24 Jul 2021

ECB set to open the financial spigots wider

Nick Beams


The European Central Bank has made it clear that it will continue to pump money into the financial system through its deeply negative interest rate setting and its purchases of financial assets.

The meeting of the governing council in Frankfurt on Thursday demonstrated the continued support for the ultra-easy monetary policy favoured by its president Christine Lagarde against a pushback from some northern European members who want to see the rate of bond purchasing eased.

Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank [Credit: Bernd Hartung/European Central Bank]

It was the first meeting of the governing council since the ECB adopted a new strategy earlier this month—the first change in two decades—that lifted its inflation target to 2 percent, dropping a previous commitment to keep price rises below that level.

As with the Federal Reserve, its counterpart in the US, ECB policy announcements are always somewhat clouded because, while they are couched in terms of inflation, their real goal is to ensure the continued flow of ultra-cheap money into the financial system.

In its press release the ECB said it expected its key interest rates to remain “at their present or lower levels” until it judged that underlying inflation was sufficiently advanced to ensure that it stabilised at 2 percent over the medium term. And in line with its strategy change it added: “This may also imply a transitory period in which inflation is moderately above target.”

The ECB statement said its new policy guidance would “underline its commitment to maintain a persistently accommodative monetary policy to meet its inflation target.”

Net asset purchases under an earlier program will continue at the rate of €20 billion per month while purchases under its €1,850 billion pandemic emergency program (PEPP) will continue “at least until the end of March 2022” or until the governing council judges that “the coronavirus crisis phase is over.”

The ECB will decide at a meeting in September whether to change the pace of its purchases under the PEPP. In March it lifted the rate of buying to €80 billion a month because of rises in some euro zone bond yields—a sign of tightening in financial markets.

The September meeting could see a widening of divisions on the governing council as northern European representatives, led by the German central bank, push for the purchases to be wound back, if not altogether eliminated, in line with their assertion that the crisis they were aimed at countering has now passed.

There was an indication of those divisions at the latest meeting. The Financial Times (FT) reported that “according to people familiar with the discussions” the wording of the new policy stance “drew criticism from the leaders of the German and Belgian central banks.”

During the debate, the FT said, “Jens Weidmann, president of Germany’s Bundesbank complained that the new conditions set by the ECB were too aggressive and increased the risk of inflation surging above its target.”

Weidmann has been a long-time critic of ECB policies in line with the views of sections of German finance capital who consider that they are too heavily weighted in favour of Italy and other highly indebted southern European countries.

The head of the Dutch central bank Klaas Knot was reported to have called for the ECB to separate the timing of when it will stop buying bonds from the issue of interest policy but this issue was dropped until there is a discussion of asset purchase plans in September.

The opposition may grow in the coming period but at present Lagarde has majority support on the governing council. Speaking at a press conference following the meeting, she said there had been a “minor divergence” on the policy statement and it had won the support of “an overwhelming majority.”

Countering claims the crisis was over, Lagarde said there was “still some way to go before the fallout from the pandemic on inflation is eliminated” in a sign that the ECB is not likely to taper its bond-buying program any time soon.

The response of financial market operators was favourable. Martin Wolburg, the senior economist at Generali Investments, told the FT that the shift by the ECB meant “there is now leeway for it to push the first rate rise beyond 2024.” If that is the case it would mean that a decade had passed since the ECB cut its rate to below zero in 2014.

The head of macro research at BlackRock Investment Institute, Elgar Bartsch, told the newspaper the ECB had delivered a “dovish surprise” and there could be an “upward adjustment” of its asset purchases later this year.

Bloomberg commented that the new forward guidance reflects a commitment to “more vigorous action” and “the next step will be an increase in asset purchases at the September meeting.”

There is a growing belief that the ECB’s policies mean it is becoming locked into providing support for government debt in the euro zone. A survey of 250 German financiers and economists earlier this month found that eight out of 10 believed it was “increasingly difficult to depart from the ECB’s low interest rate policy as governments become increasingly dependent on purchases of their bonds.”

Since the start of 2020 and the onset of the pandemic, the ECB has bought almost all the new issues of euro zone government bonds and its total holdings of sovereign debt in the bloc now stands at 42 percent.

This means the situation in the euro zone is rapidly approaching that which already exists in Japan where one arm of the state, the government, issues new debt while another arm, the central bank, buys it up.

Such a situation has never existed in any capitalist economy apart from times of war. It is an expression of the total breakdown of the so-called “free market” system, regularly touted by the ideologists of the ruling classes as the only viable and only possible form of economic organisation, and its replacement by the direct intervention of the capitalist state, on a daily basis, in order to try to stave off the development of a crisis.

Senate Democrats endorse Republican proposal for increased military budget

Kevin Reed


Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee have endorsed a Republican plan for an additional $25 billion in military spending above the amount proposed by the Biden administration for 2022 in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

The 23–3 bipartisan committee vote for a $778 billion defense budget—a direct repudiation of President Biden’s $753 billion proposal—was announced by Senator Tim Kaine, Democrat from Virginia, during a call with news media on Thursday.

According to a report by the Hill, “The funding boost would go entirely to the Pentagon, giving the department $740.3 billion compared to the Biden administration’s request for $715 billion. The remainder of the budget goes to non-Pentagon defense programs, such as the Energy Department’s nuclear weapons programs.”

While the Democrats are in the White House and have a majority in both houses of Congress, the new spending proposed for the US war machine is greater than that enacted during the Trump administration which stood at $741 billion, with $704 billion for the Pentagon, and the highest spending since World War II.

The new increase was proposed by Republicans as an amendment to the NDAA and then endorsed by Democrats during a closed-door session of the Armed Services Committee on Wednesday evening.

During his call with reporters, Kaine welcomed the budget increase and called it “very positive,” although he said military housing “remains a problem.” He also said that the NDDA will likely be voted on by the full Senate when the annual legislation is decided on in September.

Committee Chairman Jack Reed, Democratic Senator from Rhode Island, followed Kaine’s announcement with a statement that got down to the real military matters at hand. Reed said that Congress “must work on a bipartisan basis” to ensure “the policies and resources to deter America’s adversaries,” and reassure US allies that American military forces “have the right tools and capabilities to combat threats around the globe.”

Although Democrats have said very little about where the additional $25 billion will be spent, it has been reported that much of the extra resources will go toward programs that top generals and admirals had identified as priorities and were left out of Biden’s original budget request.

According to the Military Times, the Army’s unfunded priorities include, “$1.1 billion for tactical training, soldier quality of life and strategic power projection capabilities, and another $1.9 billion for aviation platforms, wheeled and tracked combat vehicles and cyber security upgrades.” The Navy request includes, “$1.7 billion for a second DDG [missile guided destroyer] and $280 million for additional flying hours for Navy pilots,” and the Air Force wants to spend “$1.4 billion on 12 additional F-15EXs and $825 million for weapon system sustainment efforts.” Marine Corps leaders demanded “more than $150 million additional Naval Strike Missiles and Tactical Tomahawk missiles.”

In policy terms, the vote by the bipartisan Senate committee is for a continued guarantee that the Pentagon will maintain overwhelming military superiority over every other country on the planet such that it can invade and launch wars against enemies and adversaries as it sees fit. Meanwhile, the committee is making a clear statement that Biden’s proposal was unacceptable and that the so-called “progressive” Congressional Democrats will have absolutely no say-so over the hegemonic global military strategy of US imperialism.

As pointed out by Stars and Stripes, Republicans have “argued for months at congressional hearings and recent news conferences that Biden’s budget is insufficient to counter the rising threat of China and Russia. They have repeatedly called for a 3-5% increase in funding and criticized Biden for his effectively flat budget.”

With their support for the Republican plan, Senate Democrats are making it clear that they agree with the foreign policy of the party of Donald Trump. Among the Democrats to vote for the Republican proposal were Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Mark Kelly of Arizona and so-called progressive Kirsten Gillibrand of New York voting in favor.

The only Democrat on the committee who opposed the increase was Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. Significantly, the other two votes against the proposal came from extreme right-wing Republicans Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Josh Hawley of Missouri who opposed the provision in the bill that will require women to register for the draft for the first time. Other Republicans who voted for the bipartisan plan also criticized it for being not substantial enough, such as Senator Dan Sullivan of Alaska who said during a press conference, “We are not prioritizing the military at all with this budget. We’re gonna continue to press to make this much stronger budget for our military.”

Also revealing the pro-war stance of the Democrats as a whole, Senator Kelly said that the bipartisan increase, “was necessary to support a number of unfunded requirements from the military branches and combatant commanders critical to getting our servicemembers the tools, training, and resources they need,” and that it also funds “the development of new technologies to maintain our competitive edge, while also addressing a broader scope of national security priorities.”

The bipartisan increase in military funding by the Senate Armed Services Committee stands in stark contrast to the cutbacks in federal dollars to assist working class families who face unemployment, homelessness and poverty arising from the criminal policies of the government in response to the coronavirus pandemic. Meanwhile, the Democrats have no problem whatsoever voting for Pentagon funding alongside Republicans who opposed the certification of Biden as President following the assault on the Capitol by a mob of right-wing and fascist elements on January 6. Among the major Trump backers in the Senate Armed Services Committee are Republicans Tommy Tuberville from Alabama and Rick Scott of Florida.

While the two parties are unable to move forward on an infrastructure spending plan and claim that “fiscal responsibility” prevents the government from providing desperately-needed resources to impoverished cities and rural areas of the country, they set aside their bickering and stage managed disagreements to provide massive funding for the US military-intelligence state.

Significantly, neither the New York Times nor the Washington Post published a report on the vote by the Senate committee, with the endorsement of the leading Democrats, to increase the 2022 military budget.

The Olympics open in the shadow of mass death

Bryan Dyne


The summer Olympics opened Thursday against the backdrop of a massive surge of the COVID-19 pandemic. Like the 1936 Berlin Olympics that preceded the outbreak of World War II and its attendant horrors, this year’s games have the aura of a looming human tragedy.

The 2020 Olympics were not held last year amid the first wave of the pandemic. The games are now being held under the pretense that the pandemic is under control, and the mass gathering of athletes and their support staffs is safe.

But this illusion is being punctured by the massive surge of COVID-19 cases—inside the Olympic Village and around the world.

People protest on June 23 against the July opening of the Tokyo 2020 Olympics near the Tokyo Metropolitan Government building in Tokyo [Credit: AP Photo/Eugene Hoshiko]

“In the time it takes me to make these remarks, more than 100 people will lose their lives to COVID-19,” noted World Health Organization Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus in remarks to the International Olympic Committee on Wednesday. “And by the time the Olympic flame is extinguished on the 8th of August, more than 100,000 more people will perish.”

Around the world, daily new COVID-19 cases have surged by 47 percent over the past month to more than 523,000 cases a day, with daily deaths standing at 7,900.

Cases among the tens of thousands of Olympic athletes and staff are also spreading. One hundred and ten people directly working for or participating in the Olympics have so far been infected, about two-thirds of whom are Japanese citizens working at the games and the rest are athletes or staff of the national teams traveling from overseas. At least four of the cases have occurred in municipalities outside Tokyo where athletes are training, indicating the extent of the spread, and dozens of others were in close contact with the infected.

That so many have been infected makes clear that the nominal measures to isolate athletes from the broader population and vice versa have failed. A running tally from Forbes shows that infections have occurred both before and after athletes arrived in Japan, as well as among several who are fully vaccinated and “took every precaution” against the virus.

Hans Westerbeek, a professor at the Institute for Health and Sport at Victoria University, Australia warned in an interview with Newsweek that, “The athlete COVID cases reported in Tokyo are most likely the start of a superspreading event.” He continued, “Given the close proximity of athletes and their teams, and the constant moving and interacting in living quarters, dining halls and training and competition venues, the virus is likely to spread rapidly.”

In other words, every athlete is competing in two different contests: athletic pursuit and pushing the boundaries of human physical achievement, while at the same time in a horrifying race to escape infection.

Japan, the host of the Olympics, is recording more than 3,500 new COVID-19 cases a day and climbing, including nearly 1,400 in Tokyo alone. In total, Japan has suffered more than 852,000 cases of the disease and 15,000 recorded deaths, of which the vast majority have occurred since the beginning of this year.

Polls show that up to 83 percent of Japan’s population opposes holding the Olympics this year. Protesters gathered outside National Stadium during the opening ceremony chanting “Cancel the Olympics! Stop them immediately! Stop the Opening Ceremony now!”

An online petition on change.org, “Cancel the Tokyo Olympics to protect our lives,” has so far gained more than 458,000 signatures, and asks the pointed question “Is hosting the Olympics worth risking our lives?”

Despite the mortal threats to the lives of the athletes, their trainers, stadium staff and the broader population, International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Thomas Bach has maintained that the Olympics remain “safe and secure” and will continue through August 8.

Contained within these statements are ignorance and cruelty on one hand, particularly towards the athletes themselves, and naked class interests on the other.

There is, of course, an immense amount of money invested in the games, some $15 billion. The IOC also has broadcasting and sponsorship contracts that it is seeking to protect, which are worth an estimated $5.7 billion.

But there is an even more sinister motive at work. Among the world’s ruling classes, the Olympics are seen as a great experiment on whether it is possible, citing the games’ motto, to “move forward” with resuming economic activity even as cases, hospitalizations, and deaths soar.

The world is, in the words of the Wall Street Journal, carrying out a “test case” for whether it is possible to “enjoy something approaching pre-pandemic life in the face of fast transmitting versions of the virus.”

“The experiment should give a strong signal of whether Covid-19 can be relegated to the status of a manageable, seasonal menace such as influenza and whether lockdowns and social distancing can be consigned to the past.”

The Olympics, too, are such a cruel experiment, in which the athletes, staff, and the population of Japan are to be test subjects for “whether lockdowns and social distancing can be consigned to the past.”

The logic of such an “experiment” is turning the entire planet into a Petri dish for the coronavirus, almost inevitably producing a variant that goes “faster, higher, stronger” than even the virulent Delta variant responsible for the most recent global surge, placing the lives of every person on the planet in the balance.

In 1936, the Berlin Olympics were used by the fascist Nazi party to advance its ideological conceptions of racial supremacy and antisemitism. So, too, the 2020 Olympics are designed to send an ideological message from the capitalist class to the world’s population: No measures will be taken to save human lives, no matter the cost.

23 Jul 2021

Africa Data Science Intensive (DSI) Program 2022

Application Deadline: 30th September 2021.

About the Award: Big Data, data science, machine learning and artificial intelligence are driving a revolution around the world as companies rush to take advantage of their data and turn it into a competitive advantage. However there is a shortage of skilled data scientists and managers worldwide and this shortage is much worse in Africa.
In this program, participants will master the data science process, from statistics and data wrangling, to advanced topics like machine learning and data storytelling, by working on real projects.

Type: Training

Eligibility: Honours, Master’s or PhD in Science, Engineering or Mathematics or equivalent industry experience.

Eligible Countries: African countries

To be Taken at (Country): Cape Town, SA

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: Full awards covering course tuition and travel and living expenses to attend the 2-week workshop are available for qualifying African students. Also,

  • Exposure to the latest algorithms and techniques in data science: covering topics in Big Data (BD), Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence (AI).
  • Under the expert guidance of our team of PhDs and MBAs: as lecturers and tutors, you will receive a mix of lectures and tutorials covering the core aspects of data science.
  • Team work: the majority of your time will be spent working in small teams to solve real-world problems, giving you deep, hands-on experience with cutting edge algorithms while equipping you with the skills to contribute effectively as part of a dynamic, agile team.
  • Emphasis on real-world skills: including management of data science projects; cleaning of data; and business problem solving skills.
  • The solutions you generate: will be presented to industry experts who will give real feedback, helping further sharpen your readiness for the real world.
  • Networking events: giving you the opportunity to network with potential employers.

Duration of Award:

  • January to May 2022 (Exact dates TBC)
  • 11 weeks (3 x 3-week online modules and 1 x 2-week workshop in Cape Town)

How to Apply: Applications are now OPEN. Click to apply

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

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Czech Government Scholarships 2022/2023

Application Deadline: 30th September 2021

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries. See list below

To be taken at (country): Public Universities in Czech Republic

Eligible Fields of Study: Students who are applying for study in Economics, Agriculture, Informatics, Environment and Energetics at public universities in the Czech Republic.

About the Award: Thanks to a generous contribution from the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport, the Faculty of Social Sciences is able to offer a limited number of partial scholarships for students of all fee based programs.. A total of __scholarships are available, ear-marked for students from developing countries and/or countries going through a process of political and economic transition.

Upon a Decision of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, scholarships of the Government of the Czech Republic are granted to promote specific Bachelor’s, Master’s, follow-up Master’s and/or Doctoral study programmes in the full-time mode of study of a specific study programme pursued by a university (or its Faculty) for a period that equals the regular duration of studies. Scholarships are not transferable to other persons or other academic years. Once a scholarship is granted, neither the university nor the study programme and/or field of study may be changed.

Type: Doctoral, Undergraduate and Masters

Selection Criteria and Eligibility

  • The scholarships are intended solely to promote the studies of adults who are foreign nationals from developing third countries in need. Neither a citizen of the Czech Republic, nor a citizen of a member state of the European Union, nor any other foreign national with a permit to permanent residence on the territory of the Czech Republic may, therefore, be granted this type of scholarship. Furthermore, the scholarships may not be granted to persons under 18 years of age. (The applicants have to turn 18 as of 1 September of the year when they commence studies in the Czech Republic at the latest.)
  • In Bachelor/ Master/ Doctoral Study Programmes plus one-year Preparatory Course of the English language (Which is combined with other field-specific training): Government scholarships of this category are awarded to graduates from upper secondary schools, or Bachelor’s / Master’s degree courses, as applicable, Who can Enroll only in Study Programmes in which instruction is given in the English language. Depending on the subject area, Applicants are normally required to sit entrance Examinations at the higher education institution Concerned. Successful passing of Entrance examination constitutes a precondition for the scholarship award; or
  • In follow-up study Programmes Master or Doctoral Study Programmes: Government scholarships of this category are awarded to graduates of Bachelor or Master Study Programmes, respectively, Enroll in the WHO study Programmes with instruction in the English language.

In addition, the Scholarship Review Board will take into consideration applicants’ results from their earlier studies. Priority will be given to students who have not previously had the opportunity to study abroad.

Number of Scholarships: TBC

Duration of Scholarships: These Government Scholarships are designed to cover the standard length of study plus one-year preparatory course of the Czech language(which is combined with other field-specific training).

Value of Scholarships: 

  • The scholarship covers the necessary costs related to staying and studying in the Czech Republic. The scholarship amount is regularly amended.
  • Currently the amount paid to students on a Bachelor’s, Master’s or follow-up Master’s study programme stands at CZK 14,000 per month
  • Whereas the amount paid to students of a Doctoral study programme stands at CZK 15,000 per month.

The above scholarship amounts include an amount designated for the payment of accommodation costs. Costs of accommodation, food and public transport are covered by scholarship holders from the scholarship under the same conditions that apply to students who are citizens of the Czech Republic. Should health services exceeding standard care be required by the student, s/he shall cover them at his/her own cost.

Eligible Countries:

  • Bosnia and Herzegovina,
  • Cambodia,
  • Ethiopia,
  • Georgia,
  • Moldova,
  • Ukraine,
  • and Zambia.

How to Apply: All applicants shall fill in the electronic application form available on the website and successfully register (i.e., obtain an application identification number by sending a completed application form to the pertinent authority electronically). The applicant shall send the completed application form to the Mission in electronic form, i.e., by completing online registration.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Cuba’s Fight against Imperialism

Yanis Iqbal


Cuba has been witnessing anti-government protests since July 11, 2021. Several objective factors account for these demonstrations. Cuba is experiencing its greatest economic crisis in 30 years. The devastating knock-on effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on the country’s tourism-dependent economy, coupled with criminal sanctions and blockade, have caused real hardship to the Cuban people.

The decline in foreign visitors caused a loss of around $3 billion in 2020. Barring a modest recovery in China, the rest of Cuba’s trading partners have fallen into economic recession. These harsh conditions of a full-scale emergency have severely depleted the country’s reserves. The domestic supply of basic necessities, including food and medicine, has been greatly hindered.

The administrative henchmen of the global capitalist class have chosen to spew crude propaganda about Cuba. On July 15, 2021, President Joe Biden set the tonal texture of imperialist discourse: “Cuba is unfortunately a failed state and repressing their citizens…Communism is a failed system – a universally failed system.” Such reductive and ahistorical remarks serve a singular function: subversion of Cuba’s revolutionary process.

Revolution

Under the savagery of imperialism, Cuba was cauterized by the African slave trade and the overflowing inhumanity of white supremacy. In its efforts to conquer Spain’s Caribbean colonies, the US tried to gain influence in Cuba as a means to strengthen the profits of the slave trade. The American ruling class continued to smuggle slaves through Cuba after the Civil War, engaging in the wholesale whitening of the island after defeating Spain in 1898.

These openly murderous policies hardened into a steely, merciless regime of economic exploitation. By 1959, US corporations controlled 75% of arable land, 100% of oil refineries, and 90% of all telecommunications. Mass destitution, illiteracy, malnutrition, racism and patriarchy became the centerpiece of Cuba’s extroverted economy, designed to serve foreign capitalists and their native stooges.

The Cuban revolution swept across the firmament of shallow darkness, demineralizing the territories of neo-colonialism and capitalism. Fluid bonds of liberation sprouted from the sensitive and tenacious hands of less than a 100 Cubans who decided to wage guerrilla warfare in the countryside to undercut the repressive apparatuses of Fulgencio Batista’s dictatorship.

Revolutionary guerillas served the people with necessary medical treatment and literacy training, forging deep links with the oppressed masses and providing an alternative to the illegitimate system of pure wretchedness. There was only one hospital of 10 beds in the countryside and over a quarter of the population was illiterate prior to the revolution.

The potent and emancipatory mix of social work and militant organization crafted the fabric of counter-hegemony, concluding in a general strike days before the revolution that ousted the US-backed government from the nation.

After the triumph of the revolution, Fidel and the core of the guerrilla army embarked on a long victory rally, from Santiago to Havana. The march was halted by speeches, salutations, meetings, and other ceremonies. By the time Fidel arrived in Havana, on January 8, 1959, the Rebel Army had come to power across all of Cuba.

The national hero was welcomed by an ecstatic crowd, while the new government took office. Castro spoke to a jubilant audience of sympathizers, emphasizing the need for revolutionary unity. As he was finishing his speech, a white dove settled on his shoulder – symbolizing the central message of Cuba’s socialist people: worldwide peace.

The imperialists did not heed the ideas of the Cuban Revolution, choosing to wage a brutal war of blockades and destabilization against the country. However, revolutionaries could not be eliminated easily. As Fidel remarked:

“[W]hen people are united and are defending a just right, they can trust their own energies. We are not, as we have been pictured, a mere group of men governing the country. We are a whole people governing a country – a whole people firmly united, with a great revolutionary consciousness, defending its rights. And this should be known by the enemies of the revolution and of Cuba, because if they ignore this fact, they will be making a regrettable error.”

Internationalism

To protect its revolution, Cuba formed a global support base. Cuban internationalists provided assistance in many ways: as special envoys, trusted advisers, military instructors and medical specialists. Between the 1960s and the 1990s, a group of high-level political observers and counselors worked as diplomats and undercover agents.

They maintained direct relationships with Latin America’s insurgent generations. These individuals belonged to the Departamento América, an organization under the leadership of Manuel Piñeiro – a close personal friend of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara, and one of Raúl Castro’s comandantes during the revolt against Batista.

During Latin America’s long decades of military dictatorship, Cuba gave shelter to persecuted dissidents and refugee exiles. It served as the political and medical recovery house for thousands of wounded or crippled guerrilla fighters and other rebels in their own countries.

Cuba always remained loyal to those who had taken up weapons to struggle against colonialism and for independence. Despite its relatively small population, Cuba’s military participated in African liberation wars and its special forces trained guerrilla and resistance movements in many countries.

After the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (COMECON), many of Cuba’s military facilities that supported the guerrilla movements were considerably reduced. During the “Special Period”, Cuba survived with great difficulties, but it never ceased to provide medical assistance to the poor and disadvantaged.

Cuba never stopped fulfilling its internationalist commitments, continuing to send medical brigades to poor regions in Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa. It also provided emergency assistance in natural disasters and its literacy experts went on civilian missions. Direct support to the guerrilla was replaced by networks of mutual support among friendly governments.

Cuba found a strong ally in Hugo Chávez’s Venezuela, whose government proclaimed the dawn of “socialism of the 21st century”. Cuba and Venezuela founded a regional grouping with a common ideological vocation: the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA). After 2000, the two leading countries cooperated in developing medical and literacy campaigns in many Global South countries.

Peace

In opposition to the discourse of interventionism, President Miguel Diaz-Canel has carried forward the historical force of the Cuban Revolution, vowing to defend the country from outside interference. On July 17, 2021, he stated:

“In the previous weeks, an intense political-communication operation was developed by a large media intoxication platform, financed by the United States Government and by the Florida political machinery. Its objective was to encourage unrest and instability in the country, taking advantage of the difficult conditions caused by the pandemic, the intensified blockade and the 243 measures of the Trump administration. In those days they carried out acts of Unconventional Warfare that included calls for social outbreak, violence, assault on police officers, vandalism and sabotage.”

The recognition of the difficult economic realities indicates the transparent approach of Cuban leaders. Instead of obfuscating the material situation, the socialist government has talked to the people, listened to their grievances and tried to devise solutions. These practices are linked to a politico-ethical project. As Canel expressed, “We are going to put our hearts into Cuba – together we can – because Cuba is love, peace, and solidarity.”

Podemos, Spanish unions collaborate with big business to slash pensions

Santiago Guillén


Spain’s Socialist Party (PSOE)-Podemos government, working with the Workers Commissions (CCOO) and General Union of Workers (UGT) unions have announced an onslaught on public pensions. This is one of several cuts to basic social rights that the government is planning at the European Union’s (EU) behest, in exchange for hundreds of billions of euros in COVID-19 pandemic bailout funds.

Podemos party leader Pablo Iglesias speaks as Spain's caretaker Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez looks on after signing an agreement at the parliament in Madrid, Spain, Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2019. (AP Photo/Paul White)

The unions and Podemos deceitfully trumpeted two measures in the pension reform as beneficial to workers. The first one is to revalue pensions annually in line with inflation. This means returning to the situation before 2013, when the right-wing Popular Party (PP) set cost-of-living adjustments at only 0.25 percent per year, well below inflation. However, this by itself is not enough to give pensioners a decent standard of living. Around 58 percent of them earn less than the minimum wage of 950 euros, and one in four receive the minimum pension of around 600 euros.

The second measure repeals a plan to cut pensions in line with increases in life expectancy, which was also approved by the PP in 2013 but never went into effect.

On this basis, the Stalinist CCOO hailed the pension reform as “an agreement that changes the course of pensions by suppressing the [PP] cuts of 2013.” UGT General Secretary Pepe Álvarez was even more enthusiastic, declaring: “I feel very comfortable signing agreements. I would feel very bad if we did not have to sign agreements.”

In the same vein, Podemos co-spokesman Pablo Fernández claimed the agreement “represents a fundamental step in the consolidation and care of benefits, by eliminating the most damaging aspects of the reform undertaken by the PP in 2013.”

Through this cynical ceremony of confusion, Podemos and the trade unions tried to mask the basic content of their measure—cutting overall pension levels—by delaying the cuts over time and touting the abandonment of this or that cut that was considered too politically explosive to enforce.

Social Security Minister José Luis Escrivá was clearer, however. He told TVE that the so-called baby boomer generation, born between 1959 and 1977, is “wider” and will have to assume “some of the effort that must be made to moderate pension spending during a specific period of time.” Therefore, he said, they will “choose between several options: one may be a small adjustment in their pension, which would be very moderate, or alternatively, they could work a little more.”

Such was the uproar that the following day Escrivá claimed he had been misunderstood.

Podemos rapidly intervened to extinguish the fire. Fernández said: 'Podemos will not allow pension cuts in the present nor the future, either in relation to the inter-generational equity factor referred to by Escrivá or to the calculation of the pension pay-in period”. What Fernández did not say is that Podemos had already voted in favor last January of the Resilience Plan that commits the government, of which Podemos is a part, to the European Commission to make those cuts.

The PSOE-Podemos government’s presentation of the pension reform is a pack of lies: the reform aims to plunge broad sections of retirees into poverty. At its heart is the penalty workers receive to their pension payments if they retire early. This could reach to up to 30 percent penalty for those who retire four years in advance, and up to 21 percent for those who voluntarily retire two years in advance. It also confirms previous plans to raise the retirement age to 67.

The brunt of this pension reform will be borne by the most oppressed sections of the working class, with the most physically-demanding jobs. It would confront them with two choices. The first is to try to stay on the job until 67 despite the physical punishment this imposes on them, thus putting their lives at risk and drastically cutting their life expectancy. The second is to request early retirement and accept living on a poverty pension for the rest of their lives.

Poverty among the elderly will skyrocket. Older workers are routinely laid off in mass redundancy schemes, enriching a layer of union bureaucrats involved in negotiating these schemes, in order to employ younger, cheaper workers or offshore work to cheaper-labor locations. Many workers who are laid off after 60 will find it very hard to find a new job. With early retirement their only option, they will receive meagre pensions.

The final objective sought with these attacks on the pension system is to force layers of workers who can afford to do so to contract private pension plans. The reform proposes to promote so-called “company pension plans”, to increase private pension funds managed by the banks five-fold to €500 billion. The unions have vested interests in private pensions. In large companies that adopt them, a parity commission is established, made up of company management and union representatives that receive lucrative commissions to oversee the private plans.

These measures are yet another devastating exposure of the irrationality of capitalism and of the reactionary agenda of the petty-bourgeois “left populist” Podemos party. In Spain, where the government and unions aim to make currently employed workers work more, there are already four million unemployed desperately seeking work. Youth unemployment stands at a staggering 37 percent.

The EU engineered the pandemic bailout fund even as EU countries rejected a shelter-at-home order on the pandemic, claiming there was no money for a scientific policy to halt the coronavirus. Instead, it demanded that non-essential workers return to work to produce profits on the massive sums of financial capital being handed over to major corporations. This led to over 1.1 million deaths across Europe, as the EU sacrificed workers’ health and lives to the profits of the financial aristocracy.

Podemos had previously claimed there was no austerity commitment in exchange for pandemic bailout funds. Last year, the PSOE-Podemos government celebrated that Madrid would receive €140 billion over the next six years from the €750 billion EU fund. The then-leader of Podemos, Pablo Iglesias, hailed it in July 2020, declaring: “There is no doubt that today, one of the most brilliant pages in EU history has been written.”

Iglesias contrasted the current bailouts to EU bailouts of Greece after the 2008 Wall Street crash: “We all remember the response of the European institutions to the financial crisis 10 years ago: austerity, men in black and demands for social cuts that caused the suffocation of the countries of the south and a serious crisis to the European project.” Now, he said, “For the first time in the history of the EU, a package of subsidies financed with joint debt is being proposed.”

As the WSWS warned, this was a lie. It is now clear that, like the post-2008 bailouts in Greece, the current bailouts are massive handouts of funds to the super-rich which are to be paid for with slashing attacks on basic social rights negotiated between the PSOE, Podemos, the unions and the Spanish Confederation of Business Organisations (CEOE).

Ukrainian interior minister with close ties to the far right resigns

Jason Melanovski


Ukraine’s Interior Minister Arsen Avakov, who is notorious for his ties to neo-Nazis, has resigned from his position in the government of President Volodymyr Zelensky. No reasons for his surprise resignation were revealed.

Arsen Avakov (Photo: Wikipedia)

Avakov was the country’s longest-serving minister. He spent seven years in his position starting in 2014 under former President Petro Poroshenko, who came to power after a US- and EU-backed far-right coup in Kiev. He continued on after Zelensky defeated Poroshenko to claim the presidency in 2019. In addition to serving under two different presidents, Avakov also maintained his position through four different prime ministers.

As Interior Minister, Avakov oversaw the country’s domestic security forces including both local and national police, and Ukraine’s newly reformed National Guard, which is composed of members of the country’s various fascist militias such as the Azov Battalion. Thanks in no small measure to Avakov—who maintains a personal friendship with the leader of the Azov Battalion, Andriy Biletsky—open fascists were essentially granted the full backing of the Ukrainian state.

Under his watch, fascist thugs were given free rein to terrorize and attack journalists, assault ethnic minorities, and carry out targeted killings, up to and including the killing of a three-year old boy in a botched political assassination attempt.

In almost every case the culprits were never caught, received light sentences, or any actual prosecution was limited to the low-level assailants without any attempt to cover those higher up giving the orders to carry out right-wing political violence.

Demonstrating the close ties between Avakov and his far-right thugs and Washington, Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch hailed Avakov in the 2019 impeachment hearings against former US president Donald Trump.

In Ukraine, Avakov is viewed simultaneously as one of the country’s most powerful and most hated political figures. A full 80 percent of the Ukrainian population held a negative view of Avakov’s time in office in a 2020 opinion poll.

In 2017, Avakov’s son Oleksander was implicated in an embezzling scandal involving the purchase of military weapons at inflated prices with government funds. Despite the blatant corruption by a family member, Avakov continued as interior minister and the charges against his son were quickly dropped.

In June of 2020 hundreds of protesters from various political backgrounds gathered in Kiev to call for Avakov’s resignation after reports of an alleged rape and torture of a woman by police not far from Kiev.

Despite the protests, Zelensky threw his support behind Avakov and stated among ministers “there were none better” than Avakov and called him “a powerful minister.”

Avakov would go on to spend another full-year in office building up his public political profile. Amid a military crisis over Crimea and East Ukraine between Ukraine and Russia in the spring, Avakov took a leading role in fueling tensions by visiting the front and inciting Ukrainian nationalists to war.

Using his Facebook page rather than official government media, Avakov called on “patriots,” using fascistic language, to prepare for war and protect the “Motherland.” He also suggested that Ukraine would fare better than it did in 2014 due to the over $2 billion in military aid and equipment it has since received from the US.

Throughout the seven-year-long conflict that has claimed the lives of over 14,000 people and displaced millions, Avakov has maintained the most right-wing and militaristic positions regarding a potential peace settlement with the breakaway separatist-controlled areas in Eastern Ukraine. Avakov and his far-right allies have vehemently opposed any deal that would grant sovereignty or special status to the separatist-controlled territories in East Ukraine, and deny Kiev full control over the region.

While the reasons behind Avakov’s resignation have not been revealed, reports have surfaced on the Ukrainian news site Strana that Avakov was ordered to resign while meeting with new US ambassador to Ukraine, George Kent. This may well be due to Avakov and his far-right ties presenting a public image problem for the United States as the Biden administration is seeking to posture as the protector of “democracy” against Russia.

Other reports have suggested that Zelensky ordered Avakov to resign after growing frustrated with Avakov’s own political prominence. Notably, in the past year Avakov refused to support sanctions pushed by Zelensky against former President Petro Poroshenko, with Avakov stating that Poroshenko “was not an enemy of Ukraine.”

Despite his resignation, it is telling that Avakov was able to quietly walk away from a position he held under two different US-backed administrations, with none of the murders, assaults and scandals he oversaw negatively affecting his political career and power.

On the contrary, reports from Russia’s Nezavisimaya Gazeta suggest that Avakov will now become a leading opposition figure and could become “the most dangerous opponent of the current government.”

Furthermore, Avakov’s announced replacement, Denys Monastyrskiy, formerly worked for Avakov associate and current deputy interior minister, Anton Herashchenko. Monastyrskiy is also a member of Zelensky’s own Servant of the People party, suggesting that Monastyrskiy was placed in the position as a compromise between Avakov and Zelensky.

Avakov’s resignation comes amid a profound domestic and foreign policy crisis. According to the news site Strana, Ukrainian political experts are expecting mass protests this fall due to rising gas and utility prices as well as an increase in consumer prices. The apparent attempts of Washington to ease tensions with Russia, including the recent summit between Russian president Vladimir Putin and US president Joe Biden, have further fueled conflicts within the Ukrainian oligarchy and the Zelensky government.

Whatever the details behind Avakov’s resignation, it is clear that he will continue to hold substantial political power within Ukraine due to his influence over the far right, which plays an oversized role within Ukraine as it is essential in carrying out the war in eastern Ukraine and crushing working class opposition to Kiev’s domestic policies.

Following his resignation, Ukraine’s parliamentary members lauded Avakov for having “saved Ukraine from the Russian world” and offered only mild criticisms of his time in office.

Avakov himself embodies the right-wing trajectory of the former Stalinist bureaucracy-turned-oligarchy and expresses it in its most rabid, nationalist form.

A former engineer, Avakov quickly transitioned into a capitalist following the dissolution of the Soviet Union by the Stalinist bureaucracy in 1991. He made millions while creating a business network that included banks, natural gas fields, supermarket chains and factories.

In 2002, Avakov entered politics as an official in Kharkov’s City Council. He was later appointed governor of the province of Kharkov by former President Viktor Yushchenko in 2005 after Avakov had supported the US-backed “Orange Revolution” in 2004.

Avakov used his position to enrich himself and his own Bazis Bank by purchasing government assets in Kharkov through the bank. He was later forced to flee to Italy in 2011 after accusations of corruption arose following the election of Avakov’s political enemy, former President Viktor Yanukovych.

Avakov eventually returned to Ukraine following the US-backed coup against Yanukovych in February 2014 and was appointed Interior Minister in the newly created government.

Through it all, like the rest of Ukraine’s ruling oligarchy, Avakov has maintained his own personal wealth which is reportedly in the hundreds of millions. While Ukraine is Europe’s poorest country, Avakov is known for his love of luxury. In 2018, Avakov purchased a 26-room villa on the Mediterranean Sea coast of Italy worth more than $900,000.

US auto plant shutdowns spur unexpected rise in jobless claims

Patrick Martin


The number of American workers filing new claims for unemployment compensation jumped significantly for the week ending July 16, driven by shutdowns in auto production linked to a shortage of computer chips. The total rose by 51,000 from the previous week to 419,000, the highest weekly total since mid-May.

Auto workers leave the Fiat Chrysler Automobiles Warren Truck Plant after the first work shift, Monday, May 18, 2020, in Warren, Mich. (Photo: AP Photo/Paul Sancya)

An additional 110,257 applications for benefits were filed through a temporary federal relief program for freelance, “gig” and other contingent workers, bringing the total number of all claims for state and federal benefits to more than half a million. The combined figure has remained stubbornly at that level or above despite claims of the Biden administration of a booming economic recovery.

Four states—Michigan, Kentucky, Texas and Missouri, all with large auto assembly complexes—accounted for the lion’s share of the increase in new applications for state jobless benefits. Michigan showed the most dramatic increase, up 175 percent, rocketing from 7,465 claims to 20,548. Nearly 13,000 of the new claims were in the auto industry, either in auto manufacturing and auto wholesale trade, according to the state labor department.

There are likely to be further auto-related increases in unemployment, from a combination of chip shortages and summer cutbacks due to changeover to production of new models. General Motors announced Wednesday it would cancel production at its Ft. Wayne, Indiana truck plant and cut production at the Flint Assembly plant because of the chip shortage.

In addition to the 13,000 new claims in Michigan, Texas saw a rise of 10,000 claims, Kentucky a rise of 9,000 and Missouri a rise of 5,500. There were smaller but substantial increases in the industrial states of Illinois, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

The increase of 51,000 overall came as a surprise to financial markets, since a survey of economists in the Wall Street Journal had predicted a drop to 348,000, rather than a jump. It was the third week out of the last six in which new jobless claims have risen, undermining the complacent official forecasts of a steady downward trend in benefit claims.

The corporate media propaganda has focused on claims that federal supplemental benefits were too generous, and that workers were refusing to take new jobs because they would prefer to stay home and collect a check.

But despite two dozen states cutting off federal benefits in June and July, the number of claimants for jobless benefits remains much higher than pre-pandemic levels. This is not surprising, since there are 7 million fewer total jobs than before the onset of the coronavirus pandemic.

There are now reports in the corporate media grudgingly admitting that rising COVID-19 infections, rather than “excessive” jobless pay, account for the difficulty in bars, restaurants and retail shops finding the workers they need. Workers are simply unwilling to go back to low-paying, high-contact jobs where they face a growing risk of contracting a potentially deadly disease.

Four of the states with increased jobless claims—Missouri, Texas, Kentucky and Florida—are among those with the largest increases in COVID-19 cases in recent weeks.

Unemployed workers have been facing a stepped-up campaign, spearheaded by Republican governors and state legislatures, but backed tacitly, and on some occasions explicitly, by the Biden administration, to roll back the federal benefits even before their scheduled expiration on September 6.

In Michigan, the Republican-controlled state legislature passed a measure to rescind the state’s acceptance of the $300-a-week federal supplemental benefits, but Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer vetoed it. Whitmer also declared an amnesty for the 650,000 jobless workers who were being targeted by her own administration to repay benefits that were deemed to be “excessive” because the workers had made errors in their applications.

The total number of workers with continuing claims for state unemployment compensation fell to 3.24 million, the lowest point since the pandemic struck in March 2020. The total receiving benefits under state and federal programs combined fell by 1.2 million to 12.57 million, in large measure because of the state-by-state campaign to end the federal supplemental benefit, as well as a program which provides benefits for freelance and “gig” workers who are usually ineligible for state benefits.

There are also millions of workers who have been jobless for so long that they will either lose benefits entirely or see their weekly payment substantially reduced, because they are reaching the end of their “benefit year.” Other workers have worked so little during the pandemic that when they do file claims of jobless benefits, they only qualify for a very small weekly amount, since the payment is based on their recent earnings.

About 4.1 million workers, more than a third of all those receiving benefits, were collecting payments from the Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation, the official name of the federal supplemental benefit, which ends in every state in the first week of September. Another 5.7 million gig and freelance workers receive benefits under the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program.

At his town hall meeting in Cincinnati, Ohio Thursday night, hosted and broadcast by CNN, President Biden reiterated that there would be no extension to those benefits and that the September cutoff of both programs would take effect. “The economy is picking up significantly,” he told his audience at Mount St. Joseph University.

Asked whether the federal unemployment benefits supplement had been an incentive for workers not to take jobs they were offered, Biden responded, “Let’s assume it did, but it’s coming to an end.”

The president flatly rejected any change in the filibuster rule in the Senate, the anti-democratic procedure that allows a minority to block legislation that fails to obtain 60 out of 100 votes in the upper house. While previously acknowledging that the filibuster rule is a legacy of the racist Jim Crow period in the American South, Biden claimed that scrapping it would “throw the entire Congress into chaos and nothing will get done, nothing at all will get done.”

While urging unvaccinated people to get their shots to protect themselves from coronavirus, Biden spent much of his time professing his willingness to work with Republicans on the passage of a bipartisan infrastructure bill, which had been blocked only hours earlier by a Senate filibuster.

“I take my Republican colleagues at their word. I come from a tradition in the Senate, you shake your hand, and that’s it, you keep your word,” he said, adding that Ohio Republican Senator Rob Portman was one of those he could trust.

Even the vetted audience at a Catholic college saw expressions of skepticism about this approach, with one questioner asking about the “utopian need to gain bipartisan support.”

Biden replied, “I may be the wrong guy to talk to.”