s, factions of the regime led by Juan Carlos worked with the Spanish Socialist Party (PSOE) and the Stalinist Communist Party of Spain (PCE) to pilot a transition to defend the capitalist state and block a struggle of the working class for power.

The PCE played the central role in preventing a revolutionary reckoning with fascism and devising a new constitutional monarchy. Under the monarchy, Spanish fascism’s crimes were to be forgiven and forgotten, and capitalist property preserved. In 1978, a constitution was adopted that protected the king from any prosecution.

To this day, the Podemos leadership hails the leader of the Communist Party from the 1950s to the 1980s, Santiago Carrillo, for his role during the Transition. Carrillo, a mentor of Podemos General Secretary Pablo Iglesias, became close friends with Juan Carlos and a regular at his palace. The king reportedly called him “Don Santiago.”

By 1981, however, the Transition regime was already on the verge of collapse amid rising discontent in the working class. The press and sections of the ruling elite began to discuss the need for a “National Salvation” government under the premiership of General Armada, Juan Carlos’ chief mentor. This meant a supposedly non-violent removal of the democratically-elected government by the military, backed by a broad-based coalition cabinet including the PSOE.

On the evening of February 23, hundreds of Civil Guards burst into Parliament, brandishing pistols and sub-machine guns, taking the government and all 350 deputies hostage. To this day, it remains a state secret how much Juan Carlos new about the coup plotters’ intentions. The coup plotters claimed they acted in the name of the monarch. A German diplomat subsequently stated that Juan Carlos had told him he was in broad agreement with the plotters’ aims.

The PSOE, the Communist Party and its trade union, CC.OO, reacted with calculated impotence, refusing to call strikes or mobilize workers against the coup. Faced with a fascist coup, they simply called on workers to remain calm, defining the assault to parliament as an isolated event.

The coup did not succeed, however, as the majority of the bourgeoisie feared that installing another military junta would have provoked a response from the working class that had lived under fascist rule for four decades. Despite the PCE and PSOE, workers had already started organising defence committees in Andalucía and Asturias; strikes broke out in Barcelona, Madrid and other major cities. On February 26, demonstrations of more than 3 million participants, the most massive in Spain’s history, swept across the country.

Although it formally failed, the coup helped cement the post-Franco Transition regime. The PSOE won elections in 1982 with the backing of the PCE and of the forces from the post-1968 middle class student movement. Together with the right-wing Popular Party, these forces formed an entrenched pro-capitalist political duopoly committed to austerity and war.

For four decades, the Spanish population was routinely bombarded with claims that the king opposed the coup, and that his televised address calling for law and order and the continuation of the elected government—six hours after the coup began—saved democracy from fascism.

Already at this time, Juan Carlos was busy using his position to receive kickbacks. These date back to at least 1973, during the first oil crisis, when Franco sent him to Saudi Arabia to bargain with the House of Saud to cut the prices of Spain’s oil imports.

During the 1980s, Juan Carlos was known as “the king of Socialists” in the 1980s and 1990s due to his close ties to PSOE Prime Minister Felipe González. The González government let Juan Carlos continue his lucrative kickbacks and corruption deals involving the weapons trade, real estate and the arts. He also received large commissions for promoting products and tourist destinations.

His largest kickbacks came from his trips to ex-colonial countries with executives from Santander, Telefónica, BBVA, Inditex, Ibderdrola, OHL, Repsol—the biggest corporations in Spain’s Ibex-35 stock market. In these trips to promote “Spanish brands,” they struck deals worth billions of euros, looting these countries in the process. These looting operations handsomely benefited the king personally.

Podemos defends the Spanish monarchy

The crisis of the monarchy intensified particularly amid the mounting social inequality and social anger caused by deep EU austerity measures that followed the 2008 economic crash. In 2014, Juan Carlos abdicated after years of scandals, including his hunting trips worth thousands of dollars in African countries as workers in Spain and across Europe saw their jobs and meager wages slashed, or the Nóos corruption case involving his daughter, Princess Cristina.

Today, Podemos is intervening to defend the 1978 consensus and the Monarchy. Last December, Iglesias claimed that Monarchy “is not in crisis, and I speak as a republican.” He also hailed Felipe VI’s daughter, Leonor, “who aspires to be head of state, speaking in perfect Catalan.”

Now, desperately trying to cover its tracks amid rising social anger, Podemos leaders are claiming that they were not aware that the government supported the former monarch’s decision to flee, even though Iglesias is deputy Prime Minister. Their complaint is that this is an embarrassment for Spain. In words of Iglesias, the “flight” was “an unworthy attitude of a former head of state,” which Iglesias fears will leave the monarchy “in a very compromised position.”

Podemos is now flirting with calls for a referendum on the republic or a monarchy, even though the party’s parliamentary spokesperson, Jaume Asens, declared this “practically impossible” due to the opposition of the government partner of Podemos, the PSOE.

The main aim of such debates is to boost their tattering left credentials as the PSOE-Podemos government is increasingly associated with austerity, pro-militarist policies, regime change in Latin America and attacks on democratic rights.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Podemos has championed back-to-work, back-to-school and deconfinement policies. Its most recent action has been to hail the recent EU bailout funneling €750 billion to the banks and corporations. The package imposes austerity across Europe, while laying down the axes on which the European imperialist powers will pursue militarist and economic policies targeting China and the United States.

Juan Carlos’ decision to flee corruption charges in Spain only underscores the profound corruption of the entire social and political order defended by Podemos and Deputy Prime Minister Pablo Iglesias.

Philippines not to join wargames in the South China Sea

Joseph Santolan

On August 3, Philippine Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana announced that President Rodrigo Duterte had issued a standing order that “we should not involve ourselves in exercises in the South China Sea, except in our national waters, 12 miles of our shores.” Lorenzana added that this order was given in an attempt to “keep a lid on tensions” in the region.

The announcement that the Philippines would not be joining the US war games in the disputed waters comes amid a dramatic escalation of Washington’s preparations for war with China. In an attempt to contain the explosive social crisis engendered by the US government’s criminal mishandling of the COVID-19 epidemic, Washington has brought the world to the brink of a war between two nuclear-armed powers.

The US is attempting, through military and economic measures, to prepare a regime change in Beijing. Over the past month, Washington has carried out a series of provocations, accusing China of spying, closing the Houston consulate, banning Chinese social media apps, and sending a cabinet official to Taipei.

On July 23, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the United States was not pursuing a policy of “containment,” indicating that the United States was pursuing a course of direct conflict with China in pursuit of regime change.

Pompeo’s statement came on the heels of his announcement on July 13 that the United States rejected all Chinese maritime claims beyond the country’s 12-nautical mile territorial limit. He denounced China’s claims in the South China Sea as “unlawful.”

Pompeo based his statement on the 2016 Arbitration ruling of the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), which rejected aspects of Beijing’s territorial claim. The case in The Hague was introduced by the Philippines under then President Benigno Aquino III, but the arguments were drawn up in Washington and were argued by US attorneys.

As the ruling was handed down in mid-July 2016, Duterte was just taking office. Looking to pursue improved economic ties with Beijing to fund his proposed infrastructural investment, he downplayed the significance of the ruling, refusing to take aggressive action against China’s claims in the South China Sea.

Washington was left with a carefully crafted legal pretext against China but without a client-state through which to pursue it.

On July 22, as Washington dismissed China’s claim as “unlawful,” the Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Teodoro Locsin referred to the South China Sea as “an avenue of cooperation” by China and the Philippines and declared that the two countries should not stumble over a territorial dispute over small marine “features,” which he characterized as a “pebble” on that avenue.

The Chinese ambassador to Manila, Huang Xiliang, issued a statement embracing Locsin’s formulation and Locsin responded by tweet, “Agree to disagree on the Arbitral Award. Civilized.”

Without explicitly naming the United States, Huang spoke of the challenges to relations between Manila and Beijing. “Glutted with cold-war mentality, some superpower is instigating the containment and oppression of China in every possible way, trying to sow discord among regional countries, and even forcing them to choose sides,” he stated.

The position taken by Manila over the past four years, completely undermines Washington’s posturing as the defender of legal norms and the “freedom of navigation” in the South China Sea.

The South China Sea is one of the most heavily trafficked bodies of water in the world. The only threat to freedom of navigation in these waters is the imminent danger of war, which is a direct result of the reckless aggressiveness of Washington.

For years, Washington has presented its military maneuvers in the South China Sea, each of which has brought the world closer to a possible catastrophic war, as being in defense of “freedom” and of the rights of the smaller countries in the region.

Now, as Manila, the official legal claimant in the ITLOS case, seeks to “agree to disagree” with China, Washington announces that it does not matter what any of the involved actors want, the United States rejects China’s claim and will enforce “freedom” at gunpoint.

Over the past weeks, Washington has staged military exercises involving two aircraft carriers in the disputed South China Sea. The military preparations for war are far advanced. In July, the United States deployed 67 large reconnaissance planes to the South China Sea. Several of the US planes flew provocative reconnaissance missions along the Chinese coast.

At the same time, the Trump administration has pursued increased diplomatic ties with Taiwan, further challenging the One China policy established by Nixon and Kissinger as the bedrock for US-China relations. On Sunday, US Health Secretary Alex Azar became the first US cabinet level official to visit Taipei.

The ruling class opposition to Duterte in the Philippines has sought over the course of several years to channel the growing levels of social unrest behind Washington’s war drive against China. They have repeatedly claimed that Duterte is a pawn of Beijing.

They have sharply escalated this rhetoric as COVID-19 ravages the country, a result of the government’s authoritarian and incompetent handling of the epidemic. Following Washington's lead, they have blamed China for the outbreak and attacked the fascistic Duterte from the right, denouncing him for being unwilling to prosecute a war with China.

Adopting a page from his playbook, they have employed misogynistic language, producing a number of social media posts that claimed his unwillingness to attack China proved that he did not “have any balls.”

Former Senator Antonio Trillanes declared that Duterte’s directive not to engage in joint exercises in the South China Sea “is a clear manifestation of Philippine support of China’s foreign policy in the West Philippine Sea.” The West Philippine Sea is the nationalist designation of the Philippine claimed portion of the disputed South China Sea.

Trillanes continued, “the message of the Duterte government to China is unambiguous subservience.” Significantly, Trillanes was the leader of multiple military coup attempts in 2003 and 2007.

The Philippines is Washington’s former colony. The United States has used the country and its pliant leaders to whatever geopolitical ends it desired for over a century. Hundreds of thousands of US troops were based in the country, at Clark Air Base and Subic Naval Base. Washington bombed Indonesia and Vietnam from planes that were took off from the Philippines. The country figures prominently in Washington’s war plans with China. The Pentagon wants its bases back.

During his State of the Nation Address in July, Duterte stated, “I read somewhere… that the Americans intend to come back to Subic.” He announced that he would not allow a return of US military bases to the country, declaring, “If you put bases here, this will ensure if war breaks out… the extinction of the Filipino race.”

Top US health official makes provocative trip to Taiwan

Peter Symonds

US Secretary of Health Alex Azar landed in Taiwan on Sunday for a three-day visit, becoming the highest-ranking American official to visit the island since the US ended its diplomatic relations with Taipei in 1979 and established formal ties with Beijing instead.

The purpose of Azar’s visit is far more than just to affirm US collaboration with Taiwan over health issues or to acknowledge the relative success, to date, of its containment of the COVID-19 pandemic. Rather, it is another provocative step aimed at strengthening US-Taiwanese relations and potentially overturning the “One China” policy that has been central to US relations with China.

In establishing diplomatic ties with China in 1979, the US acknowledged the Chinese Communist Party regime in Beijing as the legitimate government of all China, including Taiwan. Under the Taiwan Relations Act of the same year, the US declared that it would oppose any forcible attempt by China to integrate Taiwan, and authorised continuing arms sales to Taipei.

From the outset of his presidency, Trump openly called the “One China” policy into question, pointedly taking a phone call from Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen on assuming office in 2017. Tsai is a member of the Democratic People’s Party that advocates a more independent stance for Taiwan, despite Beijing’s warnings to take over by force if Taipei ever declares formal independence from China.

Under Trump, the US has boosted relations with Taiwan and stepped up arms sales, ignoring Chinese protests. In 2018, the US president signed the Taiwan Travel Act, authorising high-level official visits, both civilian and military, between the two sides. While Azar is not the only cabinet-level US official to visit Taiwan since 1979, he is certainly the highest-ranking.

Prior to meeting with Tsai on Monday, Azar told the media that Taiwan was “a vital partner, a democratic success story, and a force for good in the world.” He lauded Taiwan as “an open and democratic society, executing a highly successful and transparent COVID-19 response,” then declared that it should be “recognised as a global health leader with an excellent track record of contributing to international health.”

Azar’s comments come in the wake of a keynote speech by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo last month in which he overturned decades of US foreign policy towards China and declared in the language of Cold War propaganda that the “free world” must win out over the tyranny of “Chinese Communism.” The very terms bear no resemblance to reality—capitalism, not communism, prevails in China, and democratic rights are under severe attack throughout the misnamed “free world,” especially in the US.

To describe Taiwan as a “democratic success story” is to ignore both its past and present. For decades, the island was ruled by the brutal US-backed military dictatorship formed after the nationalist Kuomintang (KMT) was driven from the mainland following the 1949 Chinese revolution. Confronted with widespread opposition, particularly from workers in the 1980s, the regime made a tactical decision to hold elections to provide a degree of legitimacy. The police-state apparatus established by the KMT, however, remains largely intact.

Azar’s call for Taiwan to be recognised internationally as “a global health leader” is part of the Trump administration’s efforts to back Taiwan’s entry into various international bodies. China, which regards Taiwan as a renegade province, has blocked such moves as a de facto recognition of Taiwanese independence.

A bitter dispute erupted between Taiwan and the World Health Organisation (WHO) in April as part of the US-backed campaign to accord Taipei observer status at the body’s meetings. WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared that he had been the subject of racist comments by Taiwanese officials, allegations that Taipei denied. China blocked Taiwan’s presence at the World Health Assembly in May, and its campaign for observer status effectively stalled after the US withdrew from the WHO, alleging without any evidence that it was under Chinese influence.

Azar’s visit to Taiwan is part of the Trump administration’s accelerating confrontation with China. In particular, the US is keen to contrast Taiwan’s relatively successful response to COVID-19 thus far to that of China, which Trump has repeatedly blamed for the global pandemic on the basis of unsubstantiated claims and outright lies. This has been an attempt to deflect attention from his own government’s criminal negligence in allowing the virus to spread.

For its part, the Tsai administration in Taiwan is looking for greater US support and recognition. Tsai made no reference, let alone criticism, in her comments during Azar’s visit of the disastrous US health policies that have resulted in 5 million cases of coronavirus and more than 161,000 deaths as of last weekend. Instead, she highlighted Taiwanese assistance to the US by supplying face masks, and noted that Trump and his officials had pointedly appeared in the White House with “Made in Taiwan” masks.

In the negotiations that led up to formal diplomatic relations between the US and China in 1979, Taiwan proved to be most contentious issue, and it remains so today. Not surprisingly, China has responded to Azar’s visit. Foreign ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin warned last week that Beijing would “take strong countermeasures in response to the US behaviour.”

China’s sensitivity on the issue of Taiwan stems not just from concerns that its sovereignty is being violated, but also because of the strategic position of the island as the US military build-up throughout the Indo-Pacific continues apace. Not only is the primary island of Taiwan just 130 kilometres from the Chinese mainland at the narrowest part of the Taiwan Strait, but a number of heavily-fortified Taiwanese islets are just kilometres off the Chinese coast.

The Trump administration is deliberately and recklessly stoking one of the most potentially explosive flashpoints in Asia as it ratchets up the pressure on Beijing across the board—diplomatically, economically and militarily. Any move by the US to expand military ties with Taiwan, including visits by warships, joint military exercises or a visit by a top level US military figure, rather than the civilian Azar, would dangerously raise tensions across the Taiwan Strait as well as between the US and China.

Germany: Did AfD-related public prosecutors cover up right-wing extremist attacks in Berlin?

Katerina Selin

With terrorist sympathisers in the police force, neo-Nazi networks in the Special Forces Commandos (KSK) and the armed forces, the involvement of the secret service in right-wing extremist attacks, nobody can continue to close their eyes to the fact that right-wing terrorism in Germany comes from inside the state apparatus and flourishes there.

Just how close the connections and complicity are between neo-Nazis, the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), police, the Verfassungsschutz (secret service) and the judiciary is shown by recent events in Berlin.

Demonstration against Nazi attacks on June 26 in Neukölln

Last Wednesday, Berlin Attorney General Margarete Koppers was forced to take over the investigation of the right-wing extremist series of attacks in the Neukölln district. According to a press release, circumstances had arisen “which make the bias of a public prosecutor seem possible.”

Since 2013, at least 72 right-wing extremist crimes, including 23 arsons, have shaken the working-class district in the south of Berlin. The victims were mainly people who are active against right-wing extremism or have an immigration background.

New facts suggest that right-wing extremists within the judicial system have deliberately delayed and prevented the investigation. More and more details are coming to light that point to a network between the state authorities and the neo-Nazi scene.

According to media reports, the accusations concern not only the Berlin public prosecutor “S,” who is directly investigating the case, but also the head of the state security department of the public prosecutor’s office, Matthias Fenner, responsible for politically motivated crimes. Both have now been transferred.

In an interrogation of the right-wing extremist suspect and former AfD politician Tilo P., Fenner is said to have identified himself as an AfD voter and like-minded person. He assured P. that he had nothing to fear from the judiciary. This is shown in the record of a chat surveillance of March 2017, in which P. reported on the interrogation to the second main suspect Sebastian T., a previously convicted Nazi thug and local politician belonging to the neo-Nazi German National Democratic Party (NPD). According to Prosecutor General Koppers, P. is said to have told T. that one felt “in good hands with the public prosecutor’s office because of this statement.”

According to the Legal Tribune Online (LTO), the passage had already been noticed in an evaluation report of the Berlin State Office for Criminal Investigations (LKA) dated September 2019. The victim’s attorney, Franziska Nedelmann, who was able to view this report, demanded to see the original surveillance records. After being denied these, she filed a complaint with the General Prosecutor’s Office on July 10, thus setting the ball rolling.

2018—Attack on Ferat Kocak

What in recent years was repeatedly described by the Berlin Senate and the authorities as “mishaps” and “errors” in the investigations into the Neukölln series of attacks, apparently followed a pattern. The Kocak case is particularly revealing here. In the night of February 1, 2018, Neukölln left-wing politician Ferat Kocak became the victim of a dangerous arson attack on his car. He and his family, who were sleeping in the apartment building next door, only avoided death by a hair’s breadth.

That same night, the car of bookseller Heinz Ostermann also went up in flames—already the third attack on the owner of the left-wing Neukölln bookstore “Leporello.” In 2017, Neukölln Social Democratic Party (SPD) politician Mirjam Blumenthal and IG Metall trade union activist Detlef Fendt were also hit by arson attacks.

Only after pressure from lawyers and the public did it gradually come out that the attack on Kocak (and possibly also the other attacks) was prepared under the eyes and perhaps even with the help of the authorities.

January 2018: Attack planning. The LKA and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (as the secret service is called) learned from an intercepted conversation of the main suspects P. and T. on January 15, 2018 about the planning of a possible attack on Kocak, but did not warn him. The authorities were aware that the suspects were spying on the victim’s apartment. The secret service therefore issued an affidavit to the LKA on January 30, 2018—i.e., two days before the arson attack on Kocak—which was to enable further investigations.

The vice head of the LKA, Oliver Stepien, did not admit this incident until November 2019 in the Interior Committee of Berlin state legislature. The police claimed that they had not warned Kocak because he was not considered to be in danger—even though Kocak is known for his public appearances against the right-wing. Then they referred to the “protection of sources”, a typical argument of the secret services to hold their protective hand over right-wing radicals.

February 2018: House search, but no arrest. According to a report in taz, the police ordered arrest and search warrants against P. and T. as late as the evening of February 1, i.e. only one day after the attack, referring in detail to findings of the secret service. P. and T. were held to be responsible for the attack on Kocak as well as on the bookseller Ostmann. The Tiergarten Local Court thereupon allowed the search but considered the warrants to be insufficiently justified. During the house searches on February 2, 2018, a great deal of evidence was then confiscated, but the evaluation results remained secret. Meanwhile, P. and T. are at liberty and can continue to commit attacks.

March 2018: LKA man meets neo-Nazis. On March 16, 2018, secret service officers observed how a Berlin LKA official named W. first met with the main suspect Sebastian T. and three other neo-Nazis in a pub in Neukölln-Rudow and then drove off with T. in his car. This is the result of research by broadcasters ARD and rbb in April 2019.

The victim advisory centre “Reachout” then reported the incident because it was suspected that the LKA employee had passed on secret information to right-wing extremists at this and possibly other meetings, thus aiding and abetting criminal acts. However, the proceedings were dropped.

Enemy lists with personal data on 500 people—even before 2013

In May 2019, the Berlin Interior Senator (state interior minister), Andreas Geisel, then commissioned a 30-member special commission called “Fokus” to review the Neukölln series of attacks. In February 2020, this disclosed a few interim findings.

Firstly, it corrected the presumed number of victims from 30 to 72. Secondly, in evaluating the computers that had been confiscated from the main suspects in 2018, it found more than 500 personal data records from the years before 2013. Allegedly, these enemy lists, sorted in folders according to topics such as Antifa, politicians, journalists, and police officers could only have been sorted in autumn 2019. LKA head André Rauhut brazenly declared to the Interior Affairs Committee that the lists did not show “any concrete threats”; so far only 30 persons had been informed.

The Fokus commission also stated that besides the AfD member Tilo P. and the NPD member Sebastian T., Julian B. was also considered a main suspect. The neo-Nazi with a criminal record is said to have spied out possible targets for attacks with T. His apartment had already been searched in 2017 because he was suspected of incitement against Jewish institutions as the operator of the right-wing extremist Facebook group “Freie Kräfte Neukölln” (“Neukölln Free Forces”). But the proceedings against him were dropped. Julian B. is also at large.

2016—Police officer in exchanges with AfD and Tilo P.

Not only in the Kocak case, but also the attacks on the Leporello bookstore, it becomes clear that the police, AfD and neo-Nazis are in close contact in Neukölln.

According to research by broadcasters ARD and NDR, the public prosecutor’s office is currently investigating the Berlin police commissioner, Detlef M., because he is said to have passed on police internal information about the attack on Breitscheidplatz in 2016 in a Telegram chat group of the AfD. Numerous Neukölln AfD members belonged to this chat group, including the alleged right-wing terrorist Tilo P.

The policeman in question had already been in contact with district board members of the Neukölln AfD and Tilo P. in autumn 2016. This was reported in June by the daily newspaper taz, which has possession of the relevant email correspondence. According to this, P.’s proposal to visit an anti-fascist event at the Leporello bookstore on December 2, 2016 was discussed. Some AfD members spoke out against it. Ten days after the event, windows were broken at the bookstore and an incendiary device was placed in a Neukölln café.

The right-wing extremist attacks in Neukölln continued unabated this year. Around 1,000 people demonstrated against right-wing violence at the end of June. Earlier, SS symbols had been smeared on the facade of the Syrian bakery “Damascus” on Sonnenallee and a delivery van parked in front of the shop set on fire. A bakery employee told RBB that this was the seventh attack on the “Damascus.”

The role of the SPD-Left Party-Green Berlin state executive

The facts known so far are certainly only the tip of the iceberg. Information that could reveal the true extent of right-wing extremist terror and the complicity of the authorities remains under wraps. The Criminal Investigation Department’s 50-page interim report from February was classified as secret, which the interior senator justified with the words, “We have to protect the ongoing investigations.”

Against the background of the latest revelations, it is clear that the SPD-Left Party-Green Senate (state executive) is deliberately trying to prevent evidence of right-wing extremist penetration of the authorities from coming to light. The seriousness of the situation is proven by the fact that the Attorney General’s Office has now taken over the investigation. The aim is not to uncover but to cover up the extreme right-wing structures.

Koppers was vice president of the Berlin police force from 2010 to 2018, when she was appointed attorney general—in a period in which xenophobic and anti-Semitic crimes increased massively, neo-Nazis were able to carry out their mischief under the eyes of the police and the increasing of police powers was being promoted in Berlin.

Moreover, the transfer of the two public prosecutors is not an isolated case. The influence of the AfD in the judiciary was already evident years ago in the case of Roman Reusch. The AfD Brandenburg executive member was appointed chief public prosecutor in Berlin in 2016. Since February 1, 2018, he has been an elected member of the federal Parliamentary Control Committee, which is supposed to monitor the secret services. This gives the right-wing extremist lawyer access to secret information and internal information of the Federal Intelligence Service, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the Military Counter-Intelligence Service.

When Berlin’s Justice Senator Dirk Behrendt of the Green Party, Interior Senator Geisel of the SPD and several representatives of the Left Party now pretend to be outraged and call for a committee of inquiry or special investigators in the Neukölln complex, they are primarily trying to divert attention from their own responsibility and prevent any real investigation.

The SPD-Left Party-Green state executive has been promoting right-wing extremism for years and is pursuing AfD policy on the central issues. Amid the pandemic, it is deporting refugees and only in July passed an even harsher police law. Left Party, Green and SPD politicians are constantly shouting for a strengthening of the police. The Berlin police regularly use brutal force against left-wing demonstrators, for example, during the protests following the murder of George Floyd, or last Friday, during the eviction of the left-wing Neukölln pub “Syndikat.” Berlin’s Office for the Protection of the Constitution, which criminalizes left-wing organizations, also placed the “Ende Gelände” climate movement under observation last year.

Nowhere is this right-wing policy pursued more openly than at Berlin’s Humboldt University, where the Senate and university management under SPD politician Sabine Kunst are making pacts with the AfD and right-wing extremists. A prime example is Professor Jörg Baberowski, a right-wing extremist ideologue who relativizes Nazi crimes and attacks left-wing students verbally and physically. At the behest of the AfD, Kunst sued the RefRat student activist body in 2018 forcing it to provide the right-wing extremist party with lists of names of student representatives from the last 10 years. The instruction to file the suit came directly from State Secretary Steffen Krach (SPD).

What drives the ruling class and its ideologists is the fear of growing protests against social inequality, the shift to the right and militarism. That is why it is arming the state apparatus and encouraging radical right-wing forces, which in case of doubt, serve as a battering ram against the working class.

Right-wing terror cannot, therefore, be banished by appeals to the establishment parties and calls for an official committee of inquiry. That would mean setting the cat among the pigeons. What is necessary is to eliminate the social causes of the right-wing shift: the bankrupt capitalist system that gives birth to war and fascism.

Germany reopens its schools: An experiment in herd immunity

Marianne Arens

Although there are currently more than 1,000 new coronavirus infections per day in Germany, all of the country’s state governments are ruthlessly enforcing school openings after the summer break. This can only be called an experiment in “herd immunity”—a policy with potentially lethal consequences for children, teachers, teaching assistants and their families.

Last Thursday, the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) reported 1,045 new infections and on Friday 1,147 new infections. These figures refer to infections measured about 10 days ago. This means that the current rate of infection is very likely much higher. There are over 19 million cases of SARS-CoV-2 worldwide, more than 712,000 people have already died, and in Germany the number of deaths rose to 9,183 on Friday.

In this situation, all state governments are determined to send children back to school without restrictions. This is despite the fact that the increase in new infections has reached a level equivalent to that of mid-March 2020, when all schools and day-care centres were closed and the lockdown was imposed. Now, however, all of these facilities are being reopened. The goal is very clear: get the population back to work so that profit-making can resume and stock markets can soar even higher. Politicians of all stripes and business representatives leave no doubt about their intentions.

Annalena Baerbock, chairwoman of Bündnis 19/Die Grünen, stated categorically in the ARD televisions morning program on Friday, “What must be clear is the top guideline: that schools should never again be completely closed as a first measure.” With this statement, the Green Party leader echoed the demand of Siemens boss Joe Kaeser, who categorically told the newspaper Die Welt, “We certainly cannot afford a complete shutdown anymore.” The newspaper commented that Kaeser was “absolutely right: there must not be a procedure based on the motto ‘Operation successful, patient dead.’ (The patient here is clear: the German economy.) And further: “The fact that day-care centres and schools are closed first and open last must not happen a second time.”

What politicians, managers and journalist are demanding are conditions that will lead to thousands of illnesses and deaths. Just to recall, it was school closures in particular that helped to contain the pandemic initially and prevent deaths. As the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) documented in a study, in the last two weeks of March about 40,600 lives were saved thanks to the closure of schools worldwide. Without the four weeks of school closures from mid-March to mid-April, nearly 1.4 million more people would have been infected worldwide.

On Friday it was announced that there have already been cases of coronavirus at a minimum of at least two schools in the state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania where classes recommenced last Monday. After a high school teacher in Ludwigslust and a primary school pupil in Graal-Müritz tested positive, both schools had to be closed again.

In Hamburg, where classes restarted last Thursday, the number of COVID-19 infections is rising sharply. According to official figures, there were 80 new cases from Thursday to Friday. In addition to a number of persons retiring from travel, workers at the Hamburg shipyard Blohm+Voss have tested positive. On Wednesday, 60 new infections were detected among shipyard workers and employees of contractors at the shipyard.

Despite all this, teachers and pupils in Hamburg are being forced to attend classes. While the RKI insists on its “AHA” rules for social distancing, handwashing and wearing of masks, pupils will sit together in full classes, without mouth-and-nose protection and any possibility of keeping the proscribed distance of 1.5 metres. In some schools, windows cannot be opened properly, although the aerial emissions from a sick person (as a video simulation from the TU Berlin shows) can fill an entire classroom in just two minutes.

Children, teachers and parents are protesting against the opening up policy and have expressed their anger and sarcasm on Twitter. One wrote: “What is the point of the RKI if even our Ministers of Culture don’t follow its recommendations? School opening without an AHA rule is not merely a case of negligence. It borders on intentional infection.” Others call the ministers of culture “the supreme Corona deniers” and warn: “Do not then say anybody, we could have known the consequences!”

More than 20 teachers have taken legal action against being forced to attend classes. A number of teachers had already undertaken legal complaints in April and May, but in vain. Now the Education Ministry in Schleswig-Holstein has gone so far as to appeal against a ruling. The Administrative Court in Schleswig had ruled in the case of a teacher suffering from lung disease that she should not be forced to attend classes for the time being. The Education Ministry has appealed against the judgment.

An open letter to the mayors of Hamburg, Peter Tschentscher (SPD) and Katharina Fegebank (Greens), as well as the senators for schools and social affairs, Ties Rabe and Melanie Leonhard (both SPD), was signed by more than 800 parents on the first day of reopened schools. The letter opposes the policy, arguing that “a safe and orderly start of school is not possible.” The parents write that they are naturally concerned about the welfare of children and their socio-psychological development. “But the welfare of the child is not possible without health protection.” They demand “urgent improvements to the concept presented!”

It is false, however, to expect the SPD and the Greens, who govern in the city-state of Hamburg, to take such proposals seriously. Hamburg’s school senator Ties Rabe, for example, never tires of repeating his claim that coronavirus is “safer for children and young people than flu.” Against all evidence to the contrary, Rabe declares in a school-start video that children are “not as much at risk as adults.”

The Left Party, which governs in Thuringia, Berlin and Bremen, and the teachers’ union GEW, also cannot be trusted. They are all ruthlessly pushing ahead with the opening of schools because they put the interests of the economy above the life and health of the working population. It is the same politicians who agreed to pump hundreds of billions and trillions of euros of “pandemic emergency aid” into the vaults of banks and corporations.

The World Socialist Web Site, the Socialist Equality Party and its sister parties across the world reject this dangerous experiment. We call on young people, as well as teachers, educators and parents, to take action and fight against it.

In a statement published on July 6 on the WSWS, the Socialist Equality Party (SEP) in the US calls for a “nationwide general strike against the reopening of schools.” In order to organize and make such a movement successful, teachers have to “build independent action committees,” “unite with other sections of the working class” and take up a struggle for the transformation of society according to socialist principles.

“All the rights of the working class, even the right to life, depend upon the expropriation of the ruling class and the reorganization of economic life on the basis of social need, not private profit” the SEP writes and continues, “The only way to halt the reopening of schools, stop the spread of the pandemic and prevent millions more infections and deaths is through the mass mobilization of the working class in a revolutionary struggle against the source of all suffering wrought by the pandemic, the capitalist system.”

Sri Lankan election exposes historic crisis of capitalist rule

K. Ratnayake

The Sri Lankan media has responded to the last Wednesday’s election win of President Gotabhaya Rajapakse’s Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) by falsely hailing it as a “people’s victory.” The SLPP won 145 seats while the opposition parties won just 74 seats.

As a result, with the votes of six MPs from political allies, the SLPP will have a two-thirds majority in the 225-seat parliament, enabling it to change the constitution. President Rajapakse has been openly campaigning for the removal of constitutional restraints to the executive presidency which would give him sweeping autocratic powers.

The election result is not a “people’s victory” but an electoral win by a party preparing for authoritarian rule under President Rajapakse who has already appointed a host of generals to his administration. The new cabinet will be officially appointed tomorrow and the new parliament convened on August 20.

SLPP leader Mahinda Rajapakse was sworn in as prime minister by his brother President Rajapakse on Sunday. The ceremony was held at Kelaniya Viharaya in northeastern Colombo, a site mythically claimed to have been visited by Buddha. Significantly, President Rajapakse took his oath in Anuradhapura, the ancient Sinhala capital, in the north-central province. Both leaders are thus signalling the Sinhala-Buddhist supremacism character of their regime.

Sinhala-Buddhist supremacism was the main plank of the SLPP’s presidential and general election campaigns. Its purpose was to whip up hostility against the island’s Tamil and Muslims minorities, divert social tensions and divide the working class across ethnic lines.

The Sri Lankan ruling elite faces a profound economic and political crisis that has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. It has backed the SLPP because it promised “strong and stable rule”—i.e., its willingness to suppress rising working-class resistance to Colombo’s austerity policies and attacks on jobs and wages. Like its counterparts internationally, Sri Lankan big business wants the economy restructured and their profits increased by slashing jobs, imposing lower wages and increasing productivity.

The ruling class has turned to the SLPP and its authoritarian plans under conditions of a historic collapse of the United National Party (UNP) and Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), the two traditional parties of the Sri Lankan bourgeoisie.

The UNP, the country’s oldest political party, was only able to win one seat, not in a direct contest but a result of its national vote which plummeted to just 250,000. The bitterly-divided party split in February when the majority of its MPs, under the leadership of Sajith Premadasa, left to form the Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB).

The factional conflict centred on the electoral unpopularity of longstanding UNP leader and former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. The issue, however, was not a question of personality but the deep-seated hostility of workers and the rural poor to this pro-imperialist party and its attacks on democratic and social rights. The SJB won just 54 seats and 24 percent of votes in last week’s election.

The SLFP, led by former President Sirisena, is all but defunct. The majority of its MPs left the party and joined the SLPP when it was formed in 2016. Sirisena and the remaining SLFP parliamentarians contested last Wednesday’s ballot in an electoral alliance with the SLPP.

Consecutive UNP and SLFP administrations have governed the country since formal independence in 1948. The UNP was established in 1946 while the SLFP was formed in 1951 by S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike and other MPs who split in response to rising working class struggles against the UNP. Whether in or out of government, both parties used anti-Tamil communalism to divide the working class and defend capitalist rule. This reactionary agenda culminated in the communalist war in 1983 against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) creating untold devastation for the masses throughout the island.

Wednesday’s elections also exposed the ongoing crisis of the bourgeois Tamil National Alliance (TNA). It won just 10 seats, down from 16 in the last parliament, with its overall vote falling from 515,963 in the August 2015 election to just 327,168.

The Illankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK), the principal party in the alliance, was formed in 1949 in response to the anti-Tamil communalism. ITAK has a long and sordid history of attempting to secure power-sharing arrangements with the Colombo elite. These political manoeuvres have produced one disaster after another for the Tamil masses.

Formed in 2002, the TNA responded to the LTTE’s defeat in May 2009, by shifting further to the right, and appealing to the major imperialist powers, including the US, to secure their backing for a deal with Colombo.

The TNA supported Washington’s 2015 regime-change operation to oust then President Mahinda Rajapakse and to install Sirisena. It backed Sirisena’s pro-imperialist administration and its suppression of any investigation into Colombo’s war crimes, including the massacre of tens of thousands of Tamil civilians in the final weeks of war, and also supported the government’s austerity measures.

The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) contested the election in a new front called the National People’s Power (NPP) offering populist demands and calling for a “clean” uncorrupted parliament. It won three seats, down from six in the previous parliament. In 2004, the JVP had 39 MPs.

Established in the late 1960s, the JVP was a radical petty-bourgeois party based on a mixture of Castroism, Maoism and Sinhala patriotism. It is now a party of the bourgeois establishment and since 1994 has aligned itself with every regime in Colombo. This includes joining a coalition with President Chandrika Kumaratunga in 2004. Having fully backed Colombo’s communalist war it is widely discredited among the youth and workers initially attracted to it.

Commenting on last Wednesday’s election, JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake said, “This result is not one we can be satisfied with” but added “there is a role for the Opposition outside the parliament as well,” and said the organisation would organise farmers and unemployed. As its previous history demonstrates, the JVP will work with the ruling elites to derail rural poor and youth from turning towards socialism and the working class.

The deep-going alienation of the masses from the political establishment was also revealed by the millions of Sri Lankan citizens who refused to participate in the election. While there are more than 16 million registered voters in Sri Lanka just over 11 million voted—i.e., about 4.7 million did not cast a vote. This is about one million more than the previous national election in 2015, and of those that participated in Wednesday’s election, 700,000 cancelled their votes.

The media rejoicing about the SLPP victory is an expression of their support for the future government’s social assault on all working people. As an August 6 editorial in the Island entitled “Real war ahead” declared: “A democratically elected stable government is a prerequisite for restoring investor confidence, reviving the economy, and improving the country’s credit ratings.”

It is not enough for parties to just call for “stringent measures,” the editorial continued, “The interval in hell, as it were, we have been enjoying all these months will be over soon.” In other words, massive government attacks must be unleashed on workers, the rural poor and youth as soon as possible.

In last Wednesday’s election, the Socialist Equality Party increased its total vote to 780 in the three districts that it contested—Jaffna 146, Colombo 303 and Nuwara Eliya 331. The party’s vote doubled in Colombo, the country’s major working-class centre and in Nuwara Eliya, where the majority of Sri Lanka’s plantation workers live. This increase was amid the COVID-19 pandemic, where party campaigns were limited to online meetings and Facebook sharing of SEP statements and World Socialist Web Site articles.

These conscious votes indicate a growing support for socialism in Sri Lanka. The SEP will intensify its exposure of the Sinhala chauvinist provocations against Tamil and Muslim minorities that seek to divide workers. It was the only party that opposed Colombo’s communalist war against the LTTE and demanded the withdrawal of the military from the north and east of the country.

Our party advances a socialist policy against imperialist war, the coronavirus pandemic and social inequality. We alone call for the working class to break from every faction of the ruling class and independently mobilise—rallying the rural poor and the oppressed—to fight for a workers’ and peasants’ government to implement socialist policies as part of the struggle for international socialism.