Ukraine Crisis Highlights Crisis of New World Order

 Taj Hashmi

ukraine refugees2

Since the end of World War II, the US and its allies have been directly responsible for 81 percent of all unjust wars, illegal occupations of countries, civilian deaths, violations of human rights, destruction of entire nations like Vietnam, Cambodia, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and many more. So, the most embarrassing question for the US and its allies is this: Do they have any moral ground to condemn Russia for its latest aggression in Ukraine? Ukrainian crisis exemplifies the New World Order, which is neither new nor relevant to the world order. It is also a continuation of the gunboat diplomacy Western nations have used worldwide since Columbus’ time. Considering the ongoing invasion of Ukraine by Russia, it’s time to ponder whether the crisis is merely another conflict between two neighbours or whether there is more to read and elaborate on the whole situation!

Is it Ukraine Crisis or the crisis of the New World Order? The New World Order of Bush Sr., intended to prevent foreign invasions of countries – such as Saddam Hussein’s invasion and annexation of Kuwait to Iraq – has paradoxically led to even more unjust wars and invasions, and millions of unarmed civilian deaths. The so-called New World Order appears to be a safe haven for invaders, destructors of civilizations, human rights, and dignity, but only if the invading nations are from the West, and the victims are from Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

Let’s look at the apparent reasons of the Ukraine-crisis. The country was a part of the Soviet Union until its disintegration in 1991. In 2014, Vladimir Putin invaded and annexed Crimea, which Soviet Prime Minister Khrushchev had formally ceded to Ukraine in 1954. On 24th February, Putin again invaded Ukraine apparently to stop it from joining NATO. This has triggered vociferous condemnation by America and its allies. They have demonised Putin as another Hitler and have imposed multiple sanctions against him and his country. Meanwhile, we are getting mixed signals from Russia and Ukraine. While the two countries have agreed to talk about resolving the crisis, Putin is said to have mentioned the nuclear option in order to resolve the issue.

It is condemnable if Putin really referred to the nuclear option. However, although Putin has condemned “illegal sanctions” of the West, and its belligerence against Russia, he has never used the expression “nuclear option” at all. He simply asked his generals to keep “other modes of military options” ready. The deliberate lie in Western media about Putin’s so-called reference to nuclear weapons shows, once again, that the West has some hidden agenda against Russia and the entire region. In a region where autocrats are prolific, the West’s “penchant” for democracy and order is at best a bad joke, and at worst an attempt to achieve a hidden agenda.

Meanwhile, no one can absolve the NATO custodians of pushing Ukraine into the fold of the alliance that was formed solely to keep the West safe from communist aggression during the Cold War. And it’s relevant to mention the stubborn US opposition to the installation of any Russian military base in Cuba in 1962, which Khrushchev was forced to abandon following Kennedy’s clear and unambiguous threat of retaliation. As a Russian base in Cuba would pose a security threat to the US, why would a NATO base in Ukraine not do the same to Russia? Since Russia doesn’t pose any existential threat to the West, why can’t the West dismantle NATO following the example of the Warsaw Pact? Hasn’t NATO outlived its utility after the collapse of the Soviet Union and communism in Europe? By expanding NATO in the region instead of dismantling it altogether, is the West interested in reenacting the misadventures of Napoleon and Hitler in Russia by invading the behemoth using other means? Only honest answers to the above questions can help us understand the ongoing conflict in Eastern Europe and beyond.

The West must realise that just as colonialism is over, so are the days of postcolonial Western hegemony everywhere. It should also stop dreaming of the unipolar world under US tutelage. Regional powers such as Russia and China already possess weapons, technology, and money to challenge the shrieking Western hegemony around the globe. Instead of dismissing Putin’s demands for Ukraine’s total “de-militarization” and “de-Nazification” (a term for saving Russian speaking Ukrainians from neo-Nazi vigilantes), the West and its allies should pay attention to these demands for durable peace under a New World Order, in the full sense of the term.

Now, understanding the Ukraine Crisis requires looking at the contemporary history of Russian and Western diplomacy vis-a-vis Ukraine and its disputed territories in Donbas (in the east) and Crimea (in the south). This helps us figure out who is at fault: Putin, Obama, or Biden!

Obama Administration pressured Ukraine to join NATO. Ukraine’s pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych – who opposed NATO membership and wanted Russian as the second official language – was forced from power in February 2014 through a pro-Western coup, and he now lives in exile in Russia. Interestingly, French President Macron also opposes Ukraine’s entry into NATO. Petro Poroshenko, a pro-Western billionaire businessman, succeeded Yanukovych in June 2014. Meanwhile, days before Poroshenko became the President, by referendum, the majority (Russian-speaking) in Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas sub-region on 11 May 2014 had voted on whether to remain in Ukraine. They opted for independence. No government, including those of the United States, the European Union, and Ukraine, recognized the results favoring the independence of the entities. Some countries, including the US, Germany, France, and Britain, branded the referendum unconstitutional and illegitimate. On 20th May 2019, Volodymyr Zelensky, a comedian-turned-politician, succeeded Poroshenko as President. Avowedly pro-Western Zelensky favours Ukraine joining NATO.

It’s noteworthy, the Putin Administration expressed its “respect” for the results of the referendum and called for a civilized implementation, and later announced its recognition of the Republics on 21 February 2022, becoming the first UN member state to do so. The referendum was very similar to one held in Crimea in February 2014, which supported the peninsula’s joining the Russian Federation. Russia invaded Crimea and on 18 March 2014, formally annexed the peninsula. During 2014 and 2015, two rounds of trilateral talks (“agreements”) among Russian, Ukrainian, and OSCE representatives over the status of the Donbas sub-region in Ukraine failed to yield results. No party was sincere about ensuring human rights, freedom of expression, and fair elections. Putin declared on 24th February (the day Russia invaded Ukraine) that the Minsk Agreement did not exist, just three days after recognizing the independence of Donetsk and Luhansk.

In light of the above and the recent Russian invasion of Ukraine on 24 February, we know as always that truth has been the first victim of war. The Western media, Joe Biden, and other Western leaders started saber-rattling in the weeks prior to the invasion, warning of dire consequences for anyone daring to invade Ukraine. Within minutes of the Russian attack on Ukraine, Western leaders and media began spewing poison against Putin and his supporters. Through them, we learnt how Western and global sanctions would cripple Russia. The same people who were directly or indirectly responsible for killing millions of innocent civilians in Korea, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Palestine, Indonesia, Iraq, Chile, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and Sub-Saharan Africa since 1945 call Putin a war criminal and demonize him as another Hitler.

It is interesting that neither the United States nor any of its allies has participated in the war against Russia in defence of Ukraine. No wonder Zelensky lamented after the Russian attack: “We have been left alone to defend our state!”. But why? Tulsi Gabbard, a former US Congresswoman from Hawaii, and former Democratic presidential candidate in 2020 answered the question. She told Tucker Carlson of Fox TV on 25 February that Biden could have stopped the invasion of Ukraine by “guaranteeing that Ukraine wouldn’t become a member of NATO”, but he decided not to intervene for the benefit of the US Military-Industrial Complex; and that Biden actually wanted Russia to invade Ukraine so that the US Military-Industrial Complex would benefit from the new cold war. Furthermore, the West understands that a war with a nuclear-armed Russia is unwinnable and that an attack on Russia would most likely ensnare China, North Korea, and perhaps Iran as well. Putin and Xi Jinping are likely to have a tacit understanding of this whole issue. There is no windfall waiting in the wings for the West as there was after the First Gulf War in 1991 since Putin is not another Saddam, neither is Russia another Iraq or Ukraine another Kuwait.

In conclusion, one believes that in the end, Putin will have accomplished his main objectives in Ukraine. He will separate Russian-speaking Donetsk and Luhansk from Ukraine, eventually transferring them to Russia. Also, Zelensky will abandon his ambition of making his country a member of NATO. In a matter of days, Russia would decisively defeat Ukraine, as the West and its allies knew before Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine. Due to its air force being completely disabled, Ukraine will be forced to negotiate its total surrender with Russia. A different outcome is unlikely. Other consequences of the invasion will also be unpalatable to the West. Putin has proved once again that might is right is at the heart of the New World Order. As a consequence, the West in the coming years will again behave like a sitting duck following the most likely occupation of Taiwan and territories in the northeast of India by China. Nobody in the East or the West has ever fought for lofty ideals (democracy, freedom, and human rights, for instance), and no one in the East or the West minds doing business with nasty dictators anywhere in the world, including Eastern Europe. In reality, neither Russia, Ukraine, nor Belarus – among others – are democracies in the neighborhood. Who gives a damn? No one will challenge a nuclear-armed China, just as no one will challenge Russia today. This is the new normal under the New World Order!

There’s no reason to believe what Joe Biden told his “patriotic” countrymen during his State of the Union Speech this Tuesday about effective and complete sanctions on Russia until Putin withdraws his troops from Ukraine. Sanctions do not hurt superpowers. Napoleon’s Continental System (sanctions against Britain) would have worked otherwise. Excluding Russia from the SWIFT interbank payment system is likely to backfire too. Eventually, China, Russia, and their allies will have their own global orders, economic, political, and military. Their own United Nations, perhaps, with equal voting rights for each member nation! As opposed to overreacting to conflicts between rogue regimes and even violations of international law (as Putin has done in invading Ukraine), the West should reflect on its genocidal invasions of Palestine, Indo-China, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, and scores of other countries (too many to mention here), since the end of World War II. Furthermore, the West must realize that just as colonialism is gone, so too are the days of neo-colonialism vanishing fast. Since the onset of the New World Order (which was meant to protect Western interests only), we have known non-Western nations occupying countries (with big repercussions in the West) much like the United States, Great Britain, and France did in the past. Clearly, this development points to the crisis of the New World Order. Thus, there is a dire need for a “new” New World Order for every nation and race.

Biden’s COVID-19 Preparedness Plan will keep schools and businesses open regardless of the death toll

Benjamin Mateus

During his State of the Union address, President Joe Biden made the preposterous claim, referring to the COVID-19 pandemic, “We’re leaving no one behind or ignoring anyone’s needs as we move forward!”

President Biden at State of the Union (left) and Selfie of Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland without mask (right). (White House.Gov video / Deb Haaland twitter account)

Yet, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) own directives leave in the lurch millions of moderately-to-severely immunocompromised people who have been told to consult with their doctors or “have a plan ready,” whatever this means. A quarter of Americans don’t have a primary-care provider, while nearly 30 million Americans are uninsured.

The new CDC directives are unscientific recommendations that endanger every adult and child in America. Its worst impact will be on the lives of the 10 million immunocompromised individuals that live in the US, as well as the 54 million people over 65, many with significant comorbidities. With only 29 percent of the population having received a booster, most American adults must be considered under-vaccinated against the immune evading variants that dominate.

Lastly, there are 75 million children for whom Omicron has been quite devastatingly severe. Since the end of October 2021 (four months), nearly 850 children died from COVID, accounting for 60 percent of all deaths in this age group during the entire pandemic.

What Biden “forgot” to mention while hailing his administration’s record on the pandemic and promises that schools would never close again, was that vaccine effectiveness against hospitalizations for children 5 to 11 years of age declined dramatically from 100 percent to 48 percent. During the Omicron surge, the rate of infection for these children was no different than for the unvaccinated. Vaccines had no benefit in terms of protecting them against infection.

Meanwhile, with Biden’s endorsement, state after state has repealed all the mask mandates in schools, even as Omicron continues at historically high levels, and as the frequency of the BA.2 sub-variant continues to climb. In tandem with the scrapping of masks, the CDC has also rescinded its mandate for universal contact tracing, meaning the tracking of cases—a tenet of public health proven effective by centuries of experience—will no longer be required at schools. These initiatives only attempt to head off any rebellion among teachers and parents by depriving them of information about the unsafe conditions that will exist in classrooms for teachers and students alike.

As Theresa Chapple-McGruder, the director of the Department of Public Health in Oak Park, Illinois, said to The Atlantic, “It is public health’s job to protect everybody, not just those people who are vaccinated, not just those people who are healthy.” And as to the follow-up question, do “the CDC’s new guidelines meet the mark,” she replied, “Not at all!”

Indeed, COVID is a community disease and a public health emergency that affects everyone. A libertarian and individualistic approach to prevention of disease will do nothing to deter new waves of infection and the spawning of new variants, and will actually facilitate further catastrophes. The foundation of public health is the ability of centralized authority to direct measures guided by science to attack the causes of infection and make public and private spaces safe for everyone.

This means a comprehensive infrastructure overhaul of all indoor heating and ventilation based on specifications set by aerosol physicists and HVAC experts. And this is just the first step. Masks and tests left in storage don’t stop the spread of the virus. Tracking and tracing must be at the heart of any pandemic response with the stated goal of seeing the number of infections reduced to zero and kept there.

The deadly pandemic has devastated country after country principally due to the criminal policies that have placed the needs of financial institutions before the public health concerns of communities. For all Biden’s rhetorical self-congratulation during his State of the Union address, his administration’s deplorable track record on COVID-19 has built on the record of his unlamented predecessor, and made it even worse.

Scientists have taken the administration and the hypocrisy of the State of the Union address to task on these points.

Dr. Yaneer Bar-Yam, head of World Health Network, which is fighting for elimination of COVID, said of the State of the Union, “Testing was required to attend. Five senators and congressmen tested positive and did not attend. They are telling children and workers to go to school and work without tests. So, they take precautions for themselves they don’t give others. That is just not OK.”

Julia Raifman, Doctor of Science at Boston University, who is currently focusing her work on health and social policies that can reduce the burden of COVID-19, responded to the following excerpt taken from the White House’s National COVID-19 Preparedness Plan: “We know how to keep our businesses and our schools open with the tools that we have at our disposal. We’ve shown we can do it, even during the Omicron surge.”

She wrote, “We cannot do better unless we face what happened and prepare for better. This is not what happened. There were widespread labor shortages and business closures. [More than] 150,000 people died of COVID since December 15, 2021. When will we face it and prevent more?”

Researcher Joshua Salomon, Professor of Medicine and core faculty member for Health Policy at Stanford University and Alyssa Bilinski, assistant professor at the Department of Health Services, Policy & Practice (HSPP) at Brown School of Public Health, attempted to provide a concrete response to the question, “How high will expected mortality reach before CDC recommends more prevention?”

Using the performance indicators recently set by the CDC with emphasis on those that predict deaths three weeks later and then comparing it to historical “high” trends during the pandemic (200 weekly cases per 100,000), the result was death rates of 1,000 to 2,500 per day nationally, or 7,000 to 17,500 deaths per week.

Professor Salomon lamented, “As a level of mortality the White House and CDC are willing to accept before calling for more public health protection, this is heartbreaking. For the next surge to be less lethal, we need earlier signals, not later ones—and stronger prevention strategies, not weaker ones.”

Putting this into perspective, the last time the daily COVID death toll was under 1,000 per day was in mid-August of 2021. In fact, the average daily death toll in America during the pandemic has been over 1,300 per day, or just over 9,000 per week, given 950,000 reported deaths.

In other words, the state of the pandemic as it is now is to become the measure of success. If 2022 ends up as deadly as 2021, when 475,000 people died, the Biden administration would construe that as a success. Two years ago, in March 2020, then President Donald Trump said that “if the US could keep the death toll between 100,000 to 200,000, that would be a very good job.”

Today, the death toll is approaching 1 million. At the rate deemed to be acceptable by the White House and the CDC, that horrific total could reach 1.3 million or even more by Christmas, and this would be presented to the American people as a cause for satisfaction, a return to “normalcy.” If, indeed, the US government even bothers to publish the numbers at all.

Vanuatu inquiry into Australia’s exploitative seasonal worker scheme

John Braddock

The government of Vanuatu, in the southwest Pacific, has launched an inquiry into the country’s seasonal worker program with Australia, citing concerns about rampant exploitation.

Vanuatu seasonal workers, December 2021 [Source: Vanuatu Seasonal Workers Facebook]

The Guardian reported on February 23 that the inquiry follows testimony from Vanuatuan workers to a parliamentary hearing in Australia, in which they recounted experiences of bullying, exploitative working conditions, poor accommodation and lack of support services.

One worker, Sergio, told the hearing that he had received just $100 a week, from which $30 a week was deducted with no explanation about what the deductions were for. Sergio had worked picking grapes in Mildura, Victoria, since 2019. He was paid by piece rate at $2.50 a box and could fill up to 110 boxes in a day. However, he received payments of just $70 into his bank account.

Sergio further testified that when workers were ill, “medics” would come and force them to go to work. “I [did] not come here [to be] a slave. You should give me a better life, and that’s why I fight for my peoples,” he told the inquiry. At one point he had organised a week-long strike among his friends.

Last November, the Australian government launched an aggressive campaign to prevent Pacific workers from fleeing their jobs after more than 1,000 reportedly absconded. The campaign warned they would “bring shame to their families” and risked having their visa cancelled. Sydney lawyer Stewart Levitt has begun preparing a class action against the federal government, detailing “substandard and inhumane conditions” rife in the program.

Vanuatu’s opposition leader, Ralph Regenvanu, tweeted he had “urged our government to seek to revise the agreements between the Vanuatu and Australian governments” concerning the scheme. “Vanuatu Government has its duty to safeguard its citizens,” he declared. Regenvanu, however, was responsible for introducing the policy as foreign minister in 2011.

The Pacific Island governments, who are partners in the programs, will do nothing to materially improve the conditions of the workers. They have all signed up to the agreements and are closely involved in vetting applicants and even helping supervise their behaviour. The schemes have been lauded by all the participating authorities for the purported economic “benefits” to fragile island economies which depend heavily on remittances paid by expatriates and overseas workers.

Despite repeated complaints and media exposures over the years, nothing has changed. Researcher Tupai Fotuosamoa Jackson also told the Guardian that participants in the Vanuatu inquiry could be afraid to speak openly for fear of losing their job. “For the worker, there is an obligation to remain on the program and there is a fear that your opportunity to continue will be impacted,” he said.

Australia’s Seasonal Worker Program (SWP) and Pacific Labour Scheme (PLS) recruit workers into jobs in rural and regional Australia, particularly for the agricultural sector. More than 20,000 workers have entered the program since it was started by the Labor government of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, supported by the unions, in 2008. It was opened up to residents from the impoverished nations of Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. Before COVID-19 hit, numbers were increasing every year.

New Zealand also operates a Recognised Seasonal Employer (RSE) scheme which began in 2007, preceding the Australian schemes. It allows the horticulture and viticulture industries to import workers on temporary work visas from Samoa, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Fiji.

There are currently roughly 4,500 Vanuatuan workers in Australia, according to the Vanuatu’s government. Since it commenced the overall program has filled a total of more than 50,000 seasonal jobs. New Zealand’s RSE scheme has grown from 5,000 workers a year to more than 14,000. There are currently 7,300 RSE workers in New Zealand, but the supply of workers has been disrupted by COVID-19 border controls.

A Guardian investigation in October 2020 into the Australian scheme cited reports of alleged abuse and intimidation and workers surviving by eating the food they were picking. Others were charged more than $1,000 a week to sleep on a couch. Some workers have taken legal action over their treatment. Others have died, underscoring the deprivation of basic food, shelter and medical care.

A 2016 joint Australian parliamentary committee inquiry heard that exploitation was “common.” According to Union Aid Abroad, complaints included the provision of substandard accommodation, deductions of up to 60 percent of wages for lodging and board, long hours and excessive or unpaid overtime, and lack of access to health care. The NGO declared some conditions amounted to “modern slavery.”

There have been similar reports of employers abusing the scheme in New Zealand. A Newsroom investigation in 2020 alleged that in the Hawkes Bay, a horticulture region with the largest share of RSE workers, authorities were “turning a blind eye to migrant exploitation to keep the quota of RSE workers flowing into their region.”

The report identified an under-reporting of exploitation, the tolerance of ‘prison-like’ accommodation, and an environment where workers earn barely above the minimum wage and are often treated like indentured labourers. There was no way for RSE workers to complain about their treatment to anyone independent of their employer. Workers who did complain were threatened with return plane trips and allowances withheld, or even blacklisting, which would see them permanently banned.

Australia and New Zealand occupy a position of neo-colonial domination over the region. The importation of Pacific people as a source of cheap labour, exploiting desperately impoverished and oppressed Pacific peoples for their own economic ends, is a practice with a long and brutal history.

Currently in both countries industry employers are among the loudest demanding the removal of all COVID-19 restrictions to prevent ongoing disruptions to their operations and flow of profits. This is despite the huge increase in infections as the Omicron variant continues to spread, including across the Pacific.

Last September Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne announced an additional 12,500 workers would be brought in by March, with 27,000 already in the “work-ready pool.” Additional “flexibilities,” such as removing the upper age limit of 45 years, will also be enacted. In New Zealand, following strident calls by “stakeholders” that over 14,000 workers are required for the peak harvest season in March, temporary workers are among the first to be given entry under the Labour government’s border re-opening program.

Australia’s scheme is a contemporary version of the system of “blackbirding” whereby nearly one million workers were used as cheap indentured labour in Australia and other Pacific countries from the 1860s to the 1940s. Many Pacific Islanders were kidnapped and sold to Australian landowners who treated them as virtual slaves with no security or citizenship rights.

New Zealand governments also have a long and tainted history of imposing discriminatory and draconian labour and immigration controls over Pacific Islanders. When severe labour shortages developed in the early 1960s, thousands of Pacific workers were recruited for menial and factory jobs, only to subsequently find themselves victimised by hostile and racist immigration laws.

During the 1970s, many Pacific immigrant families were torn apart when police and immigration officials forcibly seized workers and their dependents, classified as “overstayers,” in a series of dawn raids, and summarily expelled them from the country. Last June, Prime Minister Ardern made a hypocritical formal apology for the raids, even as her government implements ongoing attacks on the rights of immigrants who continue to be ruthlessly exploited.

French President Macron backs NATO war drive against Russia

Alex Lantier

On Wednesday night, in a prime time address to the nation coming shortly before he is due to announce his bid for re-election in next month’s presidential elections, Emmanuel Macron spoke on the rapidly escalating war between Russia and the pro-NATO regime in Ukraine.

French President Emmanuel Macron, second left, watches screen during a video-conference with NATO members at the French Army headquarters, Friday, Feb. 25, 2022 in Paris. NATO leaders met to discuss how far they can go to challenge Russian President Vladimir Putin. (AP Photo/Michel Euler, Pool)

He spoke shortly after a poll emerged showing that 70 percent of the French public oppose joining the conflict. Defying public opinion, Macron is, however, sending French troops to neighboring Romania and warships and fighter planes to the region. His speech therefore sought to lull workers to sleep about the mounting danger of a Russia-NATO war, while demanding that the French people support NATO war policies and accept massive bloodshed and vast economic sacrifices.

Denouncing “the brutal attack launched by [Russian President Vladimir] Putin against Ukraine on February 24,” Macron warned: “The coming days will likely be increasingly difficult. … The balance of our continent and many aspects of our daily lives are already transformed by this war and will undergo profound change in the coming months.”

Macron appealed for popular support for NATO’s policy on a fraudulent basis, blaming war entirely on the Russian regime. However, while the Kremlin is responsible for launching the invasion, the NATO powers have systematically worked to threaten Russia and cut off negotiations with it, goading Putin to take military action. As a result, Macron’s appeal to the French people to support NATO against Russia collapsed into a series of lies, distortions and half-truths.

“Neither France, nor Europe, nor Ukraine nor the NATO alliance wanted this war. On the contrary, we did everything we could to avoid it,” Macron said. Pointing to his own talks with Putin, he added: “The US president made clear his availability to negotiate after physically meeting President Putin in June 2021 in Geneva. It is thus indeed alone and deliberately violating one by one all his promises to the community of nations, that President Putin chose war.”

Leaving aside his own attempts to negotiate with Putin, which clearly have failed, Macron’s claim that US President Joe Biden was “available to negotiate” with Putin is a fraud. Biden said he did not respect Putin’s “red lines,” that is, that Washington would take whatever action it pleased, even if Putin warned that this crossed a “red line” that could lead to war. All the major NATO powers then insisted that Ukraine had to have the option of joining NATO, after which NATO weapons aimed at Russia could be placed on Ukrainian soil, directly on Russia’s borders.

Macron tried to refute the arguments Russian officials have given to justify the invasion, pointing to the aggressive role played by NATO. Currently, he said, “there are neither NATO troops nor bases in Ukraine. Those are lies. Nor is this war, as intolerable propaganda would have it, a struggle against ‘Nazism.’ That is a lie.”

While it is true that NATO troops are technically not permanently deployed to Ukraine, Macron’s statement is at best a cynical dodge. In February 2014, the NATO powers backed a putsch, led by neo-Nazis of the Right Sector group, that installed a pro-NATO government in Ukraine. Since then, CIA advisors and US mercenaries from the private firm Academi (formerly Blackwater) have helped Ukrainian forces carry out attacks on Russian-speaking areas of Ukraine.

Putin’s claim that he aims to “de-Nazify” Ukraine is a political lie, as his own regime is based on close alliances with far-right groups. However, Macron’s comments covered up the enormous role played by neo-Nazi forces, like Right Sector or the Azov Battalion, in NATO’s Ukrainian puppet regime. Indeed, it was reported last year that the FBI is investigating American neo-Nazis who went to Ukraine to fight for the pro-NATO Ukrainian regime on charges of murdering non-combatants and burying them in mass graves.

A crying contradiction underlay Macron’s speech: While presenting NATO policy as moderate and Russian action as totally unprovoked, he also stressed aggressive actions NATO is taking that cut across any attempt to negotiate an end to the war. “Several major Russian banks have been excluded from the international payments system, making many transactions impossible and triggering a collapse of the ruble. Russian propaganda outlets can no longer broadcast in Europe,” he said, boasting of NATO’s “delivery of civilian and military equipment” to Ukraine to fight Russia.

Urgent warnings are needed. NATO and the Macron government are heading for a direct military clash with Russia, a nuclear-armed power. It is critical to politically alert workers and youth to this danger and mobilize opposition to NATO’s policies that threaten humanity with nuclear war.

Examining Macron’s speech also reveals the explosive internal class conflicts the NATO powers are seeking to suppress with the war drive against Russia. Already before the war, strikes and protests were mounting against rising inflation and the policies of mass infection with COVID-19 pursued by the NATO powers. Handouts of trillions of dollars and euros to the investing classes in bank bailouts massively fueled inflation, even as over 2 million people died of COVID-19 inside NATO.

Macron laid out a framework in which NATO can try to use the war to falsely blame Russia for the mounting social and economic suffering caused by the official handling of the pandemic. Having admitted that the NATO powers are working to cut Russia out of international trade, he proceeded to blame Russia for the acceleration of inflation and economic disruption the NATO trade embargo on Russia will produce.

Among the consequences of Russia’s invasion, Macron listed: “Our agriculture, industry, many economic sectors will suffer, either because they depend on raw materials from Russia or Ukraine, or because they export to those countries. Our economic growth, currently high, will inevitably be affected. Rising prices for oil, gas, and raw materials will impact our purchasing power: Tomorrow, filling up your tank, heating your home, the cost of key products will likely rise even further.”

In reality, it is apparent that the COVID-19 pandemic has triggered an enormous escalation of the global crisis of capitalism and the NATO powers’ drive to war. The deadly political and military consequences of the Stalinist dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 are becoming apparent. The proxy wars NATO fought across Europe against allies of Russia, seeking to crush Serbia during the Yugoslav wars in the 1990s or with the 2014 putsch against a pro-Russian regime in Ukraine, now have escalated into a crisis that threatens to provoke a world war.

All the historically rooted contradictions of European and world capitalism are re-emerging in the current war. Berlin’s recent decision to triple its military spending to €150 billion and thereafter spend at least 2 percent of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defense, amounts to an official rehabilitation of German militarism—which was discredited for decades after 27 million Soviet citizens died fighting the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union in World War II.

This also means that, for the first time since its conquest of France in that war, Germany could have a more powerful military than France. While the NATO imperialist powers are all moving against Russia, Macron’s speech gave some indication of the mounting tensions among the NATO powers themselves caused by these dangerous developments.

While Biden and other NATO heads of state insist that they will not meet Putin, Macron said he would and referred to French imperialism’s traditional alliance with Russia against Germany. After pledging to “stay in contact as much as I can and as much as is necessary with President Putin,” Macron hailed “the history of Russia and Ukraine, the memory of earlier generations who fought side by side with us against Nazism.”

This reference is hypocritical and politically obscene coming from Macron. He made it while also threatening Russia in alliance with a far-right regime in Ukraine that rewarded surviving members of Ukrainian SS units involved in the Holocaust with state pensions. Nonetheless, as Macron also announced a pledge to massively escalate military spending, it is apparent that German rearmament amid a war drive against Russia is also intensifying interimperialist conflicts within NATO itself.

Concluding his speech, Macron referred briefly to the April 2022 presidential elections and made clear that none of the broad outlines of the policies he had discussed—which are shared by virtually every major candidate—would be up for discussion. He said, “This campaign will allow for democratic debate that is important for the nation, but it will not prevent us from being united on that which is essential.”

Macron’s remarks point to the accelerating collapse of French democracy under the impact of unsustainable levels of social inequality, the pandemic, and the imperialist drive to war.

Australia: Residents abandoned by government in flood crisis

Martin Scott & Michael Newman

As residents of Lismore and surrounding parts of northern New South Wales (NSW) begin to clean up and recover belongings from their flood- and storm-damaged homes, anger and frustration is mounting over the pitiful official response to the disaster.

Flooded Newmarket Road, Wilston, Brisbane [WSWS Media]

While weather on Australia’s east coast today has not been as extreme as predicted, heavy rainfall is expected to continue over the weekend and into next week, including in areas already devastated by floods. With rivers and dams overflowing, the continued downpour means the danger is far from over.

More than four days after large parts of Lismore, including the entire CBD, were inundated by floodwaters, thousands of residents are still without power, phone and internet service, while food, drinking water and fuel are in desperately short supply. Evacuation centres are overcrowded, raising the possibility of a COVID-19 outbreak amid increasing infections across the state.

From the outset, almost every aspect of the emergency response has been left up to the working class local population. In Lismore, dozens of ordinary people turned up with their own boats, and many more joined the rescue operation, bravely going from house to house to evacuate trapped residents.

The sense of complete abandonment by the state and federal governments has built up throughout the ongoing crisis, as official aid has failed to materialise.

Brigitte Boll wrote on Facebook: “Milk, water, groceries, basics, everything is needed right now. Where is the help from federal gov? No one to be seen.”

Lyn Moore wrote: “Where is the State & Federal government help with getting food etc to these areas. I know the highways are flooded but can’t they bring in Army vehicles?”

The first deployment of 70 Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel to aid the rescue and recovery effort occurred only on Wednesday, and a further 170 were not sent until today.

The fact that the military was sent at all, as they now are in response to almost every disaster, is a result of decades of cuts to civilian emergency services, leaving the ADF, with its ever-increasing budget, as the only manpower available. This is also aimed at normalising the presence of soldiers on domestic soil, under conditions of widespread hostility to inequality and a social crisis that will be exacerbated by the floods.

Holly Lovegrove wrote on Facebook yesterday: “There were some ADF men working on Terania St today but they said they’re only doing other ADF people’s houses which is really disappointing.”

Lovegrove pointed out the stark contrast between the pitiful official response and the heroic and self-sacrificing actions of ordinary people. She wrote: “The Fijian/Samoan men seem to be doing more heavy lifting than our paid government services. Are there any services that aren’t run by volunteers?”

Lovegrove was referring to a group of abattoir workers who have played a major role in the rescue and recovery effort, including saving 60 residents from an aged care facility on Monday. They have only recently arrived from Fiji under the Pacific Labour Scheme, which provides cheap labour from impoverished countries to business, while denying workers basic citizenship rights.

Sally Purcell wrote on Twitter: “So much has been left to private citizens when it was so clear that Lismore, this very flood prone town, was in grave danger. The federal and NSW governments have, once again, demonstrated their incompetence and have shown how little they care about people.”

Lismore flood victims are struggling to register for the federal government’s pitiful one-off $1,000 per adult and $400 per child disaster payment. Severely limited phone and internet access is preventing many flood victims from accessing online services, and, according to social media reports, yesterday a single Services Australia worker was sent to manually handle thousands of claims.

On Wednesday, in nearby Coraki, hundreds of people were marooned at an evacuation centre as the town ran short of food and bottled water. Some resorted to siphoning petrol from their cars to use in private boats to rescue survivors trapped on the roofs of their houses. A State Emergency Service (SES) boat with supplies did not arrive in the town until late afternoon.

The central business district of Casino was flooded for the first time in the city’s history, with 330 homes reported as inundated.

In Brisbane, the state capital of Queensland, the situation is little better. Primary responsibility for the clean-up has been dumped on a “mud army” of more than 10,000 volunteers who responded to a call from the city council.

There too, residents have expressed anger at the woeful response and preparation by the state Labor government.

Brisbane Corso resident Nigel Bean told the Courier-Mail he was only notified of advancing floods late Saturday night. “Somebody has to be put on the spot and asked, ‘please explain, what has gone wrong?’” Bean said. “How on Earth can we be in a mega-metropolitan city that just won the 2032 Olympics and yet can’t even prevent, predict or communicate flooding in the CBD?”

SEQWater was forced to defend its decision not to begin releasing water from Wivenhoe Dam last Tuesday when the Bureau of Meteorology initially forecast heavy rain. Flood mitigation releases did not begin for another three days. The state-owned water authority was found guilty of negligence by a court in 2019 for contributing to the flooding of at least 20,000 Brisbane homes in 2011.

According to a new report by Deloitte Access Economics, only 3 percent of public money allocated to disaster relief is invested in preparation and mitigation. As victims of previous floods, bushfires and other disasters attest, very little of this money ends up in the hands of those who lose their homes.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison declared Tuesday that the federal government had paid out $17 billion in disaster relief in the past three years. This included $13 billion for the COVID-19 disaster payment and pandemic leave.

Two thirds of the $1.5 billion spent following the 2019 floods in Queensland was to establish a new AgRebuild loan scheme. In fact, between July 2019 and June 2021, just 64 loans were approved nationwide for flood-affected farms and agribusinesses, totaling $185 million.

A federal Emergency Response Fund established in 2019 and financed through a $4 billion cut in research funding has “committed” just $150 million to disaster mitigation, while earning more than $800 million in interest.

Emergency Response Minister Bridget McKenzie yesterday dismissed any idea of federal responsibility for the disaster, proclaiming “we don’t own the bulldozers,” and that they were relying on states and territories for flood mitigations, including levees, because “they were too expensive.”

National Recovery and Resilience Agency head Shane Stone hit back at critics of the official response, blaming flood victims for their plight. Stone told Nine newspapers: “You’ve got people who want to live among the gum trees, what do you think is going to happen? Their house falls in the river, and they say it’s the government’s fault.”

The reality is, over decades, successive governments have opened up large tracts of land on flood plains for residential development, in line with the demands of property developers. With housing prices rapidly increasing while wages have stagnated or fallen, more and more working-class families have been forced out to these low-lying areas.

The failure of state and federal governments, Labor and Liberal-National alike, to respond to this crisis, before, during or afterward, is not an aberration, but a direct product of the capitalist system, in which the health and lives of working people are entirely subordinated to the profit interests of big business.

Women Techsters Fellowship Program 2023

Application Deadline: 22nd March 2022

About Women Techsters Fellowship Program: The Women Techsters Initiative is set out to achieve the following:

1. To empower African women to establish start-ups or technology-enabled businesses to build an entrepreneurial mindset in them.
2. To support women to become digitally enabled, social champions, and owners of businesses
3. To bridge the digital divide between men and women in the technology space while contributing to economic growth
4. To ultimately improve the socio-economy of the African continent by providing skills that will elevate women from poverty The Fellowship Program is an opportunity for women to upskill and build the capacity needed to access decent work opportunities.

Type: Training

Eligibility of Women Techsters Fellowship Program: This year, we will admit girls and women between the ages of 16 to 40 years into the fellowship program. Only women in Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, South Africa, and Egypt should apply.

Eligible Countries: Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, South Africa, and Egypt

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Women Techsters Fellowship Program: The learning paths for this training are: 1. Software Development 2. Product Design (UI/UX) 3. Cybersecurity 4. Product Management 5. Data Science and Artificial Intelligence Engineering Fellows will be required to take part in the training to qualify for the internship.

Duration of Award: The Fellowship will commence on Monday, 8th March 2021 and will run for a year. The first 3 months will be for the technical training, followed by a 2-week soft skill training, and a six-month internship program.

How to Apply: Kindly proceed to fill the form if you can commit to the training schedule.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Professional Fellows Program (PFP) 2022/2023

Application Deadlines: 18th March 2022

Eligible Countries: Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, and Tunisia

To be taken at (country): USA

About the Award: The Professional Fellows Program (PFP) for Economic Empowerment, Middle East and North Africa is a two-way exchange program sponsored by the U.S. Department of State and designed to promote mutual understanding, enhance leadership and professional skills, and build lasting, sustainable partnerships between mid-level emerging leaders committed to strengthening their communities through social entrepreneurship and workforce development.

PFP Fellows are placed in intensive fellowships in non-profit organizations, private sector businesses, and government offices for an individually tailored professional development experience.  They build a broad network with American and other program participant colleagues as they develop a deeper understanding of U.S. society, enhance their professional skills.  American participants who have hosted foreign fellows travel overseas for participant-driven reciprocal programs.

Type: Fellowship, Short course

Eligibility: Who Should Apply for Professional Fellows Program (PFP)?

• Entrepreneurs, and Social Innovators.
• Small & medium business Owners and Managers who are investing in innovative socially conscious products and programs.
• Individuals working in Civil Society/NGOs working on youth workforce training and development, increasing the role of marginalized populations in the economy, building financial literacy, training in technology use and IT development, and other efforts around economic empowerment.
• Individuals working in  University incubators, accelerators, and job-readiness programs, and programs focusing on business development, financial literacy, sustainable tourism, or economic development.
• Individuals working in Government Agencies/Ministries, national policy offices, think-tanks, and offices working to increase the presence of underrepresented citizens in the economy.

Eligible candidates must be:

• 25-40 years old
• A current citizen and resident of: Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, or Lebanon
• Speak fluent to English (enough to work full-time in a US fellowship)
• Have at least two years‘ work experience in their field 
• Currently employed
• Interest in hosting reciprocal program for Americans in your country
• Able to convene 25 or more colleagues for post-trip briefings
• Have demonstrated strong leadership skills and commitment to community
• Demonstrates initiative, teamwork, and openness 
• Preference will be given to those who have not previously traveled on a U.S. government funded program.

Number of Awards: 38 

Duration and Value of Professional Fellows Program (PFP): 

This is a 42 day program in the U.S.A 

 September 24- November 4, 2022    

Spring Program 2023:  May 1-June 8, 2023

Fellows will participate in a 6-week program (Fall 2022 or Spring 2023), each with:

• A one-week host family stay
• A one-week business development and social entrepreneurship intensive with University Partner
• A one-month fellowship placement in individual businesses and/or offices in Washington, D.C.
• 4- days Participation in the Professional Fellows Congress
• Design and development of a complete proposal for a follow-on projects to be carried out by PFP fellows, supported by mini-grants

How to Apply for Professional Fellows Program (PFP):   Apply Here

• It is important to go through all application requirements on the Programme Webpage see link below) before applying

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

UNESCO Silk Roads Youth Research Grant 2022

Application Deadline:

31st May 2022. 

Tell Me About UNESCO Silk Roads Youth Research Grant:

UNESCO calls on young women and men under the age of 35 to apply for the 2022 Silk Roads Youth Research Grant. The grant aims to mobilize young researchers for further study of the Silk Roads shared heritage. Twelve grants of USD10,000 will be awarded per research project. 

The research needs to address specific issues relating to: 

• the shared heritage and plural identities developed along the Silk Roads, 
• its internal diversity, 
• its potential in contemporary societies for creativity, intercultural dialogue, social cohesion, regional and international cooperation, and 
• ultimately sustainable peace and development. 

The UNESCO Silk Roads Youth Research Grant was first launched in 2021 and is organized within the UNESCO Silk Roads Programme with the support of the National Commission of the People’s Republic of China for UNESCO, in the context of UNESCO Social and Human Sciences Programme. 

Which Fields are Eligible?

A broad array of research fields, including multidisciplinary and multidimensional proposals not limited to one specific region or chronology, are eligible. Proposed research may cover one or several themes associated with the Silk Roads shared heritage including, but not limited to: 

• Science, Technology and Traditional Knowhow  
• Religion and Spirituality 
• Language and Literature 
• Arts and Music 
• Traditional Sports and Games 
• Economy and Trade 
• The Legacy of the Silk Roads and Contemporary Issues 

What Type of Scholarship is this?

Grants

Who can apply for UNESCO Silk Roads Youth Research Grant?

Postgraduate researchers, aged 35 and younger at the time of application, are eligible to apply for the grant. The proposed research may be carried out by an individual researcher or may be part of the research of a group or collaborative project. 

How are Applicants Selected?

The submitted research proposals will be evaluated by a scientific panel comprised of renowned international academics. 

The list of grant awardees will be announced at the end of September 2022. 

How Many Grants will be Given?

12

What is the Benefit of UNESCO Silk Roads Youth Research Grant?

USD10,000 per research project. 

How to Apply for Grant:

Applicants are required to submit their research proposals by downloading and completing the template provided detailing their research project, its methods, expected outcomes and contribution to existing scholarship. 

Proposals should be submitted in English and sent to: silkroadsgrant@unesco.org 

A comprehensive guide to the grant, including details on applicant eligibility criteria, suitable research topics, and evaluation process, is available here: 

• Applicant Guidelines

• Grant winning research projects of the first edition
   
• More information on Social and Human Sciences at UNESCO 

Visit Award Webpage for Details