Criminalize Marital Rape in India: Marriage is not a License to Rape

Anirudh Pratap Singh

“When a stranger does it, he doesn’t know me, I don’t know him. He’s not doing it to me as a person, personally. With your husband, it becomes personal. You say, this man knows me. He knows my feelings. He knows me intimately and then to do this to me – it’s such a personal abuse.”1

Gravity of Domestic Violence Against Women

Domestic violence in India has always remained an entrenched problem, and it has only been exacerbated in the recent years. About 70% of women in India are victims of domestic violence. National Crime Records Bureau’s (NCRB) ‘Crime in India’ 2019 report was highly worrisome, yet not startling. As per the report, in India, a woman is raped every sixteen minutes, and every four minutes, she experiences cruelty at the hands of her in-laws.2 An estimated 99.1% of sexual violence cases are unreported, and in most such instances, the perpetrator is the husband of the victim. The average Indian woman is 17 times more likely to face sexual violence from her husband than from others.3 In spite of the recent amendments in the criminal law, the various laws meant to protect women from domestic violence and sexual assault have largely remained ineffective. But what happens, when laws that are meant to thwart crimes, provide a safeguard to the culprits and endanger the victims?!

What is Marital Rape?

The aforementioned paradox is not mere fiction but exists as a reality in the Indian Penal Code. One of the most horrifying and repressive issues with the Indian legal regime is that marital rape is perfectly legal. Marital rape, the act of forcing your spouse into having sex without proper consent, is an unjust yet not uncommon way to degrade and disempower women. Today, it has been impeached in more than 100 countries but unfortunately, India is one of the only 36 countries where marital rape is still not criminalized and is untouched by the legislature due to the patriarchal approach that permeates our society.4 In 2013, the UN Committee on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) recommended that the Indian government should criminalize marital rapes.5 The JS Verma committee set up in the aftermath of nationwide protests over the December 16, 2012 gang rape case had also recommended the same.6

In spite of such developments and decries from the advocates, activists and international bodies, rape laws in our country continue with the patriarchal outlook of considering women to be the property of men post marriage, with no autonomy or agency over their bodies. They deny married women equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Indian constitution. Lawmakers fail to understand that a marriage should not be viewed as a license for a husband to forcibly rape his wife with impunity. A married woman has the same right to control her own body as does an unmarried woman.

Legal stance on Marital Rape

The concept of marital rape in India is the epitome of what we call an ‘implied consent’. Marriage between a man and a woman here implies that both have consented to sexual intercourse and it cannot be otherwise. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 also communicates the same. Section 375 defines the offence of rape with the help of six descriptions. One of the exceptions to this offence is “Sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape”. However, the ‘United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women’ defines violence against women as “any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual, or mental harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or private life.”7  Section 375 (Exception) of Indian Penal Code is inconsistent with and violative of these principles and Article 1 of CEDAW. Further, the Supreme Court has included sanctity of women, and freedom to make choices related to sexual activity under the ambit of Article 21. Therefore, this exception clause is violative of Article 14 and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, since it is arbitrary and violates the Right to Life of married women.

Essentially, Section 375 (Exception) creates a classification not only between consent given by a married and unmarried woman, but also between married females below 15 years of age and over 15 years old. Such a classification does not pass the test of ‘intelligible differentia’ and is, therefore, prima facie in contravention to the Right to Equality enshrined under Article 14. In 2017, a PIL was filed by ‘Independent Thought’, an NGO, challenging this unintelligible classification and claiming that married women over 15 years of age should also be afforded this protection. The Supreme Court concurred with these averments to some extent and extended the age limit in Section 375 from 15 years to 18 years.

The Need of the Hour

The above judgment was only a small step towards the incumbent need to strike down the legalization of marital rape. It is high time that the legislature should take cognizance of this legal infirmity and bring marital rape within the purview of rape laws by eliminating Section 375 (Exception) of IPC. By removing this law, women will be safer from abusive spouses, can receive the help needed to recover from marital rape, and can save themselves from domestic violence and sexual abuse. Indian women deserve to be treated equally to men, and an individual’s human rights do not deserve to be ignored by anyone, including by their spouse.

Rape is rape, irrespective of the identity of the perpetrator, and age of the survivor. A woman who is raped by a stranger, lives with a memory of a horrible attack; a woman who is raped by her husband lives with her rapist. Our current laws are ancient and there is a dire need to amend them in accordance with the contemporary times. It is intriguing and frustrating to find that our penal laws which are nothing but the handiwork of Britishers have by and large remained untouched even after 73 years of independence. On the other hand, the English laws have been amended and marital rape was criminalized way back in 1991. The government has so far not shown an active interest in remedying this problem, and if one is to take a cue from the existing state of affairs, criminalization of marital rape seems nothing more than a wishful dream. One can only strive to highlight the need of the hour and hope for a sooner realization of this dream!

New Zealand’s border restrictions leave thousands of students stranded

Tom Peters

Thousands of international students, many of whom have spent tens of thousands of dollars to study in New Zealand, and have received study visas, have been unable to enter the country since it imposed draconian border restrictions in March.

They are among thousands of people with visas, entitling them to live in New Zealand, who remain stranded overseas. Hundreds of migrant workers have protested in India, demanding the same treatment as NZ residents and citizens, tens of thousands of whom have been able to return and spend two weeks in hotels that are serving as quarantine facilities.

Following the October 17 election, the state agency Education NZ told the Labour Party government the country’s border closure “has been the longest and most restrictive in the world,” and could impact tertiary institutions financially. Universities NZ said last month there were 5,200 students enrolled in New Zealand who had been stuck offshore all year. Several universities are likely to cut more jobs next year, due to the decline in revenue.

Social media meme highlighting the inadequacy of online learning options for international students stuck outside New Zealand

The government has announced that it will allow entry to just 250 overseas postgraduate students, most of whom will arrive in the New Year. On December 3, however, Education Minister Chris Hipkins told Radio NZ it was unlikely the borders would open to significant numbers of foreign students for another 12 to 18 months.

Tens of thousands of migrant workers are similarly stranded, with no idea when they will be able to come to New Zealand. Their lives are in limbo, they are unable to find work and in severe financial distress. Some have been separated from their family members in New Zealand.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s government, which is being glorified in the world’s media for its “historic” ethnic and gender diversity, has in fact actively discriminated against immigrants and scapegoated them for the economic crisis.

Until December, migrants on temporary visas who lost their jobs were not eligible for unemployment benefits, forced instead to rely on food parcels and other emergency relief. Former foreign minister Winston Peters, from the right-wing nationalist NZ First Party, declared that they should “go home” as the country would not support them. Tens of thousands of migrants who have applied for permanent residency are facing interminable delays from Immigration New Zealand (INZ).

The World Socialist Web Site spoke with Tincy, from India, who helped organise a petition with nearly 600 signatures to the New Zealand parliament “to allow international students with valid visas, who have already paid their 2020 study fees, to enter New Zealand and pursue their studies.”

Tincy had received a student visa and paid to study coding at Nelson Marlborough Institute of Technology (NMIT) in the South Island, when the border closed in late March. Her brother and sister-in-law are already living and working in New Zealand. She had taken out an education loan from a bank in December 2019, pledging her house, as well as gold, which had been a wedding gift, as collateral.

She has been unable to find work this year because employers “are asking for at least six months, one or two-year contracts. Most of the students have been forced into this situation because they resigned from their jobs [to go to NZ]. Some still have to feed their family and they are in such a pathetic situation. I got married in 2019, and after six months we planned to move and start a family, we were thinking about having a baby.” These plans are now on hold.

Rally by migrants in New Delhi in November demanding right to return to New Zealand

Tincy explained that many students were being forced to rely on their families for accommodation and other support, placing immense strain on their relationships. “We paid fees, and our future is in someone else’s hands,” Tincy said.

She said students were sending emails “on a daily basis” to Immigration New Zealand (INZ) “begging them for some kind of update.” The only reply is an automated message saying that the border remains closed. Some students were reluctant to speak out, even to “ask the government what will happen; they are scared that if they say something the government is going to reject their visa.”

“At least the government should consider the people who paid their fees in the beginning of 2020 and have a valid visa. We are really struggling. We have a career gap and a financial crisis; we are going through depression.

“One of my friends resigned from my company to go overseas to the UK. In the coming April he’s going to finish his studies; he’s paid his tuition fees back and he’s looking after his family, and I am still waiting,” she said.

Emil, who had been accepted into an early childhood education course at New Zealand Tertiary College in Christchurch, has been stuck in India all year and reliant on his parents for support. He told the WSWS he had borrowed approximately $30,500 to pay his fees and would have to pay interest on the loan. International students have to pay unsubsidised fees, which can be three times what domestic students pay.

“I don’t know how much longer I can hold on,” he said. “The bank may be asking me to return the money soon, because they have issued the money for international education, but the purpose [of the loan] hasn’t been met.”

Emil had been accepted into Rajiv Gandhi National Aviation University and Madras Christian College, but had decided to go to New Zealand instead to study to become a teacher. He has been unable to find work this year because employers were asking for a long-term contract.

“My neighbours, other family members are all asking when I will do something. I don’t have any answer for them. I can’t plan anything, I can’t do anything. International students are truly an important part of the economy of New Zealand, and [the government] is not giving us any consideration,” he said. “They are not concerned about our money, they’re not concerned about our time. Many of us have lost our jobs. It’s a burden on us.”

Emil also criticised the lack of any information from INZ. “We are ready to quarantine for 14 days or 28 days, we can pay for that,” he said. He said he was still hoping to come to New Zealand, but because of his experience this year he advised other international students to choose a different country.

Germany: Coronavirus pandemic exacerbates social inequality

Elisabeth Zimmermann

In an interview with Deutschlandfunk radio on December 14, German Economics Minister Peter Altmaier (Christian Democratic Union, CDU) boasted, “I’ve never seen an economic stimulus program that worked so precisely as it has this year.”

From the standpoint of Germany’s big companies and banks that received hundreds of billions of euros from the government, as well as the rich and super-rich who continued to increase their wealth during the pandemic, Altmaier is undoubtedly right. The Dax index neared an all-time high of 13,565 points on December 16—the same day the COVID-19 death toll in Germany reached a new high of nearly 1,000 victims.

According to the Global Wealth Report issued by Credit Suisse in October, the number of millionaires in Germany has increased by 58,000 so far this year, while the number of billionaires rose from 114 to 119, with assets totaling $594.9 billion, compared to just over $500 billion in March 2019 (latter figures from the consulting firm PwC and the Swiss bank UBS).

Crowd at a food bank in Munich

The situation is very different for broad layers of the working class, especially if they work in low-wage jobs. They receive no support from the government and face high income losses and the loss of their jobs.

An Economic and Social Science Institute (WSI) report by the trade union-sponsored Hans Böckler Foundation sheds light on the income losses these workers have suffered in recent months.

The report is titled “Income Inequality Exacerbated by Corona Crisis.” It is based on the testimony of more than 6,100 workers and job seekers who were surveyed online for information about their situation during April, June and November. According to the December 14 press release, “The panel survey provides a representative picture of the labour force in Germany with regard to the characteristics of gender, age, education and federal state.”

Seventy percent of respondents expressed concerns about their health in November (58 percent in June) and 90 percent were concerned about growing social divisions (84 percent in June). The number of working people who have lost income due to the pandemic has continued to rise with workers on low incomes particularly at risk.

In the November survey, 40 percent of respondents reported current or previous income losses, up from 32 percent in June; 53 percent of those surveyed with a net income of less than €1,500 per month suffered income losses (43 percent in June). Forty-one percent of those earning between €900 and €1,500 suffered income losses as did 49 percent of those with incomes below €900. Of the respondents with a net income of up to €2,000, one in three suffered a loss of income.

The WSI report concludes that people who were already earning very little were particularly hard hit by the coronavirus pandemic. Younger respondents, the self-employed and freelancers in particular suffered high losses of income. Workers in the hospitality industry were hit especially hard, as were low-wage, temporary workers, and workers on short term contracts. They are most likely to lose their jobs or fall below the subsistence level.

A major reason for the sharp drop in income is the massive expansion of short-time working. In April, the proportion of workers on short-time working was around 18 percent. This corresponds to 6 million employees paying social security contributions. Once again, those with net incomes of between €900 and €1,500 were particularly affected, (22.8 percent), followed by those with net incomes of €1,500 to €2,000 (22.1 percent).

The WSI report points out that the incomes of the lowest paid decile (tenth) had already fallen before the onset of the coronavirus crisis. Their incomes were lower in 2017 (the last year for which figures are available) than in 2010. The situation is not much better for the second lowest income decile and these two groups are now the most affected by income losses.

Even middle-income earners, who have seen income gains in recent years, are losing ground and the WSI study suggests that social inequality in Germany will continue to increase this year.

The “Discussion and Conclusion” section of the report reads: “This development in incomes will probably also be reflected in the distribution of wealth. Already today, wealth is distributed much more unequally than income, with the richest 1 percent of the population owning 35 percent of total wealth. Most of this wealth (40 percent) comes from business assets and from non-owner-occupied real estate (25 percent) and is thus invested in income-generating assets such as rentals and businesses.”

In its conclusion, the authors of the study list a series of demands, such as an increase in short-time working allowances and an increase in the minimum wage to at least €12. It currently stands at €9.35 gross per hour and is not due to rise to €10.45 until July 2022. The study also recommends that the low-wage sector be limited, childcare provision improved and many other measures.

Directing these demands at the government, however, is totally misplaced. For decades, every federal government, regardless of its political composition, has led an offensive against the working class. The SPD-Green government, which governed from 1998 to 2005, was responsible for the creation of a huge low-wage sector with its Agenda policy and Hartz-IV laws. At the time, these measures were supported by the trade unions, which own the Hans Böckler Foundation. Every subsequent government has intensified attacks on the working class and wiped out a vast portion of the social gains won by workers in the post-war period.

The current governing coalition of the CDU/CSU and SPD is pursuing a reckless and criminal policy in the pandemic. Although tens of thousands are infected and hundreds die every day, it refuses to organise a full lockdown and close non-essential businesses with a guarantee of full pay and compensation for affected workers and small businesses.

Most of the low-wage workers particularly affected—those employed in logistics, public transport, deliveries, Amazon workers, as well as health care and food shop workers, have no choice. They cannot work at home and must either go to work and risk their health and lives or face financial ruin.

The priorities of the German government and the ruling elite were also evident in the recently approved budget. The defence budget will increase by a further €1.3 billion next year to €46.93 billion while the budget for education and research is to be cut by €70 million to €20.24 billion. The budget for labour and social affairs is to be slashed by €5.7 billion and the budget for health by €5.95 billion—another massive assault on the livelihoods of the working class.

In factories and workplaces across the country the trade unions and corporate boards are working hand in hand to implement huge attacks on jobs and working conditions, first and foremost in the auto and its supply industries, at Lufthansa and in many other sectors. In all of these cases the pandemic is being used as a pretext to push ahead with long-prepared attacks on the working class.

Sri Lankan government detains young Muslim poet on bogus charges

S. Jayanth

Ahnaf Jazeem, a 25-year-old Sri Lankan poet, remains in jail without charge after being falsely accused, by the Crime Investigation Department (CID) on May 16, of promoting Muslim extremism. He is being held under Sri Lanka’s draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).

A scheduled December 8 court hearing was postponed until March 2021 on the pretext of concerns about COVID-19 infection. Ahnaf’s continuing incarceration is, in fact, part of the Rajapakse government’s ongoing anti-Muslim witchhunt and attacks on freedom of expression.

The PTA, which allows the authorities to detain anyone for months without charge, and to use confessions extracted under torture as evidence in the courts, was widely used during Sri Lanka’s 30-year communal war against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE).

Ahnaf Jazeem (Facebook Photo)

Thousands of Tamil youth in the north, east and south of the country were arrested and detained as LTTE suspects during the conflict. While hundreds remain imprisoned, many were “disappeared” after being arrested.

The CID is attempting to link the poet, whose pen name is Mannaramudhu Ahnaf, to last year’s Easter Sunday bomb attacks on churches and hotels by an ISIS-linked extremist group. The bombings killed 269 people and injured hundreds more.

The CID has alleged that one of his poetry books— Navarasam (Nine different moods)—demonstrates that he supports terrorism. These claims are false. In fact, the book promotes peace and ethnic unity, and is hostile towards the murderous policies of ISIS, declaring that it has no connection with Islam.

One of the poems, entitled Uruvakku (Mould), condemns armed violence and suggests that words and writing are weapons—i.e., that the pen is mightier than the sword.

Mandrak kavi (Forum Poet), another poem, denounces ISIS as scoundrels. Others oppose the US-led imperialist wars in the Middle East and artistically, and with great sympathy, voice concern about the plight of refugees who have lost their lives while crossing the Mediterranean Sea.

Following an order from the Fort Magistrates’ Court in Colombo, some of Ahnaf’s poetry was sent to child psychiatrists at the Lady Ridgeway Hospital, a premier hospital for children. This was necessary, police claimed, because he had circulated his book to the children. The poems, which were not written in simple language, but in traditional style, were translated word-for-word, and, on the basis of these inadequate translations, deemed to be harmful.

According to the DailyFT, the report presented to the court declared that the book “incites violence, arouses sexual feelings, promotes suicide, glorifies death, talks of perceived injustice against Muslims across the world, and incites hatred against the perpetrators of violence in some of the poems.”

Ahnaf Jazeem reading a poem (YouTube)

However, in another poem, which he published on his blog the day after the Easter attacks, Ahnaf bluntly, and in clear language, condemns the attacks and ISIS, whilst expressing solidarity with their victims. The CID, however, purposely ignored this poem.

Ahnaf is originally from Silavathurai in the northern district of Mannar and was undertaking tuition at the School of Excellence in Madurankuli at Puttalam district, when he was arrested. The school, which is owned by the Save the Pearl charity organisation, is being investigated by the CID, which is attempting to link it to the Easter attacks, or for promoting Muslim extremism in Sri Lanka.

Prominent lawyer Hejaaz Hizbullah, an associate of Save the Pearl and a human rights activist, has been detained under PTA laws since April this year. He has denied any connection to the bomb attacks and has filed a writ against being prevented from meeting with his legal counsel.

Human rights organisations in Sri Lanka and internationally have condemned Hizbullah’s jailing and demanded his immediate release. While he has been imprisoned for more than nine months, the police have not filed any charges against him.

It is not clear how many others remain in custody over the terror bombings. Many public figures, including former government minister Rishad Bathiudeen and his brother Riyad Bathiudeen, have been detained. Both were later bailed.

Clear evidence, however, has revealed that former leaders of the previous government, along with the military and police hierarchy, were given intelligence warnings in advance of Easter Sunday. Political leaders forewarned included then President Maithripala Sirisena, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and the parliamentary opposition chief. They took no action and allowed the attacks to take place, in order to stampede developing class struggles.

The Colombo media continues to use the terror bombings to stir up anti-Muslim sentiment, as does President Gotabhaya Rajapakse, who made it central to his election campaign, and that of his brother Prime Minister Mahinda. This hysterical anti-Tamil propaganda is being endorsed by the opposition parties and utilised to divide and weaken the working class.

The Rajapakse government is deliberately promoting divisive communalism and anti-democratic attacks on writers as it confronts rising working-class struggles against its big business policies, its grossly inadequate response to the COVID-19 pandemic and moves towards a military-based presidential dictatorship.

Ahnaf, whose incarceration only came to light in September, after his poem was used in Hizbullah’s case, is the latest victim of the government’s anti-Muslim witchhunt. The young poet is from a poor family, whose seven members are dependent on meagre earnings from casual jobs and small-scale cultivation. They cannot afford to hire a lawyer, let alone visit Ahnaf in prison.

Ahnaf’s family has not been informed about his current location, the prison conditions he faces or anything about his legal situation. Last week he was allowed to phone his parents for a few minutes, to tell them that he was okay and to find out how they were.

Trade union, works council and CEO impose cost-cutting programme on Volkswagen workforce in Germany

Dietmar Gaisenkersting

At a Supervisory Board meeting last week, representatives of the owners and trade unions at Volkswagen (VW) unanimously agreed to launch a cost-cutting programme in competition with US-based electric vehicle manufacturer Tesla. The burden of this is to be borne by the workforce at VW itself and throughout the parts supplier chain.

The Supervisory Board’s decision had been preceded by months of dispute between company CEO Herbert Diess and General Works Council Chairman Bernd Osterloh. Five years ago, when the top manager was poached from BMW, Osterloh had proudly declared that Diess was “our man.” But in the end, the IG Metall trade union and the works council no longer trusted him to successfully lead the fight against competitors from China, Europe and the US, especially Tesla.

The jobs, wages, working conditions and the health of the workers were never the question. Diess, Osterloh and their respective entourages agree that the transformation to electric vehicles and competition with other automakers are all about shareholder interests. Their goal is to establish Volkswagen as a “global champion” in the international battle for markets and profits, driving other competitors out of the market.

Volkswagen Wolfsburg industrial plant in Wolfsburg, Germany, 2006. (Photo: High Contrast/Wikipedia)

The works council and IG Metall are the driving force behind this, even if it means the destruction of tens of thousands of jobs and an intolerable increase in productivity.

To divide the workforce and suppress any resistance, they proceed according to the St. Florian principle: “Spare my house, set another on fire!” Jobs at VW have priority over those in the supplier industries, jobs in Germany over those abroad, and jobs at the main Wolfsburg plant over those at other locations. Accordingly, IG Metall had already organized the closure of the Opel plants in Antwerp and Bochum, before it was the turn of the main plant in Rüsselsheim, which is now being shut down one slice at a time.

The basis of the “reconciliation” between Diess and Osterloh was the promise that Wolfsburg would be developed into a factory for the highly automated production of electric vehicles, setting new standards for the automotive industry. So far, the VW Group had mainly converted plants in Brussels, Hanover, Zwickau, and Emden to the new technology. Works council leader Osterloh had therefore been calling to produce an electric vehicle in Wolfsburg for months.

The world’s largest auto factory, with around 60,000 employees, Wolfsburg is currently only running at about half capacity. Originally, production of one million cars a year was planned there. But according to Osterloh, it would only be just under 500,000 in 2020 because of the coronavirus pandemic.

Last week, production was partially halted in Wolfsburg and other plants because of bottlenecks in supplying semiconductors and a shortage of seat foam for the Golf 8. Despite the rampaging pandemic in Germany, however, the shutdown over the holidays is to be somewhat extended only in individual areas to ramp up production again as quickly as possible and press ahead with the restructuring plans.

Last Monday, the Supervisory Board agreed, “Wolfsburg will become a showcase location for the highly automated production of e-vehicles.” A new electric vehicle with improved battery technology and more modern software is to be built there as early as 2025, or by 2026 at the latest.

What this means for the workforce can only be guessed at present, as the management and works council are not giving away any concrete details. VW plans to produce the vehicles almost fully automatically and to cut production times in half. Cars are to come off the production line within ten hours, like at Tesla’s new factory in Grünheide near Berlin. Currently, VW workers in Zwickau need around 20 hours for Volkswagen’s ID.3 electric car.

This offensive is exactly to the liking of Osterloh and the shareholders. The head of the works council had already proudly reported to Welt am Sonntag at the beginning of September, “In the meantime, we’re in the middle of electrifying our fleet.” He saw a good chance that VW could overtake US manufacturer Tesla in terms of unit sales and software. “If Tesla sets up three factories where you can build between 300,000 and 500,000 cars, then we’re talking about a unit output of between 900,000 and 1.5 million,” Osterloh said. “We want to achieve that in 2023 as well, probably sooner.”

At Monday’s supervisory board meeting, Diess announced he wanted to shape the framework conditions in Wolfsburg “so that we can keep up with Tesla, maybe even overtake it at one point or another.” And on Tuesday, in a speech broadcast throughout the group to some 15,000 VW managers, he enthused, “This will allow us to keep up with Tesla and will even be better in terms of production costs.”

Achieving that will require widespread attacks on workforces throughout the supplier chain, at all VW plants and in Wolfsburg itself. Tens of thousands more will be added to the 20,000 VW job cuts already agreed upon this year—on which IGM and the works council expressly agree.

After a kind of “formal apology” to Diess (according to finance daily Handelsblatt ), the supervisory board announced there would only be a necessary reduction in staff “via the proven personnel instruments,” i.e., through collaboration with the unions and works council. It resolved to reduce fixed costs, including wage costs for permanent workers, by 5 percent by 2023. In production, which is already highly rationalized, this is only possible with further staff reductions. To guarantee this, Diess’ favourite, Arno Antlitz, who has been head of finance at the VW brand for ten years, has been appointed CFO of the entire group.

The suppliers are to bleed even more. Here, costs are to be cut by seven percent within two years. That means adhesion contracts for the suppliers, for which the workers there will pay with jobs, wage cuts and increased productivity. To this end, the supervisory board appointed Murat Aksel as the new head of purchasing. Aksel, like Diess, comes from BMW, where he was a feared cost-cutter in purchasing.

Thomas Schmall, who will take over the newly created board-level “Technology” department, is regarded as “Osterloh’s pupil,” according to Handelsblatt. Like Osterloh and Diess, he is in favour of the company’s own battery cell production and an acceleration of the switch to electric mobility.

The financial markets, i.e., investors and shareholders, have understood the message. Within two days, VW shares rose by around 12 percent and have remained at that level ever since.

In his Wednesday morning newsletter, former Handelsblatt editor-in-chief Gabor Steingart cheered the proposals, saying, “Germany’s auto industry has finally taken up the pursuit of electromobility—powerfully and across the group.” He said this applied both to the VW, BMW, and Daimler groups—which alone are investing €70 billion in electric vehicles over the next five years—and to the supplier chain, such as Bosch and Continental.

International investors were not just betting on Tesla, Steingart said. “They are betting on the beginning of a new era.” Those who resolutely bet on the electrification of their product range will be rewarded, he added. “Herbert Diess’ E-strategy and its backing in VW’s supervisory board has encouraged the stock market to skyrocket this week.”

This is being done on the backs of the workforce. In the summer, WSWS wrote that the leadership dispute at VW was ushering in a new phase of close cooperation between management and the union, “designed to prepare the group for a global economic war and aimed directly at employees.”

That came to fruition with last Monday’s decision by the supervisory board. The developments of last week have once again highlighted the special role of IG Metall and the works council led by Bernd Osterloh. In all corporations, the works council representatives are stooges of the management; at VW, they help steer the global corporation. The special arrangements at VW, where the Social Democratic Party-led Lower Saxony state executive is a major shareholder, means they determine who steers the group and in what direction. And they do this not in the interests of the workforce, but of the shareholders. This was once again borne out by the events of last week.

The COVID vaccine rollout: A demonstration of capitalist incompetence

Benjamin Mateus

The COVID vaccine rollout last week has been nothing short of a disastrous unorganized publicity stunt.

While Vice President Pence and members of Congress received their Pfizer COVID mRNA-vaccine over the weekend, a staged event to assure “vaccine hesitators” that top officials were undergoing the same procedure, officials across multiple states had learned they would be getting fewer doses of vaccine in their second shipment. Some 2.9 million doses were initially sent this week, but states were told that only 2 million doses would be forthcoming the week after.

After receiving 49,725 initial doses in the first week of the vaccine release, Wisconsin state health officials were told they would be receiving only 35,100 doses the following week. “This is unacceptable. Wisconsin citizens deserve the vaccine the federal government promised,” Governor Tony Evers complained.

Vice President Mike Pence receives a Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine shot at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House complex, Friday, Dec. 18, 2020, in Washington (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Dr. Ben Weston, medical services director of Milwaukee County’s Office of Emergency Management, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “Certainly, the more vaccine we can get, the better. We have lots of health care workers that we need to vaccinate. We have lots of folks that are at high risk, either living or working in long-term care facilities. And we have lots and lots of EMS providers who are on the front line, dealing with patients in uncontrolled environments.” Wisconsin was severely hit by the surge in October and November, pushing hospitals to their brink.

State governments in Oregon, Florida and Michigan have made public statements decrying reduced allotment of vaccine doses. Many of these states have moved to readjust their vaccination plans as they are left in the dark about these shortages.

According to a senior Washington official, the US will not meet its goal to vaccinate 20 million people by New Year’s Eve. The revised estimate, per General Gustave Perna, the Army officer in charge of the government’s vaccine distribution program, is that states should receive the 40 million doses a week later than predicted.

He told reporters on Saturday, “I did not understand with exactness all the steps that have to occur to make sure the vaccine is releasable. I failed, I am adjusting, and we will move forward from there.” He further added, “There is a delay between what is available and what is releasable because we’re talking about hundreds and thousands and millions of doses that we want to make sure are right.” With 2,583 deaths each day on a seven-day average, the one-week delay will see another 18,000 people succumb to the pandemic.

As of December 18, and less than a week into a national effort to vaccinate the population against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, according to a New York Times survey, approximately 130,000 people have received the first dose of Pfizer’s vaccine. This is certainly an underestimate but demonstrates that delivery of the vaccine still requires coordinating the logistics of bringing millions of people to thousands of vaccine sites and then for a second shot within a month.

On the same day, the FDA issued an emergency approval for the second vaccine against the coronavirus, developed by Moderna. Like Pfizer, Moderna has employed mRNA technology and requires two doses each spaced a few weeks apart. However, the Moderna vaccine doesn’t have the same rigorous ultra-cold temperature requirements.

Pfizer, which had to reduce initial vaccination estimates from 100 million down to 50 million doses, in part due to complex supply chain issues for their vaccine production, has pushed back against any claims that it is having difficulties producing their therapeutics, promising an optimistic 1.3 billion doses for next year. Moncef Slaoui, the chief scientific adviser to Operation Warp Speed, noted in an interview that the federal government was reaching to close the deal on the second 100 million doses for the second quarter of 2021. The $1.95 billion contract for 100 million doses signed last July allows the United States the option to buy up to 500 million more doses.

During an interview with CEO Albert Bourla on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” today, a reply to host Meg Tirrell’s question placed these publicized assurances into doubt. She began her query by stating that Operation Warp Speed had offered to assist Pfizer in increasing its manufacturing capacity by using the Defense Production Act to obtain raw material supplies. “How would that affect Pfizer if the Defense Production Act were used to help you?”

Bourla replied, “I think it would be very positive, and I think it will allow us to maximize what we can do. We are asking them right now … and I hope that they will do it soon because, particularly in some components (of the vaccine), we are running at critical supply limitations (emphasis added). But I think they will do it, so that would be no problem.”

On December 3, a Pfizer spokeswoman told the Wall Street Journal, “Scaling up the raw material supply chain took longer than expected.” These materials are sourced through the US and Europe and require a certain quality control to ensure standards are met. Pfizer has only stated that some of these batches initially received were unusable, which led to revised lower estimates. The pharmaceutical giant did not clarify where these shortfalls occurred but they included several medical-grade substances.

The original deal made between Pfizer and the US required the delivery of 20 million vaccines a month beginning in November. However, Pfizer will spread this allotment over the first four months of 2021. According to Bloomberg, “Pfizer has so far allocated about 10.4 million doses to the US, the (senior administration) official said. From the first tranche of 6.4 million, 500,000 doses were set aside as a reserve, and 2.9 million were shipped out this week. The remaining 2.9 million will be sent in three weeks as the second dose of the vaccine’s two-shot regimen. The US will begin delivering the second allocation of 4 million doses next week, again sending out half while holding back half for second doses.”

There is no public scrutiny over these processes. Once new weekly allotments are released to the federal government, they will, in turn, ship these to the states once the states determine where they must be sent.

Ed Yong, a science writer for The Atlantic, told NPR, “It’s going to be a slow process, and there are a lot of possible roadblocks in the way in terms of producing the vaccine, distributing it, allocating it. Don’t think of the vaccine as a light switch—that the minute it starts going into people’s arms, normalcy resumes. It’s going to take a while for things to get under control.”

There is no national vaccine infrastructure in the US, and the minuscule amounts of monies that have been allocated to vaccine distribution are utterly insufficient. As of this writing, lawmakers were continuing to clash in Congress over a nearly $1 trillion funding package that would help state health departments secure the billions in resources needed to finance their vaccination campaigns.

A recent publication by the Commonwealth Fund, How prepared are states to vaccinate the public against COVID-19? Learning from Influenza and H1N1 vaccination programs, reported that people with health insurance, a usual source of care and no cost barriers were much more likely to receive their annual flu shots. However, individuals with chronic health conditions who frequently access health care and have the highest national vaccination rates are still vaccinated well below the national target of 70 percent, hinting at the difficulties that lie ahead for the COVID vaccine.

Age, income, and education played a significant role in vaccine uptake. The report pointed out that though racial inequities in vaccination rates have persisted, vaccination access is linked to insurance coverage and financial barriers common among the working class of all races.

The arrival of Moderna’s vaccine sets the stage for another 5.9 million doses of a COVID vaccine to be available next week in the US. Moderna has promised 20 million doses by the end of the year and up to 125 million doses through the first quarter of 2021. However, the biopharmaceutical company has never brought a drug to the market and lacks extensive manufacturing facilities of its own. In May, they turned to Swiss manufacturing behemoth Lonza AG, striking a deal to produce 1 billion doses per year in the US and Switzerland.

There are certainly not enough vaccines presently even for the 21 million health care workers across the US. States are continuing to grapple with the pandemic as hospitals face record numbers of COVID patients and staffing shortages, which adds unnecessary complexity to state vaccination rollouts.

The pandemic has also disproportionately devastated the working class, particularly those who are older, or suffering from chronic health issues, putting them and their families at risk, while the wealthy are negotiating backroom deals with their physicians and health care systems to access the vaccine. Wealthy countries have also captured nearly all future doses of the vaccines, leaving most of the world without access to these life-saving therapeutics for possibly years to come.

COVID outbreak and China tensions expose Australian government bid to claim “recovery”

Mike Head

Frantic efforts are being made by the Australian government and corporate media to talk up prospects of “economic recovery,” despite continuing mass unemployment, rising tensions with China—the country’s biggest export market—and the raging global COVID-19 pandemic.

In releasing the government’s “mid-year economic and fiscal outlook” (MYEFO) last Thursday, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg did his best to promote the economic prospects of consumer travel and spending. He declared: “Australians are approaching Christmas with optimism and hope.”

This was despite the government’s own statistics showing that more than three million workers remain dependent on poverty-line JobKeeper wage subsidies or JobSeeker dole payments, both of which have been slashed and are due to be cut again on December 31.

Australian Treasurer Josh Frydenberg (Source: Wikimedia)

The vastly understated official unemployment figures released the same day showed the seasonally-adjusted jobless rate dropped slightly from 7 to 6.8 percent in November. Yet that still left almost a million workers seeking jobs and nearly 2.5 million classified as “under-utilised” (unemployed or under-employed, that is, trying to get extra hours).

A more accurate picture was provided by the Roy Morgan monthly employment survey. It estimated the total under-utilisation rate at 21 percent, or just under 3 million people. Employment rose in November—largely due to the lifting of pandemic restrictions in Victoria, the state previously worst affected by COVID-19—but about 40,000 people dropped out of the workforce.

New proof of the vulnerability to the pandemic came with an outbreak in Sydney just as Frydenberg released the annual budget update. The cluster quickly exposed one of the most blatant profit-driven assertions in the update: that the coronavirus is under control and there will be no more lockdowns or border controls.

Despite the renewed danger of infections spreading, Frydenberg said it would be “premature” and unnecessarily damage consumer and business confidence if any safety restrictions were imposed in response to the Sydney outbreak.

Nevertheless, popular concern over the deadly and infectious virus compelled most state and territory governments to reintroduce travel restrictions, denting big business hopes for a lucrative Christmas tourism and retail boom.

While Frydenberg promoted hopes of a national vaccine “rollout” by “late 2021,” he admitted there were “downside risks to Australia’s economic recovery.” These included “the timing, distribution and effectiveness of the vaccine in stopping the spread of the virus globally, trade tensions that limit Australia’s access to export markets, and domestic economic uncertainty.”

Just a day before the MYEFO release, the Liberal-National government announced it would ramp up its conflict with Beijing by referring China to the World Trade Organisation to challenge anti-dumping tariffs imposed on Australian barley imports. This is one of a growing number of disputes—from wine to coal—now threatening Australian exports worth more than $6 billion a year.

The government has increasingly committed Australia to back the US confrontation with China. Yet the MYEFO underscored the ongoing reliance of key sections of Australian capitalism, and overall government revenues, on China—especially for iron ore sales. Higher ore prices, fueled by the Chinese regime’s stimulus measures and supply problems in Brazil, are expected to boost Australia’s gross domestic product (GDP) by $25 billion this financial year and increase company tax receipts by $1.3 billion this year and $4.8 billion next year.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison and the media falsely reported the MYEFO as showing a significant improvement in the economic scenario—primarily because of the ending of Victoria’s restrictions—since the annual federal budget was belatedly handed down on October 6.

Headlines such as “Recovery gathering pace” highlighted a $16 billion drop in the predicted federal government deficit for this year, from $213.7 billion to $197.7 billion, and a decrease in the four-year deficit total from $480 billion to $456 billion.

However, these remain the highest deficits ever recorded in peacetime. Federal government debt is still set to soar over $1 trillion by the end of the 2020s—a measure of the depth of the worst global economic breakdown since the 1930s Great Depression. State governments are also running large deficits, causing global credit ratings agencies to strip their AAA rankings from both New South Wales and Victoria, the two most populous states.

Even the cut in the forecast federal deficit was almost entirely due to the winding back of the JobKeeper and JobSeeker payments, which have barely kept millions of working-class households out of destitution since March. There will be an $11 billion drop-off in JobKeeper and a $3.7 billion cut in welfare payments this financial year.

In other words, almost all the budget “improvement” is at the expense of working people. The resulting social crisis will intensify as mortgage, rent and small business insolvency moratoria are ended in the New Year, throwing millions more workers and family business operators into poverty.

This is a foretaste of the financial stress and social misery to come as the government implements “budget repair”—that is, imposes deeper austerity measures to extract the cost of the government deficits and debts by slashing social programs, including public health and education.

The MYEFO upgraded economic growth for this financial year to 0.75 percent, from minus 1.5 percent in the October budget. But that presupposes an end to a recession that produced the sharpest ever quarterly fall in GDP—7 percent from July to September. And the budget update confirmed negative net overseas migration and slower population growth because of the worldwide pandemic.

Even by the rosy predictions issued by Frydenberg, unemployment is yet to peak and non-mining private investment will plunge by a staggering 14.5 percent this financial year.

That is despite the federal, state and territory governments pouring about $300 billion in subsidies and incentives into the hands of business, mainly big business, this year. As well, the Reserve Bank has locked in record low interest rates of 0.1 percent for three years, and providing the financial markets with $100 billion of “quantitative easing.”

For all the upbeat propaganda, key corporate media outlets are lashing the government for not moving fast enough to unleash “budget repair” and “industrial relations reform” to further cut workers’ wages and conditions.

The Australian Financial Review editorial on Saturday accused the government of evading its “political challenges” by failing to chart a course to “wind back” spending. It also demanded “structural reform,” deeper cuts in the company tax rate and more aggressive moves to tackle the “quagmire of an industrial relations system.”

Likewise, the Australian editorial on Friday insisted that overcoming the budget deficits would require “structural reforms including in the hard-fought areas of industrial relations and tax.”

Another warning of the ruthless plans of the ruling elite came from the only expansion of social spending announced in the MYEFO. That was $850 million to fund the creation of another 10,000 “home care packages,” which are designed to keep elderly people out of residential nursing homes.

Over the past year, the government now claims to have funded 50,000 such packages. But that still leaves up to 100,000 people on waiting lists, often for more than 12 months. The MYEFO pittance is a continuation of the contempt for the lives of retired workers displayed by the fact that so far 685 of the country’s 908 COVID-19 deaths, or three-quarters, have occurred in chronically under-funded and poorly-staffed aged care facilities.

Trump held White House meeting on martial law plan to overturn election

Patrick Martin

President Donald Trump and his top aides reviewed a series of proposals for overturning his defeat in the presidential election at a meeting Friday night in the White House. This included discussion of a proposal that he declare martial law and order the seizure of voting machines in key battleground states, according to numerous press accounts.

The New York Times first reported on the meeting, which involved Trump, White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and two prominent advocates of an election coup, former Trump campaign attorney Sidney Powell and former Trump national security advisor Gen. Michael Flynn. Additional details were reported by CNN, ABC, NBC and other news outlets.

It was the first meeting at the White House for Flynn since Trump pardoned him on two counts of perjury for lying to the FBI during the investigation, in the early days of the Trump administration, that led to his firing as national security advisor. It was the first White House visit for Powell since she was dismissed by the Trump campaign after voicing a series of bizarre conspiracy theories in which Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (dead since 2013) was held responsible for manipulating the 2020 US presidential election.

Michael Flynn leaving federal court in Washington, DC, 2019. [Photo credit: AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta, File]

Trump’s welcoming such discredited figures into the White House undoubtedly expresses mounting desperation, but also an utter refusal to concede the result of the election, won by Biden with a margin of more than seven million votes. While acting like a cornered rat, Trump, as president of the United States for another month, still possesses immense powers, particularly over the US military-intelligence apparatus.

General Flynn visited the White House one day after suggesting, in an interview on the rabidly pro-Trump Newsmax network, that Trump should declare martial law, order voting machines in six key states seized by federal authorities, and conduct a second election in those states under military supervision. This would, of course, mean armed soldiers insuring that the voters of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin got it “right” this time, i.e., that the electoral votes of these states, officially delivered to Democrat Joe Biden on December 14 as a result of each state’s balloting, were instead awarded to Trump.

According to the press accounts, Trump asked General Flynn about his proposal for martial law and a second election. Meadows and Cipollone, and other unidentified White House officials, reportedly opposed Flynn and said the president did not have the authority to take the proposed actions. Powell, who was Flynn’s lawyer in his perjury case before joining the effort of the Trump campaign to overturn the election results, was said to have denounced the White House officials for being insufficiently devoted to Trump’s interests.

The meeting was characterized as ending in a “screaming” match, without a clear decision as to what course Trump would take. At one point, Trump suggested he might appoint Powell as a special counsel to investigate the presidential election, a proposal that was opposed by White House officials and even by Trump’s principal election lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who is recovering from the coronavirus and participated in the meeting remotely.

Attorney General William Barr has resisted Trump’s demand to name a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden, son of the president-elect, and presumably would oppose a similar appointment of Powell to investigate the election, but he is leaving the department under pressure from Trump, effective Wednesday, December 23. His interim successor, the current deputy attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, could well be asked to make such appointments after Barr’s departure.

On Sunday, as details of the meeting and the illegal and unconstitutional proposals that were discussed became more widely known, Trump went on his Twitter account to denounce the press reports as “Fake News.”

According to the Times account, one of measures discussed at the meeting was a proposal by Giuliani that Trump issue an executive order to seize control of voting machines in the contested states so they could be examined for “fraud.” Giuliani reportedly discussed this option with the acting deputy secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Kenneth Cuccinelli, last week, but Cuccinelli said the DHS did not have the authority to do so. An executive order would supposedly remedy that, but the president, as head of the federal government, does not have the power to take such action against the states, which actually administer elections under the US constitutional structure.

It is remarkable that Cuccinelli, a rabid anti-immigrant bigot and semi-fascist, who was a notorious law-and-order demagogue during his four years as state attorney general in Virginia, is now presented as a moderating force in the internal deliberations of the Trump administration.

In the only Sunday television interview program to take up the issue, CNN’s “State of the Union” began with host Jake Tapper declaring: “For anyone wondering just how much damage an outgoing president can do in the final month in office, we’re beginning to get something of an idea. On Friday in the Oval Office, the president reportedly discussed with disgraced pardoned former General Michael Flynn Flynn’s deranged proposal to have Trump declare martial law to force new elections in states that Biden won, so as to overturn the election results.

“Trump is also reportedly talking about giving the powers of a special counsel to attorney Sidney Powell, whose crackpot conspiracy theories about the election have been laughed out of courtroom after courtroom.”

Tapper asked a guest on the program, Republican Senator Mitt Romney, about the martial law plan, which Romney dismissed, saying, “It’s not going to happen. That’s going nowhere. And I understand the president is casting about, trying to find some way to have a different result than the one that was delivered by the American people.”

The only representative of the Biden transition to discuss the issue Sunday, Pete Buttigieg, Biden’s nominee for secretary of transportation, was far less categorical, merely stating that Biden would take office on Inauguration Day as scheduled, adding, “I just hope that, across the party and across the country, there’s an understanding about how important it is that we remain committed to democracy.”

Remarkably, there was no substantive discussion on any other Sunday television interview program about the White House discussions on martial law, nor did the Biden campaign issue any statement or comment on the issue of Trump’s continuing refusal to concede the election. Biden’s policy ever since November 3 has been to downplay Trump’s threats to overturn the election while reaching out to the military-intelligence apparatus and Wall Street to reassure them that the incoming Democratic administration will uphold their interests.

Trump continued to rail against the election results over the weekend on Twitter, declaring Saturday that it was “Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election,” and calling for supporters to attend protests in Washington on January 6, 2021, when Congress officially counts the electoral votes cast by the 50 states and the District of Columbia. “Be there, will be wild,” he tweeted, reiterating claims that he won a landslide victory in the election, and adding, “Now Republican politicians have to fight so that their great victory is not stolen. Don’t be weak fools!”

A half-dozen Republican congressmen have said they will object to electoral votes being cast for Biden by states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia, and one senator, incoming Alabama Republican Tommy Tuberville, said he would provide the support from at least one senator required to force a vote on the objection. The objection would still fail, both in the Democratic-controlled House and in the Senate, where more than a dozen Republicans have said they accept Biden’s victory.

Meanwhile, the syndicated television program Inside Edition reported that Trump “has reportedly told his staff he’s not leaving the White House, flat out refusing to accept the results of the 2020 election…”

During the summer, after he had clinched the Democratic presidential nomination, Biden told interviewers that his “greatest fear” about the election was that Trump would refuse to acknowledge the decision of the voters and would refuse to carry out a peaceful transfer of power. Since the election, however, Biden has remained virtually silent on the issue, entrusting the transition to the national security apparatus and avoiding any appeal to the American population, for fear of triggering a political upheaval the Democrats could not control.

One indication of the mood in Washington—where the prospects of a Trump coup are the subject of heated discussions on a daily basis—is a little noticed amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) introduced by Democrat Chrissy Houlahan, a former Air Force officer, with Republican support. It would require that if the president invokes the Insurrection Act of 1807, as Trump threatened to do last June during the protests against the police murder of George Floyd, military and paramilitary units will be required to wear their names and insignia so they can be identified as they take to the streets.

Trump has threatened to veto the NDAA, although not over this amendment, which does almost nothing to restrain the possible use of the military against the American people.