11 Nov 2020

Russia, Turkey negotiate cease-fire in Armenian-Azeri war over Karabakh

Alex Lantier


On November 10, a cease-fire backed by Moscow and Ankara went into effect in the six-week war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region. Unlike previous truces negotiated by Russian, French and US officials which collapsed immediately, this cease-fire has so far held. This appears to be largely because, unlike previous ceasefires, it has support from the Azeri government and its main international backer, Turkey.

The two former Soviet republics have repeatedly waged fratricidal wars over the Karabakh, which first broke out in 1988 in the run-up to the Stalinist regime’s 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union. Whereas Armenia took over the Nagorno-Karabakh in the 1988-1994 war, however, the current cease-fire agreed by Russian, Armenian and Azeri officials makes substantial concessions to Azeri territorial demands, handing much of the Karabakh to Azerbaijan.

In this image taken from footage released by Azerbaijan’s Defense Ministry on Sunday, Sept. 27, 2020, Azerbaijan’s soldiers fire from a mortar at the contact line of the self-proclaimed Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan. (Azerbaijan's Defense Ministry via AP)

Recent weeks saw major Azeri advances, relying on devastating strikes from Turkish and Israeli high-altitude drones. Evading Armenia’s older air defense systems with tactics worked out against Syrian and Russian forces in the decade-long NATO proxy war in Syria, they destroyed Armenian missile batteries, artillery and armored vehicles. After Azeri forces reported this weekend that they had captured Shusha, Nagorno-Karabakh’s second-largest city, Armenia agreed to a ceasefire.

According to the truce, Armenian and Azeri troops are to initially remain on their current positions. As 1,960 Russian peacekeepers with armored vehicles and equipment deploy along the contact line, however, Armenian troops will withdraw. Armenia will retain those parts of the Karabakh it currently holds, including the capital, Stepanakert. It must also return to Azerbaijan the districts of Agdam and Kalbajar, which it took over during the 1988-1994 war, by November 20.

The deal also calls to secure complex land routes through the mountainous region. Azerbaijan is to guarantee the security of the Lachin Corridor linking Stepanakert to Shusha and then to Armenia. The corridor will be patrolled by Russian peacekeepers. Armenia will guarantee the security of land routes from Azerbaijan via Armenia to the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, a landlocked Azeri-administered enclave separated from Azerbaijan by Armenian territory.

This shaky cease-fire, even if it holds, will not resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which the region’s capitalist regimes have proven incapable of resolving for three decades. Not only does it leave the way open to more aggressive nationalist elements on both sides to advance claims on the entire enclave, but it is likely to trigger new population displacements Armenian authorities only 10 days to abandon regions they have held for a quarter century.

This comes after a new, massive loss of life in the latest war. Russian officials have stated, based on estimates privately communicated to them by Azeri and Armenian officials, that at least 5,000 people died in the war from September 27 to October 22. Official Azeri or Armenian casualty totals have still not been published, however. Moreover, Azeri forces’ advances and Armenian bombardments also forced an estimated 90,000 Armenians and 40,000 Azeris to flee their homes.

Nonetheless, officials across the region applauded the deal, which Turkish official sources said was negotiated on Saturday between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Kremlin press secretary Dmitri Peskov applauded the “not insignificant efforts” involved.

The Foreign Ministry of Iran, which like Russia has traditionally supported Armenia, declared that it was “content about the signing of an agreement” and expressed “hope that the agreement would lead to the final arrangements for long-lasting peace in the Caucasus.”

After Azeri President Ilham Aliyev hailed the ceasefire as being “of historical importance” and a “capitulation” by Armenia, Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar visited the Azeri capital, Baku yesterday and declared: “The present situation is very pleasing for us. This operation is an awakening ... The Azeri army has shown its power to the whole world.”

In Armenia, where the government had largely hidden its growing military setbacks, protesters stormed the parliament and beat parliamentary speaker Ararat Mizoyan.

The cease-fire is a humiliating defeat for Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. Elected in 2018 after mass protests against former Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan, he advanced a chauvinist platform demanding full international recognition of Armenian authority over the Karabakh.

Pashinyan announced on Facebook the cease-fire handing over much of the Karabakh to Azerbaijan, calling it “unspeakably painful.” He continued, “The decision is made basing [sic] on the deep analyses of the combat situation and in discussion with best experts of the field. … This is not a victory but there is not defeat until you consider yourself defeated. We will never consider ourselves defeated and this shall become a new start of an era of our national unity and rebirth.”

Pashinyan had to hide as protesters stormed his official residence, tearing his nameplate off his office door and chanting, “Nikol betrayed us.”

Middle East Eye reporters at protests in Yerevan saw a woman shout at riot police: “I have lost all my relatives. I have lost my house. What are you going to do about it?” Another man, a former Armenian inhabitant of the Nagorno-Karabakh, who fought in the 1988-1994 war but had to flee to Yerevan in the current war, approved the cease-fire: “If we had carried on, we would only have lost. Many more people would have been killed.”

The Stalinist dissolution of the Soviet Union proved to have disastrous geopolitical consequences, throwing the Middle East and Central Asia open to bloody ethnic conflict and imperialist wars.

Enormous uncertainty still hangs over the cease-fire. As Russia and Turkey wage proxy wars as they back rival sides in the civil wars triggered by NATO intervention in both Libya and Syria, Azeri forces shot down a Russian Mi-24 on November 9. Baku subsequently called it a “tragic mistake.” The Kremlin also appeared to contradict Turkish claims that they would deploy peacekeepers to enforce the ceasefire, saying that only Russian peacekeepers would be deployed.

Perhaps the greatest danger comes from the explosive political crisis in Washington after the 2020 elections, and the risk of new US wars in the region. As Trump launches a coup trying to remain in office even after Democrat Joe Biden won the vote, both Trump and Biden have signaled a highly aggressive policy. While Trump nearly went to war with Iran last year, the Democratic Party has relentlessly demanded aggression against Russia, denouncing Trump as a Russian agent.

Significantly, both Russia and Iran have warned against CIA-backed Syrian Islamist militias who were transported from the Syrian war to Azerbaijan with tacit Turkish support. Iranian state-run IRNA agency warned that “the Islamic Republic’s firm response to the terrorists should they transgress against the Iranian borders is a calculated, firm and strategic position. … If after having expelled the [Al Qaeda-linked militias] from Syria and Iraq, some people help their deployment in Iranian borders, they have certainly made a grave mistake.”

Russia, whose war-torn regions of Chechnya and Dagestan also border Azerbaijan, made similar warnings. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called to “prevent the transfer of mercenaries, whose number in the conflict zone, according to available data, is already approaching 2,000. In particular, Putin raised the issue during a phone call with Turkish President Erdoğan on October 27 and during regular conversations with leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia.”

Concerns are mounting in Russia’s post-Soviet capitalist oligarchy that this truce could prove to be not the end but the beginning of a regional war across the former territory of the Soviet Union. This was the subject of the financial daily Vedomosti ’s article yesterday titled “How Russia Lost the Second Karabakh War.”

Warning that Ankara’s successful support for the ethnic-Turkic Azeris would encourage “pan-Turkic plans,” it wrote: “The balance of power in Turkic republics of Central Asia will also change radically … There is no doubt that Turkic nationalist and separatist groups inside Russia itself will also act more strongly.” It added, “Also we must suppose that this operation, judging from its execution, was not planned by the Azeris, or even by the Turks.”

Noting that the NATO-backed regime in Ukraine is now purchasing Turkish drones as it pursues its conflict with Russia in eastern Ukraine, Vedomosti called for a Russian build-up of “loitering weapons and strike drones.” It added, “The Armenian catastrophe of 2020 must serve as a warning to others, so that we do not end up learning a similar lesson.”

These statements are urgent warnings of the necessity of a struggle against ethnic nationalism and its encouragement by Stalinist forces, and the building of an international and socialist, that is to say Trotskyist, anti-war movement against imperialism among workers across the region and the world.

African App Launchpad Cup 2021

Application Deadline: 22nd November 2020. 

Type: Entrepreneurship

Eligibility:

  • Eligible Africa Countries: Egypt, Algeria, Angola, Cameroon, Chad, Comoros, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Namibia, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, The Gambia, Nigeria, Togo and Uganda.
  • Apply as Teams or Startups up to 2 Years Old
  • Team Size not Less than 2 Members
  • A Working Prototype at least is a Must

Selection Criteria: The submitted applications as well as pitching will be judged on the 4 following areas

  1. Innovation Originality/Creativity
  2. Business Model
  3. Art and/or Design of the Game/App
  4. Team Competencies.

To be Taken at: Online

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award:

  • $72k Total Cash Prizes for Winners
  • Business planning training by GrindStone
  • Acceleration Program by Microsoft through THINKROOM
  • Access to VCs for top winning startups

How to Apply: Register

  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Next Generation Social Sciences in Africa Fellowships 2021/2022

Application Deadline: 1st February 2021

Eligible Countries: Citizens of and reside in a sub-Saharan African country while holding a current faculty position at an accredited college or university in Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, and Uganda.

Field of Study: The fellowships support dissertations and research on peace, security and development topics.

About the Fellowships: The programme, launched in June 2011, responds to a shortage of experienced faculty in African higher education. The Next Generation Social Sciences in Africa program provides fellowships to nurture the intellectual development and increase retention of early-career faculties in Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, and Uganda.

The fellowships are:

  • Doctoral Dissertation Research Fellowship
  • Doctoral Dissertation Proposal Fellowship
  • Doctoral Dissertation Completion Fellowship
  • Post-doctoral Writing Fellowship

The doctoral dissertation research fellowship supports 6-12 months of dissertation research costs of up to US$15,000 on a topic related to peace, security, and development.

Proposal development fellowships are intended to support doctoral students working on developing a doctoral dissertation research proposal as well as students who recently completed a master’s degree and seek to enroll in a PhD program.

The doctoral dissertation completion fellowship supports a one-year leave from teaching responsibilities and a stipend up to US$15,000 to permit the completion of a dissertation that advances research on peace, security, and development topics.

Post-doctoral Writing Fellowship supports up to six months of completing an article or book manuscript  through a stipend of up to US$3,000. It will enable the recipient to buy time off from teaching and administrative duties to focus exclusively on finalizing an article for a peer-reviewed journal or completing a book manuscript based on a Next Gen-supported doctoral dissertation that advances research on peace, security, and development. This fellowship is exclusively available for Next Gen alumni.

Offered Since: June 2011

Type: Research, Fellowship .

Selection Criteria: Strong proposals will offer clear and concise descriptions of the project and its significance. Proposals should display a thorough knowledge of the relevant social science literature that applicants will engage and the methodologies relevant to the project. In addition, applicants must demonstrate that all proposed activities are feasible and can be completed in a timely manner. All proposals will be evaluated for these criteria by an independent, international committee of leading scholars from a range of social science disciplines.

Fellows must be willing to attend two workshops sponsored by the SSRC each year that are intended to help early-career faculty produce scholarly publications. We anticipate awarding as many as 45 fellowships in total across all categories each year.

Eligibility: All candidates must:

  • be citizens of and reside in a sub-Saharan African country
  • hold a master’s degree
  • be enrolled in a PhD program at an accredited university in Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, or Uganda
  • have an approved dissertation research proposal

The program seeks to promote diversity and encourages women to apply.

Number of Fellowships: 45 fellowships are awarded each year.

Value of Fellowships: 

  • The doctoral dissertation research fellowship supports research costs of up to US$15,000 on a topic related to peace, security, and development.
  • The doctoral dissertation proposal fellowship supports short-term research costs of up to US$3,000 to develop a doctoral dissertation proposal.
  • The doctoral dissertation completion fellowship supports a one-year leave from teaching responsibilities and a stipend up to US$15,000 to permit the completion of a dissertation that advances research on peace, security, and development topics.
  • Post-doctoral Writing Fellowship supports up to six months of completing an article or book manuscript  through a stipend of up to US$3,000.

Duration of Fellowship: Fellowships are offered each year. The doctoral dissertation research fellowship is about 6-12 months

How to Apply: 

Visit Fellowship Webpage for more details

10 Nov 2020

UK parents’ strike sabotaged by trade unions and Labour Party

Charlotte Salthill & Laura Tiernan


Boycott Return to Unsafe Schools (BRTUS) called a parents’ strike last week against pupils being forced to attend school during the escalating COVID-19 pandemic. The strike was held last Thursday, coinciding with the start of the Johnson government’s partial national lockdown that excludes schools, colleges, universities and non-essential industry.

The main demands issued by BRTUS enjoy widespread support: that schools be closed to all but vulnerable and key worker children, that fines and other threats against parents be lifted and that students have access to comprehensively funded and resourced remote learning.

Daily Express poll shows 58 percent in favour of closing schools to help stop the spread of COVID-19. The latest YouGov poll (November 2), found 46 percent support for closing schools and colleges as part of the current lockdown, with 12 percent unsure.

Thousands of parents joined last Thursday’s strike from areas including London, Sheffield, Doncaster and Stoke-on-Trent, Scotland and the Isle of Wight, according to BRTUS. Since it was founded by Tony Dadd six months ago, BRTUS: Parents United has won nearly 15,000 members.

During a Facebook livestream on the morning of the strike, Dadd was asked whether he had a message for Education Secretary Gavin Williamson. He replied, “We are only interested in the safety, health and education of our children. This isn’t an overtly political campaign. You have politicised this issue. We’re a pressure group and represent something like 50 percent of the population. We know there’s massive support that isn’t heard, and the momentum is with us.”

Dadd’s comments raise important political issues for parents and teachers. Any fight to close unsafe schools, protect families and save lives, is, by definition, a political struggle. Dadd notes the “massive support” for school closures “isn’t heard”. But why not? Which political forces are responsible for this? If more than 50 percent of the population believes that schools should be shut to suppress the pandemic, why haven’t mass strikes and walkouts been organised at schools, colleges, universities and workplaces against the Johnson government’s “herd immunity” agenda?

Events surrounding last week’s parents’ strike provide the answer. When the strike was called on November 2, BRTUS called on the National Education Union (NEU) to support the strike and stand “shoulder to shoulder” with parents. But the NEU and other teaching unions refused to back the strike, in a deliberate act of political sabotage. Like their fellow bureaucrats in other unions, NEU officials, led by Kevin Courtney and Mary Bousted, feared that any promotion of the parents’ action would draw behind it the active support of the NEU’s 450,000 teacher members.

Mary Bousted and Kevin Courtney

Two days earlier, BRTUS published a statement, “Together we are strong. GMB and Unite support BRTUS, it’s time for the NEU to join the fightback”. BRTUS provided no information about what support had been offered by the two unions. But neither Unite, Britain’s largest union, nor the GMB, whose membership includes the majority of teaching assistants and support staff, published so much as a statement of support on their websites, let alone called on their own members to strike.

Instead of condemning the actions of the NEU and appealing over their heads to teachers and support staff, on October 31, BRTUS wrote, “The NEU need to collaborate with other school stakeholders—parents--by working with Brtus: Parents United (the largest parent-led safer schools campaign in the UK)”. In line with this pitch for official recognition, BRTUS is watering down its demands for a boycott of unsafe schools to accommodate to the NEU’s fake fight against the Johnson government.

In their letter to the NEU two days later, BRTUS wrote, “we support you in your latest package of demands: 1) Improved testing available for school communities 2) Smaller class sizes 3) Guarantees that vulnerable staff can work from home 4) Increases in school funding, and 4) A Public Health review of all school outbreaks.”

These demands are a political evasion. Despite the NEU’s polite calls for schools to be included in the current national lockdown, the union has steadfastly opposed any mobilisation of its membership to fight for this. The education unions all supported the full reopening of schools in September, suppressing teachers’ calls for strike action in favour of local school “risk assessments”.

The outcome of the NEU’s collaboration with the Conservative government has been catastrophic. More than 8,000 schools have been infected with COVID-19 and 148 education staff have died. Among children in years 7-11 in England, COVID-19 infections increased 50-fold between September 1 and October 23, up from 40 cases to 2,010. Schools, colleges and universities account for more than 50 percent of virus transmission across the UK.

With BRTUS’s claims of “union support” exposed as threadbare, former Labour MP Laura Pidcock was drafted onto the group’s livestream on the morning of the strike to provide the illusion of “labour movement” backing. A protégé of former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, Pidcock is a rising star of what passes for the official “left” and is currently contesting for a position on Labour’s National Executive Committee.

Laura Pidcock speaking at the BRTUS livestream

After her defeat in the December 2019 general election, Pidcock was installed as National Secretary of the People’s Assembly, a meeting ground for the Corbynite left in the Labour Party and trade unions, with Britain’s pseudo-left and Stalinist organisations.

Pidcock was unable to cite a single example of Labour Party or trade union “support” for the parents’ strike, pathetically declaring that she was speaking in a personal capacity. She did not even mention that she was in the Labour Party. Her statement that “I’m a socialist and collective action should be supported” is worthless. Neither Pidcock, Corbyn, the NEU, GMB, Unite or any of the teaching unions posted a single tweet or statement supporting the parents’ action on November 5.

One of Pidcock’s leading allies on the People’s Assembly is John Rees of the pseudo-left Counterfire organisation. In a video posted on BRTUS’s website, Rees offers praise to BRUTUS as a “grassroots” organisation. But if BRTUS were to openly defy the NEU and appeal for united action to close unsafe schools, Rees’ “support” would immediately evaporate.

One day after the strike, Counterfire published an article amplifying BRTUS’s false message that Labour MPs including Bell Ribeiro-Addy, Ian Mearns and Grahame Morris are backing parents’ fight against unsafe schools. Such claims are political fiction. Not a single Labour MP, including Corbyn, opposed Starmer’s insistence that schools must reopen, “no ifs, no buts, no equivocations”.

These experiences contain vital lessons. As the working class come into struggle, the ruling class and its political agencies in the Labour and trade union bureaucracy, along with their pseudo-left accomplices, intervene at every point seeking to neuter any independent challenge from below. But they have nothing to offer the working class.

The Socialist Equality Party (SEP) supported the parents’ strike. Our warning that the unions were sabotaging a united struggle by teachers and parents have been confirmed.

The central lesson from last week’s parents’ strike is that any effective action against the escalating COVID-19 pandemic--including mass strikes and walkouts to oppose unsafe schools and workplaces--requires a political rebellion against the corporatist pro-capitalist trade unions and Labour Party.

Young people hit hard by UK jobs massacre

Margot Miller


While the UK’s second four-week lockdown will have minimal impact on the spread of the pandemic in the UK, thousands more face poverty due to rising unemployment.

As job losses continue across all sectors of the economy, young people are especially hard hit. A study by the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) and Exeter University found, “More than one in 10 people aged 16-25 have lost their job, and just under six in 10 have seen their earnings fall since the coronavirus pandemic began.”

“Generation COVID and Social Mobility: Evidence and Policy”, published October 26 by LSE’s Centre for Economic Performance, paints a bleak picture. Young people are facing “a dark age of low social mobility.”

The report surveyed approximately 10,000 people over September and October. On top of the 5.4 percent who reported losing their jobs, 7.3 percent were working zero hours though nominally employed. The workless rate in the age group 16-25 was 18.3 percent, compared to 11.9 percent for those aged 26-65.

Shoppers walk along Oxford Street in London, Tuesday, Oct. 13, 2020. (AP Photo/Frank Augstein)

Report co-author Professor Stephen Machin said, “There is a real concern that people who have lost their jobs are moving onto trajectories heading to long-term unemployment, the costs of which are substantial.”

The consequence for young workers beginning their working lives during a recession can impact “on earnings and jobs for 10 to 15 years, … affecting other outcomes including general health and the likelihood of entering a life of crime.”

A new term, “generation Covid”, has entered the vernacular, replacing the derogatory “snowflake generation.” While older workers face increasing hardship—14.3 million people were living in poverty in 2019—the youth in their families are twice as likely to become unemployed since the pandemic began. Young people make up a significant part of the retail, leisure and hospitality workforces—either working full-time or supplementing their income as students—all heavily hit by public health restrictions.

Recent announcements of job losses at supermarket chain Sainsbury’s, retailer John Lewis, Clarks shoes, Lloyds Banking group and a catering firm at British Airways amount to 7,200 redundancies.

In a bid to compete with discount rivals Aldi and Lidl, Sainsbury is shedding 3,000 jobs on its deli, fresh meat and fish counters, and at its Argos stores.

John Lewis will axe 1,500 jobs at head office, on top of 1,300 announced in July. The company employs 78,000 at its department stores and Waitrose supermarkets.

Clarks plans 700 job cuts, translating to two redundancies from each of its 320 shoe shops out of a total workforce of 3,969. The company already announced 900 job losses in May, with a strong possibility of shop closures.

Aviation and tourism firms have shed lost thousands of jobs due to the freeze in holiday bookings during the summer season. After making 1,068 workers redundant, only 500 staff remain employed by airline caterer Do and Co at Heathrow airport.

Despite registering healthy profits Lloyds, taking advantage of lockdown to further restructure, will lose 1,070 posts on top of the 865 announced in September.

The popular fast-food restaurant chain Pizza Express is to shed a further 1,300 jobs. It already announced 1,100 redundancies in August and the closure of 73 restaurants.

The latest casualties to close on the high street are the Edinburgh Woollen Mill chain and the homewares retailer Ponden Home, both part of the Phillip Day retail empire, announcing 860 redundancies. A further 2,000 job are also at risk as the company calls in administrators.

Even before the latest lockdown measures, which closed bars, restaurants, leisure and beauty outlets, as well as retailers classed as non-essential, a sharp rise in unemployment was forecast come winter. Now, in the run up to Christmas, up to £50 billion worth of trade could be lost.

On Tuesday, the Office for National Statistics reported that a further 314,000 redundancies were announced by businesses from July to September—a rise of 195,000 from the previous year and 181,000 from the previous quarter. October saw a drop of another 33,000 of the number of people on payrolls, meaning that there are now 782,000 less people in employment than when the UK imposed its first lockdown in March.

This continues a trend that began well before the pandemic as companies cut costs in an increasingly competitive global market. High street stores were particularly hard hit by competition from online giants like Amazon, which is expanding as demand for online shopping soars.

In this economic climate, graduate jobs are increasingly difficult to find. The LSE report predicted growing inequality in job prospects as students from lower income backgrounds lost 52 percent of teaching time compared to a 40 percent loss from the highest income groups: “62% said their long-term plans have been affected, and 68% said they believed their future educational achievement will be affected by coronavirus.”

Confirming the World Socialist Web Site’s description of the pandemic as a “poor man’s virus”, the study found, “employment and earnings losses are more pronounced for women, the self-employed and those who grew up in a poor family”.

School students in the state sector are also losing out compared to children in the private sector, which has bountiful resources to provide safe onsite learning. The government will not close schools and release the resources necessary for safe online learning at home, despite schools and campuses being among the main vectors for the virus. The education of hundreds of thousands of children is therefore being seriously disrupted as COVID-19 rips through the classrooms. Pathetic amounts of “catch-up” funding have been allocated for schooling missed during the lockdown. This can have life-long consequences.

LSE report co-author Professor Lee Elliot Major, Professor of Social Mobility at the University of Exeter, said, “We are seeing large and sustained losses in education for school pupils and university students in the wake of the pandemic, with those from lower-income backgrounds particularly suffering. The big danger for pupils is that they suffer permanent educational scarring—missing out on key grades that can shape future life prospects.”

Another study by Kings’ Business School (King’s College London), which questioned 350 entrepreneurs during the height of the initial lockdown, reported that Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s job retention scheme offered no help to many self-employed workers or young people in the gig economy. Half a million workers, many of them young, are forced to eke out a living on miserly welfare benefits.

While the mega-rich increased their fortunes with the government’s bailout schemes and ongoing quantitative easing measures, six million small businesses supporting 16.6 million jobs are floundering.

In a separate survey by the Federation of Small Businesses, two thirds of 1,500 businesses polled thought the prospects for trading was bleak, due to both the pandemic and the looming Brexit deadline.

The Resolution Foundation explained it was the young, black, Asian and minority ethnic workers who were falling into unemployment as the government’s initial furlough scheme ended. Only 43 percent of people who lost jobs in March, when lockdown began, had found new employment by September, reported the think tank. For young people it was tougher—only one in three young people found a new job.

Frances O’Grady, general secretary of the TUC, has appealed to the Conservative government to invest in job creation. “Losing your job is terrible at any time, but it is especially hard now when few employers are recruiting new workers. Stopping the devastation of mass unemployment must be the government’s top priority,” she said.

Her statement is the height of cynicism. The trade unions have not lifted a finger to defend a single job, and along with the Labour party enabled the Johnson government to create this health and economic catastrophe through its policy of herd immunity.

More than 660 parents of separated immigrant children cannot be located by the US government

Harvey Simpkins


The horrors of the Trump administration’s family separation policy are continuing to come to light. After an ACLU lawsuit last month revealed that the parents of 545 immigrant children could not be located, a lawyer tasked with reuniting families disclosed this week that the total has now risen to 666. Almost 20 percent of the children were under the age of 5 when separated.

The Trump administration began separating children from their parents in July 2017 under a “pilot program” in the El Paso, Texas area, which lasted until November of that year. In April 2018, the policy was fully implemented at the US-Mexico border and lasted until June 2018, when a US District Judge issued an injunction limiting family separations and ordering the government to reunite all migrant families.

Under this so-called “zero tolerance” policy, all migrants crossing the border, including asylum seekers, were referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution. Undocumented immigrants were imprisoned, with their children sent to various Office of Refugee Resettlement shelters around the country. The separated children included infants and toddlers.

In October 2018, Amnesty International reported that during the period April-August 2018, 6,022 “family units” were separated. Since the government’s “zero tolerance” policy officially ended in June 2018, the government has acknowledged separating another 1,100 children from their families, with the number undoubtedly far higher.

Detention facility in McAllen, Texas, Sunday, June 17, 2018 (Photo US Customs and Border Protection)

The courts have proved ineffective in putting an end to family separation. On January 13, 2020, Judge Dana Sabraw, the same judge who issued the initial injunction, refused to issue further restrictions on the government’s ability to separate families, allowing immigration officials discretion to continue to separate children where the “parent is unfit or presents a danger to the child.” In fact, immigration officials have used this “discretion” to separate families based on “crimes” such as traffic violations or mere suspicion that an adult is not the actual parent of a child.

Now, more than two years after Judge Sabraw ordered the government to reunite all children, the process of finding parents is still ongoing. About two-thirds of the parents of the initially identified 545 separated children were deported, making reunification extremely difficult, if not impossible. According to Steven Herzog, the attorney leading the effort to reunite the separated children, the new group of 121 children includes those “for whom the government did not provide any phone number.” These additional children were mostly separated during the 2017 pilot program.

The deputy director of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, Lee Gelernt, told NBC News that the new number “includes individuals in addition to [the] 545 for whom we got no information from [the] government that would allow meaningful searches but [we] are hopeful the government will now provide [us] with that information.”

The Trump administration’s grotesque family separation tactics built upon the foundation laid by the Obama administration. In an inhumane effort to deter families from coming to the United States, Obama’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) instituted the practice of splitting families apart, sending mothers and their children to one detention location and fathers to a facility in another part of the country.

As another tactic to intimidate immigrants, Obama’s DHS routinely violated a 1997 court settlement agreement, known as the Flores agreement, by frequently keeping children in detention beyond 20 days. The Obama administration also deported about 3 million immigrants, more than any president in US history.

In a related development, an important witness into purported widespread medical neglect at a Georgia Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention center has been threatened with deportation to the Philippines, despite strong evidence that she is a US citizen.

Alma Bowman has been held at Georgia’s Irwin County Detention Center for more than two years. This is the same ICE facility where a nurse recently filed a whistleblower complaint alleging that a number of women were subjected to sterilization through hysterectomies without consent.

On November 1, ICE denied a stay of removal for Bowman, which sets her up for deportation; however, after further intervention by her immigration attorneys that afternoon, the deportation was halted for the time being. According to Priyanka Bhatt, an attorney with Project South, the organization which filed the whistleblower action, Bowman was “a big source of information” for the September 14 complaint into forced sterilizations.

Since her transfer to the Georgia facility in January 2018, Bowman has been trying to raise awareness about medical abuses, along with the general deplorable living conditions at the facility. In an October 2020 letter to Representatives Hank Johnson and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bowman wrote that “These conditions are not safe for anyone to live in whether they are citizens of the United States or not.”

Bowman was born in the Philippines to a US citizen father and Filipina mother, moving to the US as an adolescent. Under US immigration law at that time, a person born out of wedlock to a US citizen father had to have their father “legitimate” the paternity prior to turning 21. According to The Intercept when she was 11, Bowman’s father filled out an immigration form called a “petition to classify status of alien relative” and submitted it to the US embassy in the Philippines. Bowman’s immigration lawyer argues that the document legitimates her paternity. According to The Intercept , her parents’ 1968 marriage also legitimated her under Georgia law, making her a US citizen.

Despite informing ICE and immigration judges about her citizenship, she remains subject to deportation. Bowman’s situation is far from unique. According to Jacqueline Stevens, founder of the Deportation Research Clinic at Northwestern University, about 1 percent of all ICE detainees and about one-half of 1 percent of deportees are US citizens, resulting in the deportation of thousands of American citizens every year.

MAS inaugurates right-wing government in Bolivia

Tomas Castanheira


Luis Arce, of Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS), assumed the presidency of Bolivia last Sunday. The inauguration ceremony was attended by world leaders, including Spanish King Philip VI and the Podemos vice-president Pablo Iglesias, representatives of the US and Iranian governments, and various Latin American leaders.

The ceremony also brought thousands to Plaza Murillo in the capital La Paz, including delegations of trade unions, social movements and indigenous peoples from different parts of Bolivia.

In his inaugural speech, Arce mentioned those who had died in the Senkata and Sacaba massacres a year ago, who were abandoned by the MAS as they fought against the coup that overthrew President Evo Morales. He also saluted his voters, in his words, the “heroes of the people who have recovered democracy.”

The president-elect, who was the minister of economy in the Morales government from 2006 to 2017, attacked the coup regime of Jeanine Áñez for plunging the Bolivian economy into a “deep recession.” He said she had led Bolivia from the “leadership of economic growth in South America” to “the strongest fall in the economy in the last 40 years.”

He concluded his speech by reiterating his commitment not only to an amnesty for the bourgeois sectors that headed the coup, but to governing together with them:

“Despite our differences, we have an obligation to live up to the people’s demands for unity, peace and certainty ... I believe in and support the strengthening of the state institutions and the creation of a safe and stable environment where the only ones who have to fear are the offenders, the criminals, the violent and those who commit acts of corruption.”

Evo Morales (Credit: www.kremlin.ru)

Vice-president David Choquehuanca evoked the country’s indigenous traditions and employed pseudo-radical phraseology to defend the blunt right-wing orientation of the new government. Affirming that “our revolution is the revolution of ideas, it is the revolution of balances,” he stated: “We are going to promote the coincidence of opposites to look for solutions between the right and the left.”

Synthesizing the corrupt political line of the MAS, Choquehuanca declared: “Our truth is very simple, the condor takes flight only when its right wing is in perfect balance with its left wing.”

Since Arce’s election victory, the return to Bolivia of ousted president Evo Morales, criminalized by the coup regime, was a controversial question. Significantly, the deposed president was not invited to participate in his successor’s inauguration ceremony, and he was not mentioned in the speech given by Arce.

Morales returned to Bolivia on Monday, a day after Arce’s inauguration. He left Argentina, where he had been in exile since last December, in the company of Argentine President Alberto Fernandez, who accompanied him to the Bolivian border. There, Morales was received by hundreds of Argentines and Bolivians, and joined a caravan around the country together with former vice president Alvaro Garcia.

The same day Morales entered Bolivia, the new government introduced its ministerial cabinet. The 16 ministers chosen by Arce were praised by the Bolivian press as a group of technocrats who shared little in common with Morales.

Arce’s choices revealed his commitment to advancing the interests of Bolivia’s capitalist ruling class. In a brief speech, he pointed out: “This will be an extremely austere government.”

The cabinet choices have generated criticism and protests within MAS itself. David Apaza, a MAS representative from El Alto—a city with a record of major working class struggles, and an important center for the party—said the party’s base was taken completely by surprise by the choice of Arce’s ministers.

Apaza stated, according to Página Siete: “Unfortunately, the list wasn’t closed in consensus nor with consultation.” The MAS leader also warned: “El Alto won’t serve as a staircase [for the government to step over] again. If anything happens, they will be the ones to blame for not attending to the people of El Alto.”

The relatives of the murdered miners’ union leader Orlando Gutierrez also protested the appointment as minister of mining of Ramiro Guzmán, a former general manager of the Vinto Metallurgical Company, demanding that the ministry be handed over to Gutierrez’s brother. According to Mario Cruz, a rank-and-file delegate of the Colquiri miners, the population supports the family’s request and may march to the government headquarters if the demand is not met.

The Bolivian Workers Union (COB), which committed itself to the election of Arce, also criticized the cabinet. Its president, Carlos Huarachi, stated: “The people had an expectation of seeing a man in a poncho, a chulo, a guartatojo or a woman in a pollera skirt. That is the request of the people, of people who have fought, ordinary people who have been in the streets, on the highways, fighting to recover democracy.”

Weeks before his inauguration, Arce had already signaled that he would go against the interests of sectors of his own party and allied organizations in handing out control over slices of the state machinery. He had stated: “I have met with several social organizations and have calculated that I would have needed 149 ministries, [because] they all ask for ministries.”

Beside their petty interests, these organizations’ protests against the new ministers expresses the strong pressure they are feeling from the masses. Over the last few months, they have engaged in a betrayal of the mass struggles against the Áñez coup regime. The MAS, the unions, and the social movements of the Unity Pact have worked to divert the revolt of Bolivian workers and peasants into an electoral channel, which resulted in the bourgeois “national unity” government headed by Arce.

The right-wing character of the new government is already emerging within the first few days of the Arce administration. The leaders of the MAS and its affiliated organizations have every reason to believe that they will soon be confronted with a new upsurge in the revolutionary movement of the Bolivian working class.

US Supreme Court justices signal support for upholding Affordable Care Act

Kate Randall


On Tuesday, key justices on the US Supreme Court appeared ready to uphold the Affordable Care Act (ACA) against the latest challenge from Republican Party opponents of the legislation.

In the course of oral arguments, most of the justices gave a skeptical hearing to Texas Republicans and President Trump’s lawyers, who argued that the ACA, also known as Obamacare, should be struck down in its entirety because Congress had eliminated the tax penalty for those who did not have insurance.

The ACA, which was signed into law by President Obama in 2010 and took effect in 2014, required those who do not have insurance through their employer or a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid to obtain coverage from a private insurer under threat of a financial penalty—the so-called “individual mandate.”

Obamacare survived two earlier challenges in the Supreme Court. In a 5-4 ruling in June 2012, Chief Justice John Roberts joined with the nominally liberal wing of the high court at the time to uphold the individual mandate to purchase insurance. The court also ruled that the federal government could not withdraw existing Medicaid funding from states that decided not to participate in an expansion of eligibility for the program under the ACA.

Clouds roll over the Supreme Court at dusk on Capitol Hill in Washington, Sunday, May 3, 2020. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

In June 2015, the high court ruled 6-3 that the federal government could provide nationwide tax subsidies to help lower-income people buy health insurance, rejecting the argument that the subsidies should be available only in states that had set up insurance exchanges, or market places, for people who lacked insurance to buy coverage.

In 2017, the Republican-led Congress cut the tax penalty to zero for those who lacked insurance as part of a year-end tax overhaul.

In the oral arguments on Tuesday, several justices said that while this “zeroing out” of the penalty effectively ended the mandate, removal of this provision did not invalidate the rest of the ACA, including its insurance premium subsidies for 20 million people and its coverage for tens of millions more with preexisting medical conditions.

Chief Justice Roberts said Congress did nothing more in 2017 than eliminate the tax penalty for those who did not have insurance. “Here, Congress left the rest of the law intact,” he said. “That seems to be compelling evidence on the question” that the rest of the law should stand.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, one of three justices appointed by President Trump, said that while he felt the mandate was unconstitutional, that should not affect the rest of the law. “It seems very clear the proper remedy is to sever the mandate provision and leave the rest,” he said.

Justices Roberts and Kavanaugh, joined by the three liberal justices on the court, could form a majority to uphold the law when a decision is handed down in the spring of 2021.

Wall Street Journal column on the ACA’s return to the Supreme Court gives an indication of the ruling elite’s attitude toward the ACA. The Journal writes: “The Court has a chance to make clear that Congress can’t use its taxing power as a constitutional end-run to impose other mandates on individuals.”

It continues: “At the same time, there’s no valid legal argument for overturning the entire ACA. The GOP Congress surgically zeroed out the penalty, thereby severing from the law. Premiums and enrollment in the exchanges have since been stable, so the mandate is clearly not essential to insurance markets. The economic reliance interests on the ACA have also grown since 2012, as amicus briefs from hospitals, physician groups and insurers attest.”

In other words, hospital chains and insurers continue to profit from the insurance premiums paid on the Obamacare exchanges.

The Democratic presidential campaign of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris placed emphasis on their pledge to defend and expand the ACA against any threats by the Republicans to undermine it. At the Senate confirmation hearing last month for Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s most recent appointee to the Supreme Court, Senator Harris repeatedly questioned her about the impact her appointment would have on the ACA.

Other Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee followed a similar line of questioning of Barrett, making no mention of Trump’s effort to stack the court with right-wing justices who would uphold any attempts on his part to challenge the legitimacy of the election, which is precisely what he is now doing.

In remarks Tuesday following the oral arguments before the Supreme Court on the ACA, President-elect Biden called the Trump administration’s call for the law to be struck down “simply cruel and needlessly divisive,” saying it would lead to 20 million Americans seeing their health coverage “ripped away in the middle of the nation’s worst pandemic.”

The reality is that Biden-Harris’ transition plan to confront the COVID-19 crisis offers only vague and wholly inadequate proposals. In particular, there is no explanation of where the funding will come from for increased testing and adequate personal protective equipment for health care workers. Nor is there any proposal for a new stimulus plan to provide the resources needed by the millions of families, schools and small businesses that are facing a catastrophic situation, which will only worsen as the pandemic grows in the coming winter months.

All Biden is offering are hollow calls for unity with the Republicans. Answering reporters’ questions about the Trump administration’s refusal to concede the election and the General Services Administration’s failure to recognize him as president-elect, stopping the release of millions in funding for his transition to the White House, Biden downplayed the very real threat of a Trump election coup.

US coronavirus hospitalizations hit new peak

Bryan Dyne


The number of hospitalizations from the coronavirus pandemic in the United States reached 61,964 as of Tuesday evening, according to the COVID Tracking Project. Also on Monday, the seven-day average of daily deaths in the US surpassed 1,000 for the first time since August 22. Both statistics demonstrate that the coronavirus is rampaging uncontrolled across the country, while the US ruling elite continues to send workers back to infected factories, offices and schools.

The current hospitalization rate is now higher than the previous all-time high recorded in April, while the number of known new cases is more than three times what it was seven months ago. The number of coronavirus tests returning a positive result has also risen to 7.7 percent, up from 4.0 percent at the start of October, indicating that current testing measures are not fully capturing the true extent of the pandemic.

Still higher numbers loom. In contrast to April, there are not even token measures in place to contain the pandemic, such as the national lockdown that covered most of that month. The policy is instead one of herd immunity, that is, the unchecked spread of the pandemic through the entire population.

This was spelled out explicitly by White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows in an interview on CNN last month, when he admitted, “We’re not going to control the pandemic.”

Hospital staff members enter an elevator with the body of a COVID-19 victim on a gurney at St. Jude Medical Center in Fullerton, Calif. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong, File)

Overall, there have been more than 10.5 million confirmed coronavirus cases in the United States, including 3.6 million that are currently active. Of those who became infected, more than 245,000 have died.

One of the most severe outbreaks in the country continues in El Paso, Texas. According to the city’s coronavirus dashboard, 1,292 new cases were reported Tuesday, and nine new deaths. There are currently 27,895 active cases in the county, more than eight times the number of active cases a month ago.

The number of people currently hospitalized with COVID-19 in the county is 1,076, with 319 patients under intensive care. Dozens have been airlifted to other places in Texas and New Mexico, as the hospitals in El Paso itself are at capacity and emergency field hospitals that have been set up are already strained.

Across the US-Mexico border in Ciudad Juarez, a new mobile hospital that can house 20 COVID-19 patients has been opened to handle the surge in the city. Ciudad Juarez has faced a similar situation to that in El Paso, where a sharp increase in cases in the multinational metropolitan area has forced Mexico’s federal government to send additional aid to the city and the state of Chihuahua as a whole. Ciudad Juarez has suffered 16,641 coronavirus cases since the pandemic began, and 1,525 deaths.

To handle the surge in the past month, El Paso County Judge Ricardo Samaniego ordered restaurants, bars and salons to close, in a two-week lockdown of the county. It is slated to end Wednesday night, although it may be extended. One factor is the sharp rise in deaths in the past month. Six refrigerated temporary morgues are already full and 10 more are en route. Samaniego has requested that a further four be provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to be sent to local funeral homes as needed.

These procedures, however, are not sustainable indefinitely, as hospitalizations continue to rise elsewhere across the country. The number of field hospitals, available beds, intensive care units and ventilators available to treat coronavirus patients, or patients with any other ailment, are rapidly shrinking. Transferring patients is all the more difficult in the United States, where Medicaid and insurance vary from state to state, meaning that even if beds are available, a given patient still might not be able to move and receive treatment because of the retrograde state of health care in the country.

In one particularly harrowing account, Dr. Emily Porter, a physician in Texas, shared a Twitter appeal for COVID beds from a Texas doctor. The appeal, to the Emergency Physician Forum group on Facebook, reads: “Does anyone who works in Texas have open corvid beds at your hospitals accepting transfers? Getting desperate here in my little town in panhandle. No beds at our hospital and anywhere within 200 miles isn’t accepting. I’ve been calling dozens of hospitals for my 5 patients in my 8 bed ER who need to be transferred out.”

As Dr. Porter noted, “emergency physicians are literally crowdsourcing COVID beds on social media while hospital administrators are home sleeping.”

Similar new lockdown measures are being prepared in California. The number of hospitalizations has increased in the state by 32 percent over the past two weeks, according to Dr. Mark Ghaly, the state’s secretary of health and human services. As a result, San Diego, Sacramento and Stanislaus counties—home to 5.5 million people—are going to re-enter the most restrictive phase of their lockdowns starting this week.

Ghaly warned that “if things stay the way they are…over half of California counties will have moved into a more restrictive tier.” This will involve closing down in-person restaurant dining in much of the state, along with gyms and a variety of other nonessential indoor venues. California currently has more than 990,000 cases and 18,000 deaths, with an average of nearly 6,000 daily cases and more than 40 deaths.

Other states are taking similar large-scale measures. Utah Governor Gary Herbert has announced a universal mask mandate while in public for the entire state. There are at least 137,000 cases and 672 logged deaths in the state, with a rate of new cases four times what it was at its peak in late July.

The state has 453 patients hospitalized with confirmed or suspected cases of COVID-19, including 185 patients in ICU beds. At present, Utah has only just enough staffed ICU beds to cope with current cases, and hospitalizations are trending upwards. North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming are similarly overwhelmed.

Workers should not, however, lower their guard because of various actions taken by states. The measures that have been taken are inadequate.

As shown in the case of El Paso, lockdowns take more than two weeks to slow the rate of new cases and hospitalizations. Moreover, none of the new lockdown measures so far are aimed at closing schools or workplaces, which have become the two main vectors of transmission.

What is needed is not a piecemeal closing and reopening carried out county by county and state by state, but a nationally and internationally coordinated effort, including the closure of all workplaces, except those required to produce the personal protection equipment, food and other social necessities, and other resources essential for containing and ending the pandemic, with no loss in income for the workers affected. The focus must be on saving lives rather than protecting the profits of corporations and hedge funds.

French government escalates cover-up of COVID-19 infections in schools

Samuel Tissot


On November 6, the French Ministry of National Education released a press statement alleging that only 3,528 students and 1,165 staff at French schools had tested positive for COVID-19 that week. However, statistics from the Ministry of Public Health show that in just the first three days of the week 25,151 people between 0 and 19 years old tested positive for the virus.

With the vast majority of 0–19-year-olds being school-age pupils and only 50,000 children being home-schooled in France, the discrepancy between these two numbers points to a systematic government cover-up of COVID-19 transmission in French schools.

This is not even the full story for last week’s pupil cases. Given that nearly half of the week’s national cases were reported on Thursday and Friday (58,046 and 60,486, respectively), the number of recorded student cases will likely exceed 40,000 when the data becomes available. Furthermore, with an average test positivity rate of over 20 percent over the past week, the actual rate of infection is likely even higher.

The virus is now out of control throughout France. Between November 2 and 6, more than 190,000 positive tests were recorded in the French population. On Saturday, a record 86,852 cases were reported. Underscoring the danger posed to schoolchildren by the virus, 182 individuals in the 0–19 age group are currently hospitalised with COVID-19 in France. Across all age groups, in the week from November 2 to 8, 3,420 people died from COVID-19.

Students leave their school in Cambo les Bains, southwest France, Thursday November 5, 2020 (AP Photo / Bob Edme)

The government’s latest set of lies comes in the face of increasingly militant opposition from French teachers. Beginning last Monday and continuing throughout the week, thousands of teachers organised strike action independently of the unions in opposition to the reopening of schools on November 2, after the All Saints holiday. Across the country, pupils joined their teachers’ strike action. In Paris, this led to violent police attacks against striking teenagers.

The Education Ministry’s criminal methods are a response to this strike action. Its aim is to present schools as safe in order to gain public support for its effort to pressure teachers back into deadly classroom environments. From the point of view of the ruling class across Europe, schools must be kept open so that profit can continue to be extracted from hundreds of millions of working parents.

This attempted cover-up of the extent of the virus’s spread in schools follows similar tactics used by the government in French schools and universities last month. That two official organs of the government are producing contradictory COVID-19 figures speaks to the profound nature of the crisis engulfing the French state in the face of increasing deaths and teacher strikes.

Following the press release, Education Minister Jean-Michel Blanquer doubled down on his ministry’s narrative. He claimed that the number of cases was “under control” and that transmission within the education system was “below the proportions found in the rest of the population.” He added that he wanted schools to stay open “at all costs”—these costs being the lives of students and teachers.

The manipulation of these figures has been complemented by a protocol designed to restrict students’ and teachers’ knowledge of cases within schools. When a pupil is confirmed as COVID-19 positive, only the head teacher is told. Despite the fact that masks only reduce the chance of infection, if those exposed wear a mask they are not considered contact cases or informed of their exposure. On Monday, Joe, a middle school pupil, tweeted, “At school today six students tested positive in year six. The class continued as if nothing had happened.”

Eric Menonville, a science teacher, noted on Twitter that the same lies had been used in the effort to enforce a return to workplaces, “It’s all a joke. The ministry of labor told us less than 1 percent of transmission happens at work and the minister of national education told us there is less than 1 percent in the institutions. So where are the infections happening?”

The censorship of case numbers at a local and national level is a murderous crime against the working class. How many parents have sent their children to school believing there are no cases? How many teachers have gone to work believing they are safe? How many pupils have gone on to infect their parents, grandparents and friends because they were not informed that they were exposed to the virus? How many people will die as a result of these transmission paths?

In response to the exposure of Blanquer’s lies, pseudo-left figures, including Alex Corbière, a La France Insoumise deputy, have only demanded that the minister show the real figures.

This half-hearted response makes no appeal to the thousands who have taken strike action in the last week, nor does it call for the necessary shutdown of in-person education. Similarly, the unions have refused to call a nation-wide strike and have actively isolated the groups of teachers who have taken independent action.

This only underscores the fact that teachers and students must form rank-and-file committees that are independent of the unions and pseudo-left forces. On the basis of a fight against the herd immunity policy of all European governments, their aim must be to expand and coordinate the strikes across the continent.

As well as the immediate closure of schools, strikers must demand the implementation of a national lockdown including all educational institutions, government offices, and businesses, with exceptions for essential food, health, and logistics workers. This must be complemented by a rapid expansion of testing and tracing capacity and the provision of adequate resources to families and teachers to ensure the highest possible quality remote learning.