Amazon’s Jeff Bezos congratulates Biden as the president-elect packs his transition teams with servants of the corporate oligarchy

Tom Carter

Amazon oligarch and COVID-19 profiteer Jeff Bezos, the world’s richest man, congratulated president-elect Joe Biden following the declaration four days after the November 3 vote that Biden had won the US presidential election.

“Unity, empathy and decency are not characteristics of a bygone era,” Bezos wrote on Instagram, congratulating Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris. “By voting in record numbers, the American people proved again that our democracy is strong.”

Jeff Bezos in 2019 (Image Credit: AP Photo/John Locher, File)

This sentiment was echoed on November 7 by the Business Roundtable, including Bezos as well as the chief executives of Apple, Cisco, Microsoft and Salesforce. The big business organization issued a statement that said: “Business Roundtable congratulates President-elect Biden on his election as 46th President of the United States. We also congratulate Vice President-elect Harris on her historic accomplishment as the first woman, Black woman and person of South Asian descent to be elected Vice President of the United States… We look forward to working with the incoming Biden Administration and all federal and state policymakers.”

Last week, Biden’s transition team posted the names and most recent employers of members of its agency review teams on the website buildbackbetter.org. Given the composition of these teams, it is easy to see why Bezos and his fellow oligarchs are in a congratulatory mood.

The individuals who have been appointed are listed alongside the company for which they most recently worked, and organized into “teams” based on the government operations they are tasked with reviewing, such as the departments of Commerce, Defense, Education, Labor, State and Homeland Security.

The composition of these agency review teams demonstrates the intersection, if not outright integration, of the technology monopolies, academic aristocracy, beltway think tanks, trade union bureaucracies, giant law firms and the military-intelligence apparatus of war and repression at home and abroad.

Amazon will have not one, but two seats on the transition teams. Tom Sullivan, Amazon’s director of international tax planning, will sit on Biden’s Department of State team. In addition to Sullivan, Mark Schwartz, an “enterprise strategist” for Amazon Web Services, will serve on the extremely powerful Office of Management and Budget (OMB) team. The OMB oversees the $5 trillion federal budget and exerts influence across a broad range of federal regulatory frameworks.

In addition to figures from Amazon, Nicole Isaac, senior director of North American policy at LinkedIn, will sit on the Department of Treasury team. Brandon Belford from Lyft will serve on the Office of Management and Budget team, along with Divya Kumaraiah from Airbnb.

Shara Mohtadi of Bloomberg Philanthropies, which is funded by the donations of billionaire oligarch Michael R. Bloomberg, will sit on the Council on Environmental Quality. And no less than four individuals, serving in various capacities, are drawn from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, which is co-owned by Facebook oligarch Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan.

Arun Venkataraman from Visa will sit on the team tasked with reviewing the Office of the United States Trade Representative, which will also review the US International Trade Commission and the US Trade and Development Agency. This team will also include Ted Dean from Dropbox.

The labor bureaucracies will also have seats at the table, demonstrating their complete integration into the apparatus of capitalist rule. Beth Antunez, Shital Shah and Marla Ucelli-Kashyap of the American Federation of Teachers, together with Donna Harris-Aikens of the National Education Association, will sit on the Department of Education team.

The labor bureaucracies are also represented by LaQuita Honeysucker from the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, who will be on the Department of Agriculture review team, while Josh Nassar of the United Auto Workers will sit on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau team.

Brad Markell of the AFL-CIO will sit on the Department of Energy Team. His name appears right before that of Trisha Miller from the venture capital firm Gates Ventures.

On the Department of Labor team will be Jennifer Abruzzo of the Communications Workers of America, Dora Chen of the Service Employees International Union, Jessica Chu of the Amalgamated Transit Union International, Nadia Marin-Molina of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON), and Shaun O’Brien of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, among others.

The major academic institutions represented on the list include Harvard Law School, the University of Michigan Law School, New York University School of Law, Duke University, Stanford University, Georgetown University and others. Major law firms and consulting firms include Deloitte Consulting; DLA Piper; Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe; Sidley Austin; Covington & Burling; and Latham & Watkins.

The racial and identity politics promoted by the Democratic Party did not fail to be reflected on the list, with Bonnie Jenkins appointed to the Department of State team from an organization titled Women of Color Advancing Peace and Security. Jenkins, a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, previously served as the coordinator for threat reduction programs in the Obama administration’s Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation.

The Department of Defense team will be led by Kathy Hicks from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), who will be joined by Melissa Dalton and Andrew Hunter, also from the CSIS; Stacie Pettyjohn, Christine Wormuth and Terri Tanielian from the RAND Corporation; Ely Ratner from the Center for a New American Security; and Lisa Sawyer of JPMorgan Chase, among others.

The composition of Biden’s agency review teams exposes and refutes all of the pseudo-left and opportunist groups in the orbit of the Democratic Party and the trade union bureaucracies, which have throughout the year attempted to persuade American workers that Biden, the Democratic Party and the unions represented some sort of channel through which they could advance their own independent interests.

The parade of lobbyists, servants and agents of the capitalist class into the incoming Biden administration prompted a defensive article in the New York Times on Thursday, titled “Progressives Press Biden to Limit Corporate Influence in Administration.”

The title of the article essentially acknowledges that “corporate influence” (i.e., corruption) is playing a pervasive role in the formation of the incoming administration, and suggests “limits” on that influence.

The article concedes that “Mr. Biden’s team included executives from Amazon Web Services, Lyft, Airbnb and a vice president of WestExec Advisors, a Washington consulting firm whose secretive list of clients includes financial services, technology and pharmaceutical companies.”

The Times then points to the efforts of “progressive Democrats” who are advocating “for tighter ethics rules.” This is nothing but a fig leaf for the otherwise naked domination of the Democratic Party by the interests of the military-intelligence-corporate-financial oligarchy.

The facts presented in the Times article themselves paint a devastating picture of how the so-called “left” wing of the party is being shoved aside as the fat cats shoulder their way into the new administration. In a joint letter sent Thursday, a number of organizations associated with the so-called “progressive wing” of the Democratic Party pleaded with Biden not to “nominate or hire corporate executives, lobbyists, and prominent corporate consultants,” and to adopt “ethics” rules to limit corruption.

These and other feeble efforts by the “progressive Democrats” are being unceremoniously ignored. The Times itself was compelled to acknowledge that “Mr. Biden has not always shared the left’s concerns about lobbying.”

Tendencies like the Democratic Socialists of America were used by the Democratic Party during the election campaign to further the Democrats’ electoral prospects, but within days of the vote they were tossed aside and roundly denounced for having supposedly cost the Democrats votes and positions with their “radical” and “socialist” rhetoric.

These “socialist” elements had been promised “space” in a Biden administration, but they showed up after the election only to find their “Green New Deal” and other promised reforms piled up in trash bags by the curb.

There is nothing unexpected about the emerging right-wing, pro-war, pro-Wall Street composition of the incoming Biden administration. Biden himself spent decades in Washington as a corrupt bag-man for wealthy interests in the state of Delaware, the legal headquarters of hundreds of thousands of corporations that take advantage of its business-friendly laws.

As vice president, Biden was reportedly opposed even to the barebones rules against corruption that were imposed during the Obama presidency. In the words of the Times: “When he was vice president under Mr. Obama, Mr. Biden bristled at the strict lobbying rules, which he contended would deprive their nascent administration of experienced talent.”

From the moment Biden secured a lead in the voting results, the Democratic Party swung viciously to the right, attacking “socialism” and the “left” in general. On a conference call with House Democrats after the election, former CIA agent Abigail Spanberger, now a representative from Virginia, shouted: “We need to not ever use the word ‘socialist’ or ‘socialism’ ever again.”

While the “socialists” have been escorted out of the back door, the front door has been thrown open to corporate executives, lobbyists and consultants to staff the new administration.

American workers should sever all ties with the Democratic Party, an old political mafia totally dominated by the capitalist class, as well as with all organizations and tendencies still promoting illusions in it.

Amazon workers, for example, cannot fight against Amazon with a political party stacked with agents of Amazon. They need their own organizations, which they must build and control themselves.

Windstorm leaves hundreds of thousands without power across the northeastern and midwestern US

Kathleen Martin

On Sunday, November 15, a strong windstorm with gusts up to 66 miles per hour swept across the northeastern and midwestern United States, knocking out power for hundreds of thousands of households and businesses in the region.

According to the Weather Channel, more than 792,000 customers from New York to Illinois lost power Sunday. As of Monday evening, nearly 140,000 customers nationally were still without electricity from the previous evening. The most severe outages were reported in Connecticut, Michigan, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Unlike other developed countries, power lines in the US are still above-ground, subject to even the smallest weather events. Power outages from downed power lines, even during relatively minor storms, take place on a semi-regular basis. Dead branches, fallen trees, and sustained winds often down power lines, creating hazardous live wires and fires, and knocking power out across the country’s decaying infrastructure.

A fallen tree in the backyard of a home in Detroit, Michigan (Credit: Twitter/@DTE_Energy)

Sunday’s outages have seriously disrupted life for the thousands of people working or learning from home, sheltering in place, or quarantining due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Michigan, which has seen a massive surge in positive COVID-19 cases and death rates in the last few weeks, and which just implemented further lockdown measures, had the most outages at over 340,000 on Sunday. Nearly 150,000 were still waiting for repairs and without power during the day Monday, according to DTE Energy, one of the state’s utility companies which raked in $319 million in its 2019 third-quarter earnings.

DTE, like many of the other widely-hated utility companies, has notoriously and criminally scaled back its tree-trimming maintenance, allowing nature to run its course on the aging power grid.

In Connecticut, over 16,000 Eversource Energy customers were still affected by Monday. At one point during the peak of the storm on Sunday, over 36,000 in Connecticut were without power. Several school districts were delayed or closed on Monday from either outages or storm damage.

Eversource spokesman Frank Poirot told a local news outlet, “Sunday’s intense storm brought a combination of heavy rain saturating the ground and high winds that hit the state, causing trees already weakened by the prolonged drought to come down, taking power lines with them and leaving thousands of our customers without power.” Eversource Energy’s total 2019 earnings were $909.1 million.

In Ohio, nearly 100,000 had no power as the storm swept through Sunday evening. Northeast Ohio was worst hit, and by noon on Monday over 20,000 in Cuyahoga County and 12,000 in Summit County still did not have power.

First Energy reported that power “should be restored by Thursday at 4pm,” leaving many without power during the pandemic for days on end. At least one fatality was recorded, that of a 63-year-old woman in Dayton who was struck by a falling tree. First Energy’s 2019 earnings were $908 million.

Several recreation centers and bars in the region opened their doors to residents so they could power electronics and warm up. Residents were required to social distance and wear face masks.

Pennsylvania saw nearly 57,000 residents lost power. Most were First Energy customers but several thousand from other utility companies were also impacted.

Tornado warnings were issued in seven counties in New York. Water levels in Lake Erie rose dramatically due the wind, causing significant lakeshore flooding and erosion in the area. Approximately 40,000 lost power during the worst part of the storm on Sunday. In-person and remote learning was canceled for several schools in the western portion of the state.

Power outages are tracked by private utility companies on a state-by-state basis. No real-time data is managed or tracked by the federal government. However, according to PowerOutage.us, a private company which aggregates data from utility companies, there were still over 87,000 customers without power in Michigan as of this writing.

A recent analysis by the Department of Energy found that there has been a 67 percent increase in major power outages, defined as 50,000 customers or more, from weather events in the United States over the last 20 years. This is due in large part to decayed infrastructure which is barely maintained by private utility companies which rack up multi-million to billion dollar profits every year.

It is not clear how the power outage will impact the skyrocketing cases of COVID-19 in each state. While many state and local governments are requiring or encouraging residents to follow recommended guidelines set by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, thousands have been forced to mix with other households to warm up, charge phones, get internet access to complete work or school assignments, plug in needed medical equipment, and other basic necessities.

The private utility companies, many of which refused to implement a moratorium on payments at the beginning of the pandemic—and which swiftly cut power to those who cannot afford their bills, pandemic aside—must be expropriated by the working class and run democratically so that utilities including heat, water, electricity and internet can be provide for free as essential services. Trillions of dollars must be invested in modernizing the country’s infrastructure so that predictable weather events like rain and high winds do not disrupt or devastate workers lives.

Such a development can only be achieved through the reorganization of society to meet human need and not private profit.

Boeing announces 7,000 additional layoffs

Steve Filips

Boeing, the giant US commercial and military aviation manufacturer, has announced 7,000 layoffs, bringing its total to 30,000 for the year. The company cited the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the airline industry as the underlying cause, and also announced that there were no orders forthcoming for the entire month of October, the second consecutive month where this occurred. Boeing intends to make these cuts despite receiving $17 billion in federal bailout money earlier in the year.

Additionally, 37 orders of the 737 MAX, the airliner whose serious technological defects were covered up by the company, and led to two separate crashes and 346 deaths, have been taken off the books.

Boeing logo (Credit: Flickr.com, sota)

The collapse in new orders is driven by the crippling of the airline industry by the coronavirus pandemic, with the amount of passengers declining 65 percent. This in turn has led to a wave of route consolidations and closures. According to OAG Aviation Worldwide, the airline industry reduced 47,756 air routes operating in January to 33,416 in November, a 30 percent decline.

In March, while haggling with Congress for a share of the trillion-dollar corporate bailout under the CARES Act, the airline industry held workers’ jobs for ransom, threatening tens of thousands of job cuts unless the federal government intervened. In the end, the airline industry promised only to delay any layoffs until September 30. The industry group Airlines for America announced that US carriers have shed 90,000 of the 460,000 industry jobs since March, a 20 percent reduction. Southwest Airlines is also threatening layoffs for the first time in its history unless workers accept 10 percent wage cuts.

Indicating the worsening position of the airline industry, 25 of the 37 canceled orders for the 737 MAX were dropped by Boeing because of the financial weakness of the purchasers.

Southwest Airlines traditionally uses variants of Boeing’s 737 aircraft and was the largest customer for the 737 MAX. It was forced to cancel thousands of flights after the 737 MAX was grounded, and as a result Southwest is considering purchasing A220 aircraft from Airbus, Boeing’s European rival. Boeing, the largest US exporter, and Airbus are at the center of trade war measures between the US and Europe. In retaliation for increased US tariffs, the EU last week slapped 15 percent tariffs on US aircraft.

However, Airbus, as with all major manufacturing companies, maintains operations all over the world, including the United States. In 2015 it opened a plant in Mobile, Alabama with the capacity to produce 40 to 50 A220 and A320 aircraft per year.

In attempt to cut labor costs, Boeing has announced plans to shift all production of its new 787 Dreamliner from Everett, Washington to North Charleston, South Carolina.

The International Association of Machinists, which has 35,000 members at Boeing, has done nothing to mount a defense of jobs at the Everett facility, calling on workers instead to wait until 2024 when the contract is up for renegotiation. In 2014, under the bogus pretext of “job security,” the IAM forced through a vote on a concessions-laden contract, which had eliminated pensions for new hires, after it was initially rejected by the membership.

Mass layoffs are also taking place at other aviation companies. Raytheon Technologies, which is the product of the April merger between Raytheon and United Technologies, announced last month it is cutting its workforce by 15,000, blaming the dramatic downturn in commercial passenger airline demand.

The company has also announced that it is moving all production from Connecticut to Asheville, North Carolina, where the company expects significantly cheaper labor costs.

GE Aviation announced in May it would eliminate up to 13,000 jobs, a quarter of its workforce. Of this total, 10,000 cuts are taking place at two locations, Cincinnati and Dayton. David Joyce, the head of GE Aviation, said of the layoffs: “[The] comprehensive strategy we are developing for resizing the business is consistent with the forecast of our commercial market.”

Nepal-India Relations: A View from Kathmandu

Yubaraj Ghimire

A somewhat long meeting between Nepal’s Prime Minister KP Oli and Secretary of India’s Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW), Samant Goel, on 21 October 2020 continues to trigger a debate in Nepal’s political circles about openness—or lack thereof—in Nepal-India relations.

Oli, who hosted the meeting, has been criticised—even by his own party—of not only breach of protocol and diplomatic norms, but also for meeting with the intelligence chief rather than a diplomat or senior political leader at a time when Nepal-India relations are their lowest ebb. This comes after New Delhi and Kathmandu published new political maps, with both sides including the 370 sq km area of Kalapani, Lipulekh, and Limpiyadhura in their respective versions.

Oli clarified that he met Goel not in his capacity as Secretary (R), but as Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s special emissary. The territorial dispute has soured bilateral relations which have suffered an intermittent does of irritants: India only ‘noting’ but not recognising Nepal’s new constitution promulgated in September 2015, and the border blockade that created enormous shortages and hardship for the Nepali public for nearly five months.

Nepal’s journey to radical politics and a prolonged transition began in 2005-06 when the Maoists—the ultra-left force that had been leading the insurgency against the state for a decade at the time—and seven major left, democratic, and regional (Terai or plain-centric) political parties were brought together under India’s mediatory role. The goals charted by the deal reached in New Delhi in November 2005, commonly known as the 12-point agreement, were the end of absolute monarchy, consolidation of peace and democracy, and economic prosperity. In April 2006, in his last declaration as the Monarch, Gyanendra Shah said that Nepal would have a new constitution written by an elected Constituent Assembly. Shah was put under suspension soon after and the monarchy abolished in May 2008.

The constitution declared Nepal a federal democratic republic and a secular state. It is however contested by a huge, although unorganised, opposition of dissenters, not just for its vagueness about many crucial issues such as centre-state relations, but also the way in which the only Hindu kingdom in the world was declared a secular republic without involving the people directly, or through a referendum. In October 2020, the government secretly issued a circular that the country will henceforth be identified only as ‘Nepal’, without using the terms ‘secular’, ‘federal’, and ‘republic’ in both internal and external communications. 

This indicates major problems within Nepal’s domestic politics, which have manifested in the brewing dissent against KP Oli’s government that secured a nearly two-third majority in parliament less than three years ago. Nepal is nowhere near achieving economic prosperity, consolidated peace, democracy, and political stability as envisaged by the 12-point agreement. There are also signs of visible distrust and uncertainty in its relationships with India and China, its immediate neighbours, and the world outside. The distrust between Nepal and India is mutual, and it puts both sides’ diplomacy to the test. Will the future relationship conform to the rhetoric often parroted by both, which is of Nepal and India’s common civilisational, cultural, and historical links leading to a shared destiny?

The heat and dust raised by Goel’s visit to Nepal must thus be understood in context. Former Secretary (R) PKH Tharakan played a crucial role in bringing Nepal’s eight parties to agree on a common agenda 15 years ago, in collaboration with the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA). Why then has his successor’s visit raised such doubt and resentment in Nepal? The answer is China. Between the radical changes ushered in 2006 and now, China has emerged as the most influential actor not only in Nepal’s investment and development sectors, but also as a key factor in Nepal’s internal politics, thus displacing India.

India’s mediation for change in Nepal, and its successful lobbying of endorsement by major Western powers, mainly the US and the European Union (EU), was seen as a matter of strategic concern by China. A suspicious China began making deep inroads into Nepal and magnifying investment manifold, across a range of crucial sectors: hydro energy, trade and investment, post-earthquake reconstruction, and tourism. It has been the biggest FDI contributor in Nepal for four years in a row. 

China also exploits India’s perceived negative image in Nepal as an external force that ‘interferes too much in internal politics’, and a development partner that has a record of poor delivery compared to pledges. Further, there is still skepticism about international motivations since the monarchy, a party to the conflict, was kept out of the peace accord signed in November 2006.

General MM Naravane, India’s Chief of the Army Staff (COAS), visited Nepal less than a month after Goel. The next visit is scheduled to be by  Foreign Secretary Harsh Vardhan Sringla. However, whether these engagements will re-initiate a culture of dialogue and be effective in resolving bilateral tensions amicably and to mutual benefit remains to be seen. India must realise that the management of internal politics is Nepal’s own sovereign business—but certainly with the commitment that it will not allow its territory to be used in detriment to India’s core or vital interests.

India-Nepal Relations: A View from New Delhi

Sangeeta Thapliyal

India-Nepal relations have been on a downward slope. Many have blamed the border blockade as the turning point; others have pointed to China’s increasing influence. Many more have highlighted Nepal’s domestic politics as being primarily responsible.

What looked like a visible upswing in relations following Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s grand reception in Kathmandu in 2014 did not last long. Modi visited Nepal four times in his first tenure as PM and signed many agreements on infrastructure, tourism, trade, and culture. However, these developments coincided with Nepal’s adoption of the new constitution.

The Indian stance on this was seen unfavourably by Nepal. The official Indian statement said, “We note the promulgation in Nepal today of a Constitution.” In the same statement, India also expressed concern about violence in response to the new constitution, and urged “that issues on which there are differences should be resolved through dialogue in an atmosphere free from violence and intimidation, and institutionalized in a manner that would enable broad based ownership and acceptance.”

India’s preference was for a consensual constitution, which took all stakeholder interests and concerns into account. Within Nepal, however, the Madhesis and Janjatis were opposed to the constitution. Ultimately, the Madhesis closed the border with India, obstructing movement of goods across the border. This caused great discomfort to the people, who had been affected by the earthquake just a few months earlier.

The strain in relations thus worsened. While 1975 and 1989 also saw border blockades, political parties and the Nepali public had then blamed their monarchy and government for deteriorating relations with India. This time around, the government, political parties, as well as public sentiment, especially in the hills, blamed India, and supported the government in looking for trade alternatives.

Nepal looked to China to bail it out of economic hardship. To meet its fuel deficiency, Nepal signed agreements to import petrol, diesel, and petroleum products. China agreed to supply 1,000 metric tons of fuel on a grant basis. Agreements on infrastructure development in Nepal, hydropower, trade, and construction of railways and highways linking the two countries were also signed.

At the time, Nepal had only one trade point with China, through the Kodari pass that had been damaged during the 2013 landslide and later, the earthquake. Another trade route was opened through Kerung pass in 2014, which was later connected with the rail link from Xigaze. Kathmandu and Beijing are planning to open seven more trade routes. In 2017, Nepal signed on to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

Chinese presence across various domains in Nepal, such as socio-economic, political, and defence, has increased over the past few years. Incidentally, the increased interaction has also diminished China’s attractiveness, with local media reporting incidents of clashes between Chinese nationals and Nepalis. Similarly, the media and political commentators—hitherto cautious in their commentary—have begun to question the government's policies and projects with China.

More recently, Nepal countered India’s new map and laid claim on the Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura passes in Uttarakhand. It became more assertive after India inaugurated a road to Lipulekh pass in 2020. A new map with the aforementioned territory was unanimously passed by Nepal's parliament.

Some Indian policy analysts have suggested that this was done at China’s behest given its coincidence with the India-China border standoff. Historically, these passes belonged to India. People used them for trade and pilgrimage to Mansarovar. Nepal has never used them. Kathmandu’s aggressive posturing on boundary issues with New Delhi, despite other pressing issues such as the pandemic, led to the suspicion that Prime Minister KP Oli was trying to divert domestic attention by raising issues related to nationalism and sovereignty.

Ultimately, there are various reasons for the negative turn in the bilateral relationship. First is Nepal’s domestic politics, with PM Oli attempting to usher in anti-India nationalism to counter dissent within his party and from opposition parties. This age-old political tactic still works like a charm. Secondly, PM Oli’s personality must also be assessed. He is a confident, assertive, and astute politician who is currently quite displeased with the belittling of his office by Indian bureaucrats.

It is Nepali public sentiment and transboundary people-to-people links that have helped the bilateral relationship withstand political challenges. However, irresponsible reporting in the Indian media and personal comments on Oli that have verged on slander have impacted the Nepali view of India. Nepal amending its Citizenship Act has also done little to alleviate the depression in the relationship.

The Indian government has shown a preference for solemn resolve to assuage tensions and not let political tensions spill over into other areas of cooperation. Over the past two years, energy and infrastructure projects such as the 69 km-long Motihari-Amlekhgunj petroleum pipeline have been completed. The pipeline was inaugurated in 15 months instead of the stipulated 30 months. Survey work for a railway link from Raxaul to Kathmandu was completed in December 2019, and the Jayanagar-Kurtha broad gauge rail is expected to be operational from December 2020.

During the pandemic, India has lent periodic assistance to Nepal by supplying PPE kits, medical supplies, ventilators, etc. In keeping with tradition, Indian Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) General MM Naravane visited Nepal on the invitation of Nepal Army Chief, General Purna Chandra Thapa on 4 November, in a continuing Indian attempt to reset the relationship.  

Nepal does not emerge as a ‘loser’ in this scenario. It has sparked further competition between its neighbours, and is benefitting from both relationships. It has tried to shrink the space traditionally occupied by India by opening up space for China—especially in the political and economic spheres. India’s projects thus appear to be directed more at countering China and reclaiming lost space in Nepal.

At Odds with Haitian Presidency, a Government Watchdog is Weakened by Executive Decree

Jake Johnston & Kira Paulemon

On Friday, November 6, the Haitian government published in Le Moniteur a new decree limiting the powers of the Superior Court of Auditors and Administrative Disputes (CSCCA). The decree itself was signed by the president and ministers nearly two months earlier, on September 9, but was not formally made public until this past weekend. The court, one of only a handful of nominally independent government institutions, is responsible for reviewing draft government contracts as well as conducting audits. While its functions and title have been altered over time, the court was first established in 1823, and was only completely eliminated during the 19-year US occupation of Haiti. It was reestablished afterward and enshrined in the 1987 constitution.

President Moïse has ruled by decree, which is not formally allowed by the Haitian constitution, since January 2020, when the terms of most of parliament expired. He has extended executive powers, reforming the penal code, naming a new electoral council with a mandate to reform the constitution, and now weakening one of the last remaining institutions exercising government oversight. The latest decree follows years of conflict between the CSCCA and the Haitian presidency.

In 2018, anticorruption protesters began advocating for an investigation into Moïse and his predecessors’ handling of billions in Petrocaribe-related spending. Moïse, under increasing pressure from the streets, pledged to support such an investigation. The CSCCA has since released three audit reports on Petrocaribe, finding widespread irregularities and fraudulent practices in the management of the Venezuelan-led aid program, and directly implicating the president, and the company he led before his election. Last year, members of the court had to temporarily leave the country due to threats. As of yet, there has been no real judicial progress in holding anyone accountable for the misuse of public funds. The president has denied all the CSCCA’s allegations.

The conflict has extended beyond just the Petrocaribe investigation, however. In June, the court raised questions over a contract to provide the presidency with helicopters, which had gone to a close political ally. The same month, the CSCCA was accused of hampering the response to COVID when it identified irregularities in a number of contracts to provide the health ministry with face masks awarded under a state of emergency exception. The contracts, worth about $10 million, moved forward despite the concerns — which included companies that had no experience in the sector and one which was owned by the wife of a current minister in the government. The health emergency “served as a pretext … to accelerate the corruption machine,” according to The Center of Analysis and Research in Human Rights (CARDH). The organization found that $34 million in emergency spending had bypassed CSCCA review all together.

In late August, the court blocked a $57 million no-bid government contract with the US company, General Electric, and asked the government to make needed corrections. The president has held the deal up as a key to his pledge to provide electricity across the country. According to the court, one reason for the court’s delay in approving the GE contract was the presence of unknown subcontractors that were to be paid a portion of the total amount.

On September 6, Moïse held a “community dialogue” at the National Palace, where he declared that it would be necessary to “reform” the CSCCA. Public works minister Joacéus Nader went so far as to say the court was blocking progress in the country, and referred to its independent judges as “ignorant” and “incompetent.”

In response to comments made by Moïse, the court issued a five-page statement outlining a series of acts of intimidation and threats on its members. The court also provided some of the reasons why it had not approved contracts. “How is the Court responsible for the invalidity of this draft contract? Where are the blocking acts? Who is blocking whom, or who is blocking what?” the court asked.

Prime Minister Joseph Jouthe attempted to ease tensions, apologizing just days later on Nader’s behalf, and telling Haitian daily Le Nouvelliste that while it was possible to remove bottlenecks in contract processing, changes would not be made without the court’s involvement. We now know that by the time of Jouthe’s apology, the government had already drafted and signed the decree curtailing the court’s powers — but it had not yet been made public.

Two weeks after Jouthe’s apology, Nader appeared at the CSCCA’s offices in Petionville, claiming he and the large group he arrived with were there simply to check on the status of the General Electric contract. But the president of the court had a different interpretation: “When you come into an institution with a group of heavily armed men who have their faces covered and dressed in black, and whom we can’t even identify if they are police and they cross all of the perimeters to go into an area that is extremely sensitive where even some of the judges don’t go to, that is nothing more than an act of intimidation,” Rogavil Boisguéné told the Miami Herald. “It was a threat to prevent the court from doing its job.”

With the recent changes made by decree, the Haitian presidency will no longer have to wait for the court’s approval before moving forward with government contracts. In the decree, the Moïse administration argues that the reform is necessary due to the “unjustified slowness in the signing of contracts,” which, it argues, “is detrimental to the socio-economic development of the country.” A significant change is that the court’s opinions on draft contracts will only be “advisory” now. The court also will only have three to five days to issue an opinion before the government can move forward with the contract in question. Overall, the court’s review has been changed from ex-ante to ex-post; the court will still provide oversight, but only after the contract has been executed.

On November 12, the CSCCA’s president issued a brief statement taking note of the government’s decree. In the release, Boisguéné states that the court’s ex-ante control is derived from a “strict application” of the constitution and reminds public officials that “the administrative and financial responsibilities attached to their functions are strictly personal” and that is it “their responsibility” to “ensure that … opinions are respected within the framework of this constitutional provision.”

Haiti’s public finance system is notoriously cumbersome. In 2016, the World Bank noted that multiple institutions played similar roles in approving contracts, and that the CSCCA was conflicted in that it both approved contracts and then audited spending afterward. The National Commission on Public Procurement (CNMP) is also tasked with approving government contracts. “There is considerable debate within Haiti and among donors over the appropriateness and the utility of this ex-ante role [for the CSCCA]. However, it continues to date,” the Bank wrote. The new decree specifies that if the CNMP has approved of a contract, the CSCCA cannot prevent its execution regardless of if irregularities are identified.

But, shifting the CSCCA’s role without further efforts to ensure it is able to provide effective oversight on the back end sends a dangerous message, according to activists. The court would still be able to conduct audit reports such as those it produced on Petrocaribe, but the lack of judicial follow up to that report serves as an example of why limiting the court to after-the-fact auditing will be of limited value in preventing government waste or holding officials accountable.

With the president replacing the heads of the anticorruption and anti-money-laundering institutions in 2017, parliament now dissolved and the judiciary seemingly unable or unwilling to take on politically sensitive cases, the CSCCA had been one of the last remaining institutions able to check the powers of the presidency. In a country with a long track record of impunity, the changes have sounded alarm bells.

“Since 1986, we never had a head of state who had shown so much desire to neutralize the institutions of control,” economist Etzer Emile Tweeted. “This new decree could open the door for more acts of corruption in a country where impunity is king,” he added. Emile acknowledged that administrative procedures may be burdensome, but “it does not mean we have to remove the locks.” Checks and balances, he continued, “are critical … to guarantee transparency and good governance.”

On Sunday, a group of opposition political leaders issued a statement decrying the government’s desire to “to transform the country into a lawless state.” Moïse, the leaders argue, has repeatedly ignored constitutional limits on executive power, and they noted that ministers who sign these unconstitutional decrees could face legal repercussions after leaving office.

The president, in an interview Monday morning with Tele Métropole, was defiant. He repeated the argument that the reform was necessary to take on entrenched interests that simply wanted to block progress, and claimed that the decree would actually strengthen the CSCCA by allowing it to just focus on its auditing role. There is little doubt that Haiti’s procurement system needs to be reformed, but, in a comment to HRRW, a former high-ranking government official, who asked to remain anonymous, offered a different rationale for the changes: “To have the road completely opened to allow contracts without any restrictions to his friends or partners.”

Hindutva Hindrance to Economic Growth and Development in India

Bhabani Shankar Nayak

The perils of Indian economy are products of directionless economic policies of Modi government. It is led by ignorant leadership and arrogance of Hindutva politics based on exclusionary ideology, which is inspired by European Nazism and fascism. There is a method madness in the reactionary politics of BJP and RSS. It intends to convert multicultural India into a monolithic India based on Hindutva. It is a reactionary political outlook shaped by national and global capitalist classes.  These forces have unrestricted access to national treasury and natural resources in India under Modi led government. From deregulation, demonetisation, GST to pandemic lockdowns, Modi government did everything to dismantle both supply and demand side of the Indian economy. The collapse of two primary pillars of economy led to the growth of unemployment and declining purchasing power of the masses. The consumption and consumer demands declined immediately, which shocked Indian economy and pushed it to undeclared recession for the first time in Indian economic history. Modi government is doing everything to protect corporate interests, when people are trying to find ways to survive with hunger, homelessness, unemployment and Coronavirus pandemic. Indian economic predicaments are inherent within exclusionary Hindutva politics. The economic recovery, growth and development in India depends on social, religious, and political inclusive culture, where citizens are equal shareholders of economic opportunities.

Hindutva exclusionary politics is trying to hide all its failures and constantly diverting public attention. The advocates of Hindutva glorify mythological Hindu past and blame all previous governments for all ills of Indian society today. The current problems are products of past deeds. It is a perfect Hindutva recipe that derives its philosophical legitimacy from the Karma theory of the Bhagavad Gita. The current problems are products of Hindutva economic policies, which are geared towards upholding the interests of corporates in India. It is evident in the rise of corporate wealth and decline of per capita income of the working Indians.  Hindutva uses neoliberal dispossession to mobilise the masses and consolidates its Brahmanical social and cultural order. At the same time, Hindutva politics accelerates neoliberal economic policies that dispossess the masses. This political and economic contradictions are integral to Hindutva politics. The mainstream mass medias are playing a central role in hiding these contradictions by promoting Hindutva agenda of dispossession and disenfranchisement of majority of Indian citizens; Muslims, religious minorities, lower caste, tribals, women and working classes. Hindutva exclusionary ideology is not only depriving Muslims from their citizenship rights but also accelerating deprivation of lower caste, women and working-class population from participating in economic opportunities by privatising national resources.

Hindutva politics is opposed to the idea of India as an inclusive, constitutional, liberal and secular democracy. It follows mythological theocracy, which is opposed to very foundation of scientific and modern India of 21st century. The Indian economic perils are products of such a reactionary and medieval ideology of Hindutva. It is shaping India with its Hindutva shock therapy based on prohibitions, controls, and commands over everyday lives of people. Hindutva discourse is trying to dominate every aspects of Indian life from food habits, dress patterns, education, health to reproductive rights. These regressive outlooks are fundamentally opposed to economic growth and development in India. Because social, political, economic religious, and cultural marginalisation weakens citizens, families, societies, states and institutions to mobilise internal resources of India.  The centralisation of power by Hindutva forces further diminish the abilities of local and provincial governments to mobilise local resources. The availability, accessibility and distribution of goods and services depend on production, demand and supply. Hindutva politics destroys every economic foundations of the country by creating social and religious conflicts and violently suppressing political opposition and democratic decentralisation processes.

Hindutva model of economic and political governance of Modi government is based on multiple forms of exclusionary practices that hinder economic growth and development in India. Hindutva’s innate hatred for Muslims is the first form exclusion, which diminishes more than fourteen percentage of Indian population and their abilities to contribute to their individual lives and to the national economy. Hindutva politics considers women only as mothers, sisters and wives who can be prayed inside the house. Such a patriarchal approach discourages civic and economic participation for nearly forty-eight percentage of Indian women population. The apartheid Hindutva ideology believes in caste hierarchy, which disables social and economic abilities of nearly twenty five percent of lower caste and tribal population. It means eighty-seven percentage of Indian population are living under the conditions of structural barriers that does not allow them to grow and be the shareholders of national life.  The processes of marginalisation, denials of citizenship rights and lack of participation creates social, political and economic conditions of institutionalised deprivation, which gives power to Hindutva forces. Therefore, crisis crime, dominance, and deprivation are four weapons of Hindutva politics in India.

Hindutva exclusionary politics creates conditions of deprivation trap, which breeds unemployment, poverty, debt, destitution, marginalisation, illiteracy and illness. These outcomes are dangerous and weakening of India and Indians both in short run and long run. Social coexistence, peace and inclusive cultures are foundations of economic growth and development. But the idea of inclusive culture and peace are alien ideals and antithetical to Hindutva politics. Therefore, Hindutva ideology is a hinderance to economic growth and development in India.

The Hindutva politics led Modi can neither be reformed nor can be revised. The only alternative is to defeat it ideologically and politically till it becomes qualitatively and quantitatively irrelevant and illegal in India. Hindutva is Indian version of Nazism and fascism. It is detrimental to India, Indians and humanity. India and Indians will suffer social and economic underdevelopment as long as Hindutva rules the country. The institutionalisation of Hindutva discrimination destroys all potentials and conditions for economic growth and development. The struggle against Hindutva is struggle against caste, gender and religious based discrimination in India. The united struggle against Hindutva politics must develop radical narratives based on social, political and cultural integration, inclusive economic and development policies for peace and prosperity for the masses. These are essential conditions of sustainable economic growth and secular development of society in India.

Ethiopia slides towards civil war as Tigray conflict escalates

Jean Shaoul

The escalating military conflict in Tigray, home to six million people, in northern Ethiopia is creating a horrific humanitarian crisis that is spilling out across the country’s borders. It threatens to spiral out into a broader civil war across the 110 million-strong country and to engulf the Horn of Africa.

Hundreds of people have died since the fighting began earlier this month after Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed ordered airstrikes in response to what he claimed was an attack by Tigray’s ruling party, the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), on a military compound and deployed troops to the province.

The airstrikes’ targets included TPLF positions around the Tigrayan capital of Mekelle, with Ethiopian troops seizing the airbase in Humera in a bid to secure the border with Sudan and prevent TPLF forces from escaping. Sudan has responded by deploying its forces to the border, potentially blockading Tigray which already had 600,000 people in need of aid.

Ethiopia regions (credit: map for use on Wikivoyage, English version)

Fighting has been reported in several locations, but details are sketchy as the federal government in Addis Ababa has cut the telephone and internet lines, arrested journalists, and prevented people reaching the province.

Abiy’s government has declared a six-month state of emergency in the province, while Ethiopia’s federal parliament has declared Tigray’s regional government illegal and voted to dissolve it. It said that the Tigray leadership had “violated the constitution and endangered the constitutional system” by holding regional elections in September after Abiy postponed this year’s promised elections, ostensibly due to the pandemic, as anti-government protests and opposition mounted.

Parliament said a new caretaker administration would hold elections and “implement decisions passed on by the federal government.” It declared that the TPLF should be branded a terrorist group after blaming it for a massacre of ethnic Amhara in Oromia on November 2, further escalating tensions.

Abiy’s reformist pretensions essentially mean loosening the country’s ties with China and adopting neo-liberal economic policies that open up Ethiopia’s largely state-run economy to the transnational corporations and financial institutions to the acclaim of the imperialist powers. He is a former military intelligence officer and minister of defence in the previous TPLF-led government. Abiy hopes that the military assault on Tigray will secure the removal of the TPLF leadership and establish a new leadership subservient to the federal government.

Ethiopian refugees line up for water in Qadarif region, easter Sudan, Sunday, November 15, 2020. Thousands of Ethiopians fled the war in Tigray region into Sudan. (AP Photo/Marwan Ali)

Abiy has rejected calls by the United Nations and the African Union for talks and reiterated his intention to prevail by force. But his aggressive response may backfire and prompt the TPLF and its supporters to dig in. More than half of Ethiopia’s army is based in Tigray, a legacy of its war with Eritrea, and its support is not assured, prompting Abiy to sack his army chief, head of intelligence and foreign minister.

The conflict may inspire Ethiopia’s other semi-autonomous, ethnically based states, including Abiy’s own Oromia where an armed rebellion is already underway, to secede. Politicians of all stripes have whipped up ethnic tensions to prevent a unified struggle by the impoverished masses against the Ethiopian elites. Killings and intimidation are a daily occurrence. Unrest is mounting in the Somali region, with at least 27 people killed in clashes on the border between the Afar and Somali regional states in the last few weeks. The Ethiopian Human Rights Commission said gunmen had killed at least 34 people on a passenger bus on Saturday night in the western region of Benishangul-Gumuz that borders Sudan.

Ethiopian officials said that Tigrayan forces had fired rockets towards Amhara state that is adjacent to Tigray, with one rocket hitting the airport in Gondar and another the airport in Bahir Dar, near lake Tana, on Friday. While the number of casualties is unknown, both airports are used by military and civilian aircraft as the country’s road infrastructure is poor.

The TPLF said that the rocket attacks were in response to the air strikes and attacks carried out by Abiy’s forces that have included both federal troops and Amhara’s regional forces as well as units from Eritrea, on Tigray’s northern border. It appears that armed Amhara factions are seeking to regain territory in west Tigray they claim the TPLF annexed when the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) set up the federal structure in 1995.

A Tigrayan spokesperson warned of further strikes not only against Ethiopian targets but also Eritrea, sparking fears of the fighting spreading beyond Ethiopia’s borders. Debretsion Gebremichael, Tigray Regional President, told Reuters that Eritrea had deployed 16 divisions to Ethiopia, without specifying the number of troops involved. On Sunday, the BBC reported that Tigrayan forces had fired rockets into Eritrea, after claiming Ethiopian soldiers were using an Eritrean airport to attack Tigray.

For nearly two decades, Ethiopia and Eritrea fought a brutal war over disputed borders that spilled over into Somalia, cost the lives of up to 100,000 people and led to massive internal displacement on both sides. It ended in 2018, with Ethiopia agreeing to cede Badme, the disputed territory at the heart of the conflict, to Eritrea, as per a UN ruling, for which Abiy but not his counterpart Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2019. This was little more than a PR stunt aimed at boosting his credibility as he seeks to link Ethiopia more closely to the imperialist powers.

This was met with fury by the TPLF, which claims Badme as its own. It refused to join Abiy’s new Prosperity Party coalition that replaced the EPRDF, a coalition of several militia groups and parties, in which the TPLF had been the dominant partner that governed the country since 1991. The TPLF viewed the peace treaty as “selling out” Tigray and set up regular border posts around Badme, preventing the full implementation of the 2018 peace deal.

This set the TPLF on a collision course with the Abiy government that had sought to marginalise it by dismissing senior Tigrayans from federal institutions, issuing an arrest warrant for a former spy chief and member of the TPLF’s leadership body, and blaming the TPLF for hiring proxies to incite violence.

In the last few days, reports have emerged of a civilian massacre, with human rights organisation Amnesty International saying it had confirmed that “scores, and likely hundreds, of people were stabbed or hacked to death” in the town of Mai-Kadra (May Cadera) near the Sudanese border on November 9. Abiy accused forces loyal to the TPLF of carrying out the killings, a claim the TPLF denied. Tigrayan refugees in Sudan have blamed the massacre on unknown perpetrators from the neighbouring Amhara state.

Michelle Bachelet, the UN human rights chief said, “There is a risk this situation will spiral totally out of control,” and warned the massacre, if confirmed, would amount to war crimes if committed by one of the belligerent forces.

The fighting has forced at least 20,000 civilians to cross the border into Sudan, according to the UN, which has warned nine million people could be displaced by the fighting, adding to the already massive 1.8 million people internally displaced within the country.

On November 11, the Sudanese government warned that 200,000 Ethiopians might soon flee Tigray into Sudan, leaving the country unable to cope amid rising discontent with the military’s stooge civilian government’s inability to address the terrible social and economic conditions. In April last year, the Sudanese military, backed by the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, mounted a pre-emptive coup against the long-running regime of President Omar al-Bashir as mass anti-government protests threatened to get out of control.

The TPLF has also accused Abiy of using drones from the United Arab Emirates’ military base in Assab, Eritrea, to attack the region.

Toledo Coca-Cola workers continue strike over unsafe conditions and rising health care costs

Katy Kinner

Workers at the Coca-Cola Consolidated facility in north Toledo, Ohio, have been on strike since November 2. While the union wants to limit the strike to a set of minimal and vague demands, workers are expressing their anger over low wages, unsafe conditions and rising health care costs.

After months of negotiations on a new contract, 100 workers, members of Teamsters Local 20, rejected the company’s final contract offer and began a strike. Toledo Coca-Cola Bottling Company is the largest cola bottling facility in the country and employs 130 people. The factory has continued to operate throughout the strike.

On the second day of the job action, a tractor-trailer driven by a strikebreaker hit a picket, sending 59-year-old Jeff Rudnicki to the hospital. No charges have been filed and Toledo police brushed off the incident, claiming that Rudnicki walked in a manner that “intentionally caused him to be struck by the trailer.”

In one photo strikers held picket signs reading, “Coca-Cola Consolidated doesn’t protect its employees from COVID-19” and “Coca-COVID.”

A leaflet posted on the Teamsters Local 20 Facebook page stated that workers went on strike to protect themselves from unsafe conditions in the plant and to demand lowered health care costs. One section of the leaflet read, “Even though Coca-Cola’s Toledo distributor is raking in Covid profits, the company has failed to comply with Ohio and CDC [Centers for Disease Control] Covid safety guidelines and is demanding that its essential food supply chain workers pay up to almost $10,000 every year for family health care at a time when they are putting themselves and their families at risk to help our community.” The leaflet is the only mention of the Coca-Cola strike on the union’s Facebook page.

However, neither the leaflet nor any official demands have been posted on either the Teamsters Local 20 official website or reported to journalists. In a statement to the Toledo Blade, Teamsters Local 20 President Mark Schmiehausen merely explained that Toledo Coca-Cola workers had been working long hours during the pandemic and, “We feel that the company is not negotiating in good faith. That’s all we ask for is for them to be fair.” He also asked the nearby community to show their support by boycotting Coca-Cola products.

The strike is a reflection of growing anger among many sections of workers who are looking for a way to fight against unsafe working conditions exacerbated by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The failure of the Teamsters to publish strike updates or list any strong demands demonstrates that union bureaucrats, in tandem with company management, are seeking to ensure that production is maintained at all cost even amidst the dangerous conditions produced by the pandemic.

The safety conditions in the bottling plant are sure to worsen as the pandemic resurges in the US and globally. According to the most recent Ohio Department of Health COVID-19 update, the state is reaching record numbers of cases and hospitalizations. A record number 8,071 coronavirus cases were reported over 24 hours between November 12 and 13, breaking the previous record from the day before by more than 1,000 cases.

Hospitalizations—which are a more reliable metric for the state of community transmissions—were also up to 2,075 on November 5, a 55 percent increase from two weeks prior. Of the hospitalized patients, the Ohio Department of Health reports 541 were in the intensive care unit, breaking the previous record from April of 533 ICU patients.

Sixty-eight of Ohio’s 88 counties are at Red Level 3—indicating there is a high risk of exposure and spread. This number is expected to rise.

In addition, Coca-Cola workers across the country, including in Ohio, face the possibility of mass layoffs. In August, Coca-Cola announced a “restructuring plan” stating that the company would begin with 4,000 “voluntary” layoffs in the US and Puerto Rico followed by an unnamed number of “involuntary” layoffs around the world. These are only the latest job cuts to be carried out by Coca-Cola, which has reduced its global workforce by 100,000 in the last eight years. James Quincy, CEO of Coca-Cola, has a net worth of $47.3 million and received a salary of almost $19 million in 2019.

Toledo Coca-Cola workers must break the isolation of their strike and fight to mobilize other sections of workers—in health care, auto and education—against the strikebreaking operation by management. A powerful movement in the working class must be developed against the inhuman policies of the ruling class to let COVID-19 spread unchecked. This requires the formation by Coca-Cola strikers of a rank-and-file safety committee independent of the Teamsters.

The pandemic cannot be controlled in a humane and effective way within a system that sacrifices the lives of workers for the sake of the ever-greater accumulation of private wealth by the corporate and financial oligarchy. Workers need to adopt a socialist program and perspective aimed at the reorganization of economic life based not on private profit, but human need.