Another grim US jobs report amid stock market frenzy

Shannon Jones

New claims for unemployment insurance declined slightly, reaching a seasonally adjusted 847,000 for the week ending January 23. The figure is still far above any recorded prior to the pandemic. The four-week average was 868,000, the highest level since September, compared to 229,002 initial claims in the comparable week in 2020.

The continuation of record levels of new unemployment filings comes as the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that the US economy contracted by 3.5 percent in 2020, the largest yearly decline since the demobilization following World War II. It was the first decline since 2009, during the Great Recession, when the economy suffered a 2.5 percent contraction.

Pedestrians wear face coverings while passing by a sign on an empty restaurant/retail space Thursday, Jan. 21, 2021, in downtown Denver. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)

The more poorly paid sections of workers have been hit the hardest by the impact of the pandemic, including those employed in the travel, hospitality and leisure sectors. Hundreds of thousands of small businesses have faced bankruptcy and closure, while airlines and other big corporations have been bailed out by the federal government.

In the midst of this economic disaster the frenzied speculation on Wall Street reached a new level this week with the “short squeeze” on electronics and video game retailer GameStop, which saw shares of the struggling company skyrocket. The artificial inflation of shares of near bankrupt companies is just the sharpest example of the pumping up of financial markets through the continuous infusion of vast amounts of government funds, $3.5 trillion since the start of the pandemic.

The injection of trillions of dollars into the markets combined with record low interest rates has fueled unprecedented levels of speculation and the obscene enrichment of billionaires such as Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and Tesla founder Elon Musk. Share prices on many stocks have run up to fantastic levels, with the stock of electric carmaker Tesla, for example, up 964 percent since the start of 2020 despite the company barely eking out a profit.

At the same time, workers face intensified pressure to resume work at schools and factories despite the uncontrolled spread of the pandemic, which is killing more than 3,000 every single day. The overriding priority of the Biden administration, which is demanding schools reopen for in-person teaching despite the spread of the pandemic, is to make sure that workers are free to return to their jobs in order to keep producing profits to sustain the massive share price bubble on Wall Street.

The figures contained in the weekly jobs report by the Department of Labor point to the pandemic’s continued devastating economic impact on workers. In addition to the new claims for regular unemployment benefits, 48 states reported 426,856 initial claims for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance, a broader program that covers the self-employed “gig” workers and others who are not generally covered by state unemployment benefits.

The number claiming continuing benefits in all programs for the week ending January 9 was 18,282,090, which was an increase of 2,293,495 from the previous week.

The scaled down $300 weekly supplement to unemployment benefits enacted in December after months of delays is set to expire in March. Meanwhile, President Biden reported that a new coronavirus relief bill is stalled in Congress and may take “weeks” of negotiations before delivering any relief. The bill contains a paltry $1,400 one-time stimulus check, scaled back from the $2,000 earlier falsely touted by the Democrats, and a $400 weekly supplement to unemployment benefits. The Democrats have already indicated a willingness to reduce even these token amounts in the interest of bipartisan “unity.”

This haggling takes place as millions of working class families across the United States face hunger and the threat of eviction. While unlimited funds are made available to Wall Street, workers are being forced to rely on desperately underfunded food banks and other charities for day-to-day survival.

In the face of this, the Biden administration made the token gesture of signing an executive order raising Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, or food stamps, by 15 percent to poor families whose children normally rely on school lunch and breakfast programs. He also raised benefits 15 percent for some low-income families.

SNAP benefits are absurdly inadequate, far from enough to ensure families have enough to eat. The program has faced relentless attack by both Republican and Democratic administrations. In 2014, President Obama signed legislation cutting $8.7 billion from the SNAP program, causing 800,000 households to lose some $90 a month. Rule changes ordered by Trump last year cut off almost 700,000 from receiving benefits.

Food banks and food pantries have been struggling all during the pandemic to meet surging requests for assistance. Another blow fell this month when, in the midst of the pandemic and despite rising need, the state of Texas proposed a 41 percent cut to the Surplus Agricultural Products. The grant program allows food banks to procure fresh produce from Texas farmers that would otherwise go to waste.

In another public relations gesture, on Tuesday Democrats introduced the Raise the Wage Act that would increase the minimum wage in steps to $15 an hour by 2025. This cynical maneuver, which relies on inflation to cut the value of the pay raise, will face ferocious opposition from corporate interests and will likely be further whittled down or eliminated entirely.

When the demand for a $15 an hour minimum wage was introduced in 2012, it was presented as a radical measure that would lift millions of low-wage workers out of poverty. Although far from adequate to ensure a minimal standard of living at the time, inflation has since eviscerated the $15 an hour proposal which is now worth just $13.25 in 2012 dollars and will amount to even less by 2025.

This week California announced that it may force 4.1 million people to repay some or all of the unemployment benefits they were paid during the pandemic. The state claims that an audit showed that some people, who received benefits, may not have been technically eligible due to bureaucratic rules even though no fraud was involved. The penny-pinching attitude towards struggling workers stands in sharp contrast to the trillions of virtually no-strings money handed out to corporations under the bipartisan CARES Act.

The subordination of all economic and social life to the voracious demands of Wall Street is the greatest barrier to any attempt to deal with the pandemic and the ongoing economic disaster in a rational and socially beneficial fashion. No resolution to this crisis is possible without a direct struggle by the working class against the capitalist profit system and the two big business political parties that defend it. The emergency measures that are needed to bring the pandemic under control and provide assistance to workers and small businesses require the independent political mobilization of the working class based on a socialist program.

Why a Digital Geneva Convention on Cyberwarfare Won’t Materialise

Pieter-Jan Dockx

In December 2020, it was reported that the digital systems of US government agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security had been infiltrated by alleged Kremlin-backed hackers. While the full extent of the damage is yet to be determined, the attack prompted renewed calls for international rules aimed at constraining cyberwarfare. These calls for an international treaty on cyberwarfare, often referred to as the ‘Digital Geneva Convention’, are not new. In 2018, Robert Hannigan, the former head of the UK’s signals intelligence service, GCHQ ,also voiced the need for internationally-agreed boundaries on hacking by nation-states. Yet, despite these calls, the prospect of such an agreement actualising are slim. Issues related to the attribution of cyberattacks, the lack of critical cyber incidents, as well as a global shift away from multilateral action, all act as major impediments.

The Attribution Problem

An issue that has persistently hampered international cooperation on cyberwarfare, and will continue to do so in the future, is the ‘attribution problem’. The term captures the inherent difficulty that exists within the cyber domain on pinning down the source of an attack. Yet, for any form of international agreement to be effective, it is essential that those breaching its terms can be identified. Without it, agreed-upon rules would be unenforceable.

The methods for anonymity and stealth available in cyberspace make attribution more complex than in physical warfare. Even if an attack is traced back to a geographical location, it still does not disclose the extent of state involvement, if any at all. This plausible deniability has allowed governments accused of cyberattacks to shift the blame to non-state actors operating on their territory, such as cybercriminals or hacktivists.

The space for plausible deniability is also constantly evolving. Apart from passing responsibility to non-state actors, governments have started outsourcing their operations to these groups. Russia allows cybercriminals to operate freely on its territory in return for carrying out government-sponsored attacks. State-backed actors also conduct false flag operations by purposefully leaving behind digital evidence that points at another government as the culprit.

Critical Incidents

The cyber domain has not yet witnessed the kind of critical incidents that often precede international action, as seen in other areas of warfare. It was World War I that propelled action against the use of chemical weapons, and the Cuban Missile Crisis that led to limitations on nuclear weapon testing. The largest cyberattacks in history, such as NotPetya and WannaCry, cost billions of dollars to governments and companies around the world. Yet, they did not lead to a large loss of life or threaten the perceived survival of a global superpower.

Large-scale cyberattacks on major countries’ critical infrastructure, such as electricity grids, would also likely compel a global response. However, such incidents have only occurred in countries that do not have the clout to lead this international endeavour. These include the targeting of Ukraine’s electricity grid and the attack on Iran’s nuclear programme.

As a result, the world’s major powers have not just backed away from international cooperation, but have even embraced more offensive postures­—further disincentivising constraints on cyberwarfare. In 2019, the US adopted its new “defend forward” doctrine which allows it to carry out pre-emptive cyberattacks. This year, the UK also launched its National Cyber Force, a unit tasked explicitly with offensive cyber operations.

Multilateralism in Decline

Global political trends such as the decline of US power, the rise of China, and the resurgence of nationalism have all narrowed the scope for multilateral action—including on cyberwarfare. During the peak of US hegemony in the 1990s, Washington used its dominance to advance global action on trade and disarmament. However, since the 9/11 attacks, American power has been declining, restricting its ability to forge and enforce international agreements.

This has been further exacerbated by the rise of China which has used its growing influence to challenge the US on the world stage. Beijing has created alternative international organisations such as the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), and is actively reshaping existing ones like the World Health Organisation (WHO). During the Trump presidency, competition between both countries turned into a zero-sum game ill-suited for cooperation.  

Multilateral cooperation is also being hindered by a resurgent nationalism that is increasingly shaping states’ foreign policies. Based on the idea of “America First”, the US withdrew from multiple international agreements. China’s nationalist ‘wolf-warrior diplomacy’ on the other hand has strained its global partnerships. Even the European Union, the self-proclaimed champion of multilateralism, is experimenting with economic nationalism to fend off competition from the US and China.

Conclusion

Every time a government falls victim to a cyberattack, talk of a Digital Geneva Convention ensues. Yet, the idea faces numerous challenges. Internationally, there has been a shift away from multilateralism in favour of national interest. In cyberspace itself, no attack has yet sparked the sense of urgency often required to prompt action. Even if these dynamics change, and the recent US government breach proves to be a turning point, the inherent difficulty of attributing cyberattacks to governments would likely still undermine any agreement.

India’s Internal Security: A Fog of Triumph?

Bibhu Prasad Routray

Official data on each of India’s internal conflict theatres for the past successive years have continued to portray progress towards peace and stability. Guns are falling silent across conflict theatres and the death count has reduced drastically. Government reach is expanding into hitherto no-go areas. Gun-toting insurgents/militants are mostly fighting battles of survival. India today is probably witnessing the last phase of armed insurrections. A decadal review of India’s campaign to bring stability to its three prominent conflict theatres—Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), the Northeast (NE), and the left-wing extremism (LWE) affected states—do portray an array of achievements. Yet, several challenges remain, which must be overcome for the country to have durable peace.  

The following five trends sum up this decade’s violent extremist campaigns and official efforts to counter them, although these certainly don’t exhaust the entire debate on the subject.

Imperfect Wars

Efforts to end conflicts in each of these prominent theatres have been radically different from one another. Whereas the Indian Army is the preferred choice against militants in J&K and the NE, owing to the indigenous nature of the LWE, which operates without any external assistance, police and the central armed police forces are deployed. A restrained application of force that bars heavy artillery and machine guns from being used has been the hallmark of counter-insurgency (COIN) campaigns. Yet, each of these campaigns has been riddled with human rights abuses, with the forces operating with a sense of impunity. The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, operational in J&K and some NE states, which enables security forces to summarily arrest and even kill suspected militants, has been identified as a primary problem by activists. At the operational level, however, a lack of ground-level intelligence, disconnect with the local population, and the haphazard nature of force deployment, remain problematic.

Whether any COIN operation can ever be a perfect war without any collateral damage is a continuing debate. At the same time, however, due diligence of critical COIN elements such as leadership and the training and quality of personnel can lead to significant improvements in the way forces approach their duties. Several corrective measures have been taken by the government, which has resulted in a significant reduction in the number of staged encounters and incidents of torture, etc. Still, from time to time, the discovery of a unmarked grave (J&K), or the killing of a villager termed as an “extremist” (LWE-affected states), or extra-judicial killings of civilians and militants (Manipur), produce narratives of an abdication of authority.        

Does an Absence of Violence Equal an Absence of Peace?

There is perceptibly less violence in India’s conflict theatres today. Militancy-related incidents have significantly reduced as compared to 2011. In the words of the J&K Police, much of it is due to successful counter-terrorist (CT) operations that have eliminated the top militants of various outfits. In the NE as well as with regard to LWE, the capacity of extremists to orchestrate violence stands drastically reduced. According to the South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP), incidents of killing in the entire country have reduced from 555 in 2011 to 297 in 2020. The reduction is even more pronounced when compared to the previous decade (2001-2010), during which the average yearly incidents of killing was 1671. Between 2011 and 2020, it is barely 453.

An absence of violence, however, hasn’t resulted in peace. While the government has managed to conclude a number of peace agreements with insurgency movements in the NE, there isn’t a single peace-making effort worth its name either in the J&K or LWE theatres. The peace process on NE’s oldest insurgency—with the National Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM)—is still inconclusive despite several official promises and efforts. While the group remains adamant on its demand for a separate constitution and a flag, the government’s veiled threat that it will go ahead with a peace process by excluding the NSCN-IM has not worked. As a result, in each of these conflict theatres, islands of tranquillity coexist disharmoniously with pockets of resistance and instability. And more often than not, instability from those pockets spill over into areas that are considered to have stabilised.                         

Residual Violent Extremism

According to official estimates, barely 250 active militants are operative in J&K; another 3-4,000 (including those belonging to the NSCN-IM) in the NE states; and there are less than 1,000 in the LWE-affected states. Experts often term this as residual militancy/extremism because of their inability to pose a major threat to India’s national security. The truism in this assertion is incontestable. A major achievement of security force operations over the past decade is that extremism and insurgency are fueled today by a mix of dissent and sedulous fidelity to waging a fight against the state, rather than any conviction of vanquishing the over-imposing state.

At the same time, however, the state has continued to find residual and dispersed extremism a more challenging phenomenon to deal with than a full-fledged armed insurrection. The cadre strength of existing armed groups has remained more or less the same for the past few years, nullifying the steady attrition imposed by COIN/CT operations. Violent extremism is proving to be a complex challenge to be solved by security force operations alone.              

Changing Character: Externally Assisted to Locally Sourced

One of the prominent trends in India’s internal conflicts over the past decade is their transformed nature: from being externally assisted to locally sourced and managed. While LWE has been an indigenous movement throughout its existence, external support even to armed groups in J&K and NE are on the wane. The number of Pakistani militants in J&K has decreased over the past few years. Local groups like the Hizb-ul Mujahideen (HM) have gained ascendency over the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM). Today, even among the LeT and JeM militants active in J&K, there are more local Kashmiri youth than those from Pakistan. Officials blame this on Pakistan’s strategy to portray the Kashmiri militancy as an internally-fueled armed insurrection and not so much an externally-assisted one. However, available data does indicate a growing desire among local youth to be a part of ongoing militancy movements. While 257 locals joined the militancy between 2011 and 2016, 631 locals have joined various groups over the past four years (2017-2020).

Policy and Operational Hits and Misses

According to SATP, 4,332 terrorists, extremists, and insurgents were killed in India in various security force operations between 2011 and 2020. Further, a large number have either been arrested or have surrendered. Concerted official efforts have prevented global jihadism—al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS) and the Islamic State (IS)—from finding a foothold in Kashmir and elsewhere. The neutralisation of prominent militants/extremists—Burhan Wani and Zakir Musa (J&K), Drishti Rajkhowa (Assam), and scores of others in the LWE-affected states—have limited the extremists’ violence potential and curbed the romanticism that feeds extremism.

And yet, 2010-2020 will also go down as a decade of undelivered promises. The central government’s  August 2019 decision to alter the status of J&K is yet to produce much impact on its security scene. In spite of its surgical strikes and intense diplomatic efforts, New Delhi has not succeeded in making Pakistan give up its sponsorship of Kashmiri militancy. The much hyped expectation of the surrenders of Ganapathy, former general secretary of the Communist Party of India-Maoist (CPI-Maoist), or Paresh Baruah, the chief of the United Liberation Front of Asom, (ULFA) have not materialised. In 90 districts across India, over 100 battalions of security forces are still battling the LWE. In the NE, groups like the ULFA, NSCN-IM, and many other peripheral outfits continue to remain attached to the objective of ‘freedom’ and a recognition of their rights.

Outlook

The government’s projected aspiration of making India a US$ 5 trillion economy by 2025 has been linked to the goal of ending all internal conflicts. It is obvious that the political leadership hopes to use concerted security force operations to further weaken extremists across theatres. While that is still achievable, the changing nature of violent extremism coupled with systemic changes may pose additional complex challenges.

The spectre of radicalisation, still in evolution, will have to be dealt with a nuanced approach. The outcome of the ongoing peace process in Afghanistan amid a reduced international footprint may inflate the capacities of existing armed groups, especially those in Kashmir. The new US administration’s Af-Pak policy may play a role in shaping the contours of violent extremism in India. And lastly, at home, the official policy towards minorities and deprived and alienated groups and regions will decide the longevity of dissent and protraction of conflicts. A lack of unity of purpose among the Centre and States continues to remain one of India’s major challenges in addressing internal security threats. Some attention to evolving a united approach will be essential for long-term stability and peace.

Swedish Institute She Entrepreneurs Program 2021

Application Deadline: 2nd February 2021.

Eligible Countries: Countries in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) regions: Algeria, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Palestine*, Sweden, Syria, Tunisia or Yemen

To be taken at (country): Sweden

About the Award: She Entrepreneurs is a recognised leadership programme for young emerging women social entrepreneurs in the Middle East and North Africa region (MENA) and Sweden. Intended for women who have already started to build a social business, She Entrepreneurs offers participants a chance to take their social business initiative to a whole new level.

The She Entrepreneurs programme is an intensive programme with a full-day schedule and many evening activities and all selected participants have to commit to participating in all activities of both module 1 and 2.

Type: Entrepreneurship

Offered Since: 2011

Eligibility: To apply to She Entrepreneurs you have to:

• have the drive, ambition and interest to use social entrepreneurship to implement a social business initiative that you have already started working on
• your social business initiative should be based and implemented in your country of citizenship or in one of the countries of the She Entrepreneurs programme listed above
• be between 20 and 36 years old
• have a good working knowledge of both written and spoken English.

Selection Criteria: A selection committee consisting of staff from the Swedish Institute as well as representatives from partner organisations and field experts evaluates the applications according to the following criteria:

• applicant’s social business initiative that will be the focus of the programme
• applicant’s drive, motivation and commitment, as well as her answers to the questions of the She Entrepreneurs application form
• assessment of the applicant’s CV.

Selection Process: Around 60 shortlisted applicants are called for interviews as a second step in the selection process. The interviews are conducted through Skype. This offer is valid only under the condition that the participant obtains a visa to travel to Sweden. SI will facilitate the visa application process, but cannot guarantee a visa. In recent years, applicants living in conflict-ridden areas have in a few cases seen their visa applications rejected.

She entrepreneurs will accept references who speak English, Arabic and French.

Number of Awardees: Around 28

Value of Programme: She Entrepreneurs participants will build on their knowledge of business elements, from branding to risk-taking. The programme offers a competitive advantage as participants develop their own social business initiative and acquire personal skills and innovative tools.

The programme also allows women entrepreneurs to meet, inspire each other and share experiences on common challenges. Participants will emerge with a strong and active network of likeminded women who support each other in driving important changes in society.

Duration of Programme: A total of two and a half weeks

How to Apply:

• Follow these steps to submit your application
• It is important to go through the Application instructions on the Program Webpage before applying.

Visit Program Webpage for details

E-JUST TICAD7 African Scholarship for Science, Technology and Innovation Fields 2021/2022

Application Deadline: 13th February 2021

Type: Masters

Eligibility:

•  Applicants shall be researchers or instructors who belong to
  universities or research institutions in Africa who needs to obtain
  M.Sc. degree in the list of applicable courses as below No. 2 or
  top-class undergraduate students who are expected to be researchers or instructors by those universities.
• Applicant must be a holder of nationality of a country in Africa except for Egypt.
• Must have home address and current address in African continents.
• Not serving in the military.
• Applicants should be under 30 years on September 1, 2020.
• Applicants shall continue their jobs in their home universities or institutions after completion of their postgraduate programs at E-JUST. Endorsement of application forms by their home institutions is required in order to assure they would return to home institutions in future

Eligible Countries: African countries

To be Taken at (Country): Egypt

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: Tuition fees, accommodation, medical care, monthly stipend and round-trip flight ticket.

Duration of Award: The period necessary to complete the degree requirements in E-JUST, which should be within two years + Preparatory Course if applicable for M.Sc. degree

How to Apply: The applicant should complete the application before the deadline and attach all the required documents.

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

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Opposition mounts to Spanish government’s refusal to implement coronavirus measures

Alice Summers

The coronavirus pandemic in Spain is continuing to spiral out of control. Almost every day new grisly records are broken for the number of cases recorded or for the incidence rate within the population.

On Thursday, Spain saw its highest ever number of cases reported in a single day: 44,357. This beat the previous record, set only the day before, of 41,576. Another 42,885 cases were reported on Friday, the second highest figure of the whole pandemic. This brings the grim infection total to 2,499,560, with cases having risen by half a million in only two weeks. This is approximately one percent of the population becoming infected every fortnight.

More than 55,000 people have now died from the virus, according to official statistics, over 2,000 of whom lost their lives in the last week alone—more than 400 on each of the five weekdays when figures are released. Excess death statistics indicate that the real death toll is around 85,000.

The 14-day incidence rate across the country is exploding. Every day since January 15 has marked a new record high. On Friday, this figure shot up to 828.57 per 100,000 people, while six regions (Valencia, Murcia, Extremadura, La Rioja, Castilla y León and Castilla-La Mancha) are reporting staggeringly high incidence rates of between 1,000 and 1,500 cases per 100,000 people.

A funeral at Seville's Cathedral, Spain, Thursday, Jun. 4, 2020 (AP Photo/Miguel Morenatti)

While infection rates soar, the rollout of the vaccine has proceeded at a glacial pace. As of Friday, only 1.17 million doses of the vaccine had been administered, about 2.5 percent of the total population. While the government has announced its aim to vaccinate 70 percent of the population by summer, at the current rate it will be well into next year before this is achieved, leaving the majority of Spain’s inhabitants vulnerable to the virus for many months more.

The Madrid region announced last week that it will stop inoculating frontline health care workers as it has run out of vaccines. Jesús Aguirre, health minister in the region of Andalucía, also announced that no vaccines would be administered over the weekend due to shortages. This came as it was made public that top officials in the central Health Ministry and in the army had skipped the vaccination queue, ultimately leading to the resignation of Chief of Staff General Miguel Angel Villarroya on Saturday.

The blame for this explosion of cases and deaths lies squarely on the shoulders of the Socialist Party (PSOE)-Podemos government, which has refused point-blank to take any serious measures to control the pandemic.

The government has repeatedly insisted in recent weeks that no new lockdown measures will be implemented, with Health Minister Salvador Illa declaring in an interview last Monday, “With the strategy that already worked in October, we can break this wave.” This refers to the government’s refusal to impose confinement measures during the peak of the pandemic in the autumn, instead merely implementing curfew measures and closing some shops.

The previous week, he had proclaimed, “At the moment, we do not contemplate any home confinement. We controlled the second wave without home confinement. We will defeat this third wave through co-governance and the current state of alarm, which works.”

So adamant is the nominally “left” government that no measures will be taken to curb the contagion that it refused requests from regional authorities to bring forward curfew measures to 8:00 p.m. Currently the “state of alarm,” which was enacted by the PSOE-Podemos administration last October, allows regional governments to enforce curfews from 10:00 p.m. at the earliest.

After the region of Castilla y León brought forward its curfew to 8:00 p.m., the central government challenged this decision in the Supreme Court, arguing that it was illegal and in breach of its state of alarm decree. Requests from eight other regions to extend their curfews have also been denied. Although these curfew extensions in and of themselves would have little effect and are largely symbolic, the PSOE-Podemos administration intends to send a clear signal: No additional measures which would impinge on the profit interests of Spanish businesses will be tolerated.

Meanwhile, Fernando Simón, director of the Centre for the Coordination of Health Alerts and Emergencies, sought to blame the population for the surge in infections and deaths. In a press conference last Monday, he dishonestly claimed that the main source of transmission was in the hospitality sector, and therefore that closing bars, while keeping workers at work and children in schools, is the most effective way to control the virus. “The measure which has had the biggest impact,” he stated, “has been the closure of the inside of bars.”

Cases in schools and universities are also rapidly rising, as the PSOE-Podemos government insisted education facilities reopen after the Christmas break on January 11, despite the explosion of coronavirus cases.

While comprehensive data for the whole country is not available, 65,122 pupils and educators were in confinement in the region of Catalonia alone due to COVID-19, with 10 schools having to close. In Murcia, a region with a far smaller population, around 5,600 students or education staff have either contracted the virus or are in isolation due to suspected contact with an infected person. In the region of Aragon, 34 classrooms in 29 different education centres had to be closed due to the virus, a significant increase over the previous weeks.

In Extremadura, one of the regions worst affected by the current surge in cases, high school students began a strike Monday against the return to in-person education, pointing to the unsafe conditions in schools and the overwhelming of hospitals. The students are demanding that the return to classrooms be delayed by at least a week and that the required resources are allotted to ensure quality online teaching.

Parents of school children in the city of La Línea de la Concepción, bordering the British enclave of Gibraltar, have also begun boycotting schools in opposition to the maintenance of in-person education even as the new, more infectious British strain of the virus runs rampant. Incidence rates in this city have risen to a staggering 2,460 cases per 100,000 inhabitants, likely due to the increased prevalence of the new strain.

With classrooms in the city remaining largely empty due to the parents’ boycott, the local branch of the General Confederation of Labour (CGT) felt compelled to call an indefinite strike beginning Monday across the municipality of Campo de Gibraltar. The CGT has called on all workers in non-university education centres in the municipality—with a population of around 270,000 people—to stop work until further notice. The CGT’s strike call, however, is merely rearguard action designed to keep the growing anger of parents and teachers under their control and will not affect any schools outside of this small municipality.

These actions are being joined by public sector workers across the Canary Islands, with around 3,000-4,000 workers on temporary contracts—despite many of them having worked for the regional government for over 20 years—going out on strike to demand permanent contracts and better conditions.

As pandemic continues in China, lack of resources provokes social media protests

Jerry Zhang

January 23 was the first anniversary of the Chinese government’s lockdown of the city of Wuhan, which eventually contained the first major outbreak of COVID-19. A year later, however, the pandemic is raging worldwide, and re-emerging in China.

With the arrival of the coldest period of winter, infections are growing rapidly. On January 24, there were 124 new confirmed cases (symptomatic) and 45 new asymptomatic infections in China.

In the past week, more than 100 new cases have been reported almost every day, mostly concentrated in the Heilongjiang and Jilin provinces of northern China.

Patient being treated for COVID-19 (Source: WSWS)

As of January 26, there were 2,928 confirmed cases (symptomatic) and 956 asymptomatic infections across the country, with seven regions classified as “high-risk” and 72 as “medium-risk.”

With the massive movement of people associated with the week-long Spring Festival looming, due to commence on February 12, and the spread of the epidemic across the country, the government’s pandemic prevention and control system is facing tremendous pressure and fueling popular discontent.

Tonghua City, Jilin Province, with a population of about two million, is one of the hardest-hit areas. On January 24, there were 67 new cases in Jilin Province, of which 56 cases were in Tonghua City. As of January 26, there are 202 confirmed cases (with symptoms) in Tonghua City.

The local government announced a lockdown on January 18, blocking traffic and suspending production and business activities. In addition, many areas implemented “seals” controls—many residents had their homes affixed with seals to prohibit entry and exit.

This bureaucratic control measure has caused significant dissatisfaction. Being forcibly locked in their homes and unable to obtain enough food and medicine, people protested on social media about the lack of resources and support, including the shortage of volunteers that officials relied upon to deliver essential supplies.

A resident commented on social media: “There are only 800 volunteers in Tonghua City, but in fact there may not even be 800. The app for ordering daily necessities cannot be opened, and no one will deliver them three or four days after placing the order. Community calls have been unable to get through…

“Every house has a seal, garbage is left in the house for more than ten days, chronic patients have no medicine to use, [and must] open the window to ask neighbours to get some insulin. Pregnant women can’t eat fruits and vegetables. My brother was trapped in a pet shop without a bed or quilt. He only relies on a box of instant noodles that he forgot to bring home before…

“All the delivery workers are sealed at home. They have done multiple nucleic acid tests and are not allowed to come out for distribution. Some people want to be volunteers, but the community does not allow them.… It is better to report the real situation… Solving problems blindfolded is really ridiculous.”

Another resident posted this message: “At present, as an ordinary resident, the problems I can see are as follows: 1. There are not enough front-line workers and volunteers. Many people do not sleep for several days and nights and can’t hold on anymore. High-load work makes many frontline workers and volunteers overwhelmed. 2. There are not enough samples for nucleic acid testing, and no one will do the test after the seal is put on the door. 3. There is no support guaranteed after the seal is put on the door, and no one has delivered materials and handled garbage for many days.”

Confronted by residents’ protests and dissatisfaction, Tonghua City punished 14 bureaucrats, including the director of the local health committee, on January 23 for ineffective pandemic prevention and control. On January 24, Jiang Haiyan, the deputy mayor of Tonghua City, publicly apologised at a press conference for food and medicine delivery and other issues.

However, according to many media reports, despite official promises, the problem of resource deliveries has not been resolved. At the same time, a large number of frontline workers and volunteers frequently lack protective equipment.

Such insensitive bureaucratic methods are not confined to Tonghua City, with reports of similar practices in Heilongjiang and Hebei provinces.

Since the lockdown policy was first implemented in Wuhan last year, it has been generally considered to be an effective means of responding to COVID-19 outbreaks. China mostly controlled a large-scale pandemic through strict control measures.

However, problems are being caused by the Beijing regime’s rigid social management. Bureaucrats at all levels neglect the needs and opinions of the working class, seriously disrupt lives and violate basic rights, in order to prove their “political performance.”

Not only that, but following the economic shock caused by the pandemic, the Chinese government and official media played down the impact of the epidemic during the second half of last year. Despite many small-scale pandemic outbreaks, the government kept its focus on a “Resume Production” campaign. Many articles warned of the risk of a new wave of infections in China, but the government paid no attention.

Now the pandemic shows no signs of remission in China, and the working class faces a bureaucratic response and lack of support, as well as unemployment and wage cuts.

Canada’s major airlines lay off thousands more workers

Alexandra Greene

Canada’s two largest airlines have announced they will be laying off thousands more workers, adding to the already large group of aviation sector workers who have suffered work and income loss due to the pandemic.

Air Canada and WestJet released statements earlier this month declaring that they will be laying off 1,700 and 1,000 employees, respectively. Both companies asserted that they were forced to cut jobs due to new health regulations imposed by the federal government to stop travelers from bringing new cases, including of the newly identified more contagious variants of the COVID-19 virus, into the country.

Air Canada A319-100 (Wikimedia Commons)

In recent months, Air Canada and WestJet, together with major trade unions and organizations representing the hotel and tourism industries, have been pressing for COVID-19 restrictions on air travel to be scaled back or removed altogether.

Rather than demanding that workers receive adequate support so they can shelter at home until the pandemic is brought under control, the unions have joined with the airlines and various business lobby groups to press for the removal of public health measures and the provision of additional billions in public funds to the airlines. This campaign has included publishing joint full-page newspaper ads.

The job cuts will include temporary layoffs, unpaid leave and reduced hours for operations workers, such as flight attendants and ticket agents. Both companies will be operating at approximately 20 percent capacity and discontinuing various flight routes.

The recently adjusted federal government travel regulations referred to by the airlines now require all passengers over the age of five entering the country to have received a negative result on a standard nose-swab COVID-19 test within 72 hours prior to boarding their flight. Travelers entering Canada from a country where COVID-19 tests are not readily available will be granted an exception but will be required to quarantine in a federally regulated facility for 14 days.

The airlines made clear with their response that they expect workers to pay for these medically necessary restrictions—all so that their wealthy shareholders and executives can continue to enjoy a financial bonanza.

WestJet CEO Ed Sims indicated his disapproval of the measures, telling reporters, “The entire travel industry and its customers are again on the receiving end of incoherent and inconsistent government policy.” Sims added that the Calgary-based airline saw a significant decline in bookings and an increase in cancellations as soon as the new federal regulations were announced.

The heads of Air Canada, WestJet, Transat and Sunwing, along with the International Air Transport Association and National Airlines Council of Canada, pushed for the new rules to be implemented at a later date, but Ottawa has not obliged their requests

The claim by airline executives that their companies are strapped for cash and cannot afford to pay workers’ wages, which have been swallowed whole by the trade unions, is a fraud. These well-capitalized companies with billions of dollars in reserves have already received hundreds of millions of dollars in financial support through federal government programs, including the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS).

This is in keeping with the response of the Trudeau government to the pandemic, which has been to prioritize corporate profits over the protection of human lives. While funneling over C$650 billion in bailout fund to banks and investors, the Liberal government has refused to provide nonessential workers with the requisite financial support to allow them to remain at home until the pandemic is brought under control.

Air Canada has received the single largest amount of federal funding of all publicly traded companies in the country, a staggering C$492 million of public funds through the CEWS, which covers up to 75 percent of workers’ wages. As the WSWS previously explained, the wage subsidy has functioned as little more than a slush fund for the corporate elite, with companies continuing to shower their stockholders with fat payouts while claiming the public funds.

According to the federal government’s fall economic update, the airline industry as a whole was provided C$1.4 billion in aid as of early December. Yet thousands of workers have been or will soon be laid off, bearing the brunt of a battle for corporate profits, share valuations and investment in which they did not elect to partake.

Moreover, it is a battle, thanks to the role of the pro-capitalist trade unions, that workers are being forced to fight unarmed. During April and May 2020, the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) engaged in weeks of talks with Air Canada to assist in pushing through 22,800 job cuts in the face of widespread opposition from rank-and-file workers. CUPE demonstrated its total subservience to market-dictated demand and the prerogative of Air Canada to continue making profits and handing payouts to shareholders when it informed the workers being laid off that they were “ surplus” flight attendants.

The trade unions insist that workers’ jobs and lives be subordinated to the airlines’ ability to turn a profit. Responding to the latest round of job cuts by WestJet, Chris Rauenbusch, president of CUPE Local 4070 (which represents flight attendants at WestJet and its spinoff low-cost carriers), fully embraced the company’s corporate talking points, placing blame for the layoffs on the government and the new public health regulations.

“Ottawa,” said Rauenbusch, “has demonstrated zero understanding of the $36 billion in GDP Canada’s airlines contribute to our economy.”

Rather than holding the multibillion-dollar airlines accountable for how they have chosen to spend their vast amounts of cash reserves and government aid, Unifor and CUPE have spent recent months campaigning for billions of dollars in public funds to be turned over to the same airline companies that are throwing workers out of their jobs amid the pandemic. In October, Unifor held a press conference to demand that the Trudeau government cough up C$7 billion to support the airlines.

Following the latest job cuts, Unifor national president Jerry Dias underscored his organization’s corporatist relationship with the airline companies, demanding substantial government bailouts for “our devastated industry.” Making clear that his primary concern was maintaining the global competitiveness of Canadian airlines and thus the profits of investors and shareholders, not protecting workers’ jobs, Dias bitterly complained, “[O]ur airlines have been burning through cash, and we still have not seen aid anywhere near what other international carriers have received. Canada needs to act urgently on this front.”

The money airlines have been “burning through” has certainly not gone towards securing jobs or providing workers with income amid the raging pandemic. Many workers have been given the option to “keep their jobs”—with no guaranteed work hours or income—or leave. For all intents and purposes, this is a choice between the fire and the frying pan, since a “voluntary” departure jeopardizes workers’ entitlement to Employment Insurance.

While slashing jobs wholesale and pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars in wage subsidies and federal aid, the airlines have confiscated the money that would-be passengers paid them for flights that were cancelled when COVID-19 lockdowns were imposed last March. More than 100,000 Canadians have signed petitions demanding that the government force the airlines to reimburse them, rather than hold on to the money as “credit” for future travel. Several class-action lawsuits have been filed. With many customers suffering severe financial losses as a result of the pandemic, the airlines are withholding funds often needed for basic necessities such as food or housing.

As of September 2020, Air Canada reported having C$2.3 billion on hand in revenue from ticket sales. Of this, a staggering 65 percent was in the form of “non-refundable” fares from cancelled flights.

Former Air Canada executive John Gradek, now a lecturer at McGill University, states that the airline giant has the money to pay the refunds but is intentionally exploiting the issue as a “bargaining chip” in bailout negotiations with the federal government.

“Air Canada does not need government funding to process those refunds,” he said, drawing attention to the C$8 billion in unrestricted liquidity the company had access to as of September 2020.

Meanwhile, the airlines have seized on the current crisis to permanently suspend operations on less profitable routes to smaller cities.

To defend their jobs and livelihoods, airline workers at WestJet and Air Canada must take up a struggle against the corporatist gang-up of company management and the trade unions. They should establish independent action committees to launch a fight to protect all jobs, rehire all airline workers who have been laid off, and secure a guaranteed income to all airline workers throughout the pandemic. In this struggle, the closest allies of airline workers are the workers across Canada and internationally who are being subjected to the same rapacious government- and union-backed corporate onslaught amid the pandemic. To oppose this, they must adopt a socialist program aimed at the expropriation of the ill-gotten gains of the super-rich investors of the airline companies and other large businesses, and the transformation of these private for-profit concerns into publicly owned utilities under the democratic control of the working class.

Australian governments lift safety restrictions despite COVID-19 dangers and vaccine doubts

Martin Scott

Australian governments are continuing to scrap health and safety restrictions and promote the back-to-workplaces drive of big business, rather than maintain even limited measures to curb further COVID-19 outbreaks before the population can be immunised on a broad scale.

No vaccinations have yet occurred in Australia, and fresh doubts exist about the availability, timing and efficacy of the vaccines ordered by the federal government. Clear dangers still exist that more infections will escape from hotel quarantines for international arrivals, including cases of the more infectious mutant variants spreading around the globe.

COVID-19 testing site in the Melbourne suburb of Fawkner (Photo: @JoanWil85024201, Twitter)

As part of a wave of restriction-lifting by state and territory governments, New South Wales (NSW) Premier Gladys Berejiklian announced on Tuesday that rules in Greater Sydney would be eased from midnight Thursday. The relaxation comes despite NSW Chief Health Officer Kerry Chant’s admission that it was “too premature to say” that community transmission of the virus has been eliminated in the state.

The source of a family COVID-19 cluster in western Sydney remains unknown, and sewage surveillance at a Liverpool treatment plant indicates that undetected community transmission is occurring in the city’s southwest.

Under the relaxed measures, 30 people can gather inside a household, 50 people can gather outdoors, and up to 300 guests can attend weddings and funerals. All other venues will be subject to a four square metre rule, with no cap on numbers. Masks will no longer be mandatory in supermarkets and shopping centres, although they will still be required for public transport passengers and front-of-house hospitality workers.

Berejiklian made clear that the public transport mask mandate was bound up with efforts to force office workers back into their employers’ buildings, including in Sydney’s central business district. “One of the reasons we are requiring people to wear a mask on public transport is to encourage people to come back to work,” she said.

Even during the period of tightest restrictions in Sydney, public health was subordinated to corporate profits, most notably in the decision to proceed with a lucrative televised cricket test match at the Sydney Cricket Ground in front of 10,000 spectators.

No such exemption was made for an “Invasion Day” protest, marking the anniversary of British colonisation, held in Sydney’s Domain on Tuesday. The seated outdoor event proceeded with the 3,000 attendees forced to congregate in smaller groups, and police did not allow the protesters to march. Five people were arrested.

In another profit-driven decision, Victoria’s Labor Party government is still allowing the multi-billion dollar Australian Open tennis tournament to proceed next month in Melbourne although at least nine of the more than 1,200 players, broadcasters and support staff flown in to the country on chartered aircraft have tested positive for COVID-19.

Remaining border restrictions between states are being lifted, in a bid to promote travel and unhindered business operations. This morning, Queensland Labor Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk announced that her government will fully open the state’s border with New South Wales from February 1. If there are further outbreaks, significant inter-state travel poses the risk of a rapid spread of the virus across the country.

Governments across the country, both Labor Party and Liberal-National Coalition, are hailing the beginning of the 2021 school year as a “return to normalcy,” regardless of the ongoing global pandemic. In NSW, students, staff and parents will not be required to wear masks, and sporting carnivals, excursions, overnight camps, and concerts will be permitted. In Victoria, drinking fountains will again be allowed, and no social distancing measures will be in place, although masks are “recommended” for older students.

The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) announced on Monday its provisional approval of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. Australia has ordered 10 million doses of the vaccine, but the first batch of 80,000 doses will not arrive until late next month at the earliest. The company has experienced significant delays in delivering its vaccine around the world, triggering conflicts with competing national governments over its broken supply contracts.

Under the federal government’s plans, most people will receive a different vaccine, developed by AstraZeneca and produced domestically by medical biotech firm CSL. The country is supposed to receive 53.8 million doses of this vaccine, which the TGA has not yet approved.

No explanation has been offered for the delay in rolling out the vaccines. On Monday, after weeks of promoting the notion that vaccines would enable a full economic reopening, Prime Minister Scott Morrison downplayed hopes in the vaccine rollout. “It’s not a silver bullet because there are still limitations to what these vaccines can do,” he said.

It is still unclear whether the vaccines will prevent transmission of the coronavirus or merely stop those who are infected from developing symptoms. Federal Health Department secretary Brendan Murphy said on Monday: “Probably within three months we will have pretty good data on how effective the vaccines are at preventing transmission and that will give us the potential to re-evaluate things like international travel and hotel quarantine.”

There is also an open question around the impact of new strains of COVID-19 on the planned vaccination program. The B.1.1.7 mutation, sometimes called the “UK variant,” appears to be significantly more communicable, and possibly more deadly, than earlier strains.

Another variant—501Y.V2 or B.1.351—most prolific in Africa, but also present in Europe, Asia, North America, Australia and New Zealand, not only appears to be more contagious than previous strains, but has also been found in initial studies to reduce antibody levels in patients who have received vaccinations or been previously infected.

These new strains are the result of the criminal “herd immunity” policies of capitalist governments around the world. All viruses mutate, certainly, but the insistence that the wheels of industry continue to turn amid the raging pandemic has turned the world’s factories, schools, offices, and shopping centres into petri dishes fostering the development of new variants.

The genetic variations in the B.1.1.7 strain do not directly reduce the efficacy of the existing vaccines, but its greater contagiousness means a higher level of immunity among the population is required to stamp it out.

This presents a particular problem for the AstraZeneca vaccine. The company released trial results late last year showing the vaccine to be effective in only 70 percent of cases, not enough to eliminate the virus even as the vaccination rate approaches 100 percent.

A limited number of participants in the Astra Zeneca trial who initially received a half dose, rather than two full doses, fared better, with the vaccine showing an efficacy of 90 percent. While this may be a promising development, it points to the complexity of delivering the vaccine correctly to the entire population.

Quarantine and border workers, frontline health workers, and staff and residents in aged care will be the first to receive the vaccine according to the federal government’s “national roll-out strategy.”

While teachers, retail staff and warehouse, construction and fast food workers were considered “essential” when that designation was necessary to keep schools and businesses open during lockdowns, they will not receive early vaccinations.

Such is the callous and ruthless attitude of big business and government to the health of the working class, as has been demonstrated throughout the pandemic.