5 Apr 2022

German press seizes upon claims of Russian atrocities to demand military escalation

Peter Schwarz


Atrocity propaganda is one of the most important weapons of modern warfare. The enemy is alleged to have committed bestial crimes, which are either totally invented or greatly exaggerated, to then seek their total destruction. This is the pattern now being followed by the broad campaign about Russian war crimes in Bucha.

As yet, although there is neither reliable information nor any independent investigation, the Ukrainian government and NATO are using the alleged massacre of civilians to burn all bridges leading to a ceasefire and to promulgate the continuation of the war until the complete subjugation of Russia.

What exactly took place in Bucha is not yet clear. The Ukrainian and Russian accounts of events differ diametrically. The Ukrainian government accuses the Russian army of brutally murdering over 400 civilians in the small town near Kiev. The Russian government speaks of a “provocation by the Kiev regime” and claims that no one was harmed in the town until the withdrawal of Russian troops on 30 March.

Photos and video footage show numerous bodies in civilian clothes lying on the roadside. Journalists also confirm they have seen bodies. Who these are and who killed them and when, however, has not yet been clarified. In view of the role similar incidents have played in imperialist war propaganda, the greatest caution is therefore called for.

Bodies to be buried at a cemetery in Bucha, outskirts of Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, April 5, 2022. (AP Photo/Felipe Dana)

Let us recall the “Račak massacre,” which was instrumentalised by NATO to justify its war against Yugoslavia in violation of international law. On 15 and 16 January 1999, 40 bodies were found near the village of Račak, and presented by the Western media as evidence of an alleged Serb genocide of Kosovo Albanians. Later, it turned out that the evidence had been manipulated. The actual events have not been clarified to this day, as important documents remain under lock and key.

Even now, the NATO powers immediately instrumentalised the alleged Bucha massacre to intensify the conflict with Russia. President Joe Biden has announced further sanctions and called for a “war crimes trial” against President Vladimir Putin, effectively blocking the path to a negotiated settlement. The European Union also wants to tighten its sanctions against Russia.

The reactions in Germany are particularly ferocious. Formerly liberal representatives of the affluent middle class, including numerous journalists, are gripped by a veritable war hysteria. For them, sanctions against Russia and military support for Ukraine cannot go far enough.

News and talk shows have degenerated into pure propaganda programmes where dissenting opinions are no longer tolerated. Even ex-Chancellor Angela Merkel and German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who used to be foreign minister, are caught in the crossfire of criticism because they once cultivated diplomatic relations with Putin. Steinmeier has since admitted his “mistake”; Merkel has not, so far.

Green Party Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, a leading voice in German war propaganda, has expelled 40 Russian diplomats from Germany in response to Bucha. The German government, like its US counterpart, is supplying additional weaponry to Ukraine.

The double standards of this campaign break all bounds. Journalists, who for decades have defended every war crime committed by the USA and NATO and downplayed the historical crimes of the Nazis, are discovering a new dimension of war crimes in Bucha.

Typical is a comment by the head of the politics department of the Süddeutsche Zeitung, Stefan Kornelius. What was visible in Bucha, he writes, “cannot even begin to be described with the term crime and makes clear the brutal, bestial nature of this slaughter.” The Russian invasion was “aimed solely at destruction and death,” it defied “all notions of atrocity.” Ukraine was suffering “not a war of aggression” but “a campaign of extermination.”

The Nazis described their war against the Soviet Union, in which almost 30 million people fell victim, as a “campaign of extermination.” In the territory of today’s Ukraine alone, they murdered 5 million people, including 1.5 million Jews. In Babi Yar, which is only a few kilometres away from Bucha, Hitler’s Wehrmacht (army) shot 34,000 Jewish men, women, and children within 36 hours.

Equating the events in Bucha with these historical crimes deliberately trivialises the Nazi regime, in order to follow in its footsteps. Kornelius advocates intensifying the war against Russia until its complete surrender. “Those who believe that Ukraine can make peace with Russia and the war would then end should be honest: No one in Ukraine will make peace, these images will catapult the war into a new dimension,” he writes.

Kornelius, who is very well connected internationally, has long been active as a propagandist of German militarism. As early as 2014, he had welcomed the overthrow of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych by fascist militias and called for NATO military intervention when Russia incorporated Crimea into its territory in response.

A year earlier, he had advocated US military intervention in Syria following an alleged poison gas attack on Syrian civilians. Cynically, he noted that it did not really matter whether the Assad regime or the Western-backed rebels had used the poison gas: “Realistically, it also makes little difference who fired the shells.”

Kornelius is just one of many German journalists calling for all-out war against Russia.

Mathieu von Rohr, head of the “Foreign Desk,” writes in Der Spiegel: “There will not be a return to the status quo ante, there cannot be. Not with Russia, not for Europe. This war has irrevocably changed some things on the continent: It is now definitively clear that peace in Europe can only be defended against Russia.”

He also accuses Putin of waging “a war of extermination against Ukraine” and concludes: “We must supply Ukraine with all the weapons it can use, especially heavy weapons—and quickly.”

In the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Reinhard Veser comments that the Ukrainians were “in a struggle for existence in which they have no other option but to fight back with all their might. The West must provide them with the means to do so.” Compromises with Putin could not lead to lasting peace, he writes.

The rehabilitation of Nazism is an inseparable part of this war campaign. In 2014, the return of German militarism and support for the right-wing coup in Ukraine went hand in hand with the trivialisation of Nazi crimes. At the time, Berlin historian Jörg Baberowski called in Der Spiegel for the rehabilitation of Nazi apologist Ernst Nolte and attested that Hitler had “not been cruel.”

When the Sozialistische Gleichheitspartei (Socialist Equality Party, SGP) and its youth organisation IYSSE protested against this, the bourgeois media almost uniformly rallied behind Baberowski. When the SGP gained support among students and workers, the Verfassungsschutz (secret service) denounced it as a “left-wing extremist” organisation, placed it under surveillance and included it in its annual report. At that time, the political rise of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) also began.

In the meantime, the trivialisation of Nazi crimes has become commonplace in Germany. Ukrainian Ambassador Andriy Melnyk, an open admirer of Nazi collaborator and war criminal Stepan Bandera, is a celebrated guest in editorial offices and at political events.

When Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced the biggest rearmament offensive since Hitler in the Bundestag (federal parliament) on 27 February, Melnyk, who sat in the public gallery with former Federal President Joachim Gauck, was greeted with a standing ovation by deputies from all parliamentary groups. Since then, Melnyk has unabashedly defended his extreme right-wing views.

The target of his latest attack is Süddeutsche Zeitung columnist Heribert Prantl. The latter had called Melnyk’s cult of Bandera “alienating” and noted: “Bandera is a convicted murderer of the Polish Interior Minister Pieracki in 1934; he became the leader of the radical anti-Semitic wing of the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists in 1940; he took over police powers there after the German Wehrmacht invaded Lemberg/Lviv and was involved in pogroms against the Jewish civilian population as well as in the murder of Soviet prisoners of war.”

Melnyk retorted on Twitter, “Neither the Russians, nor the Germans have the right to determine who Ukrainians revere as heroes. Stepan Bandera & hundreds of thousands of my compatriots fought both Hitler and Stalin for the [UKR] state. Leave us alone with your lectures.”

The war offensive against Russia and the rehabilitation of Nazi crimes are two sides of the same coin. Germany, the USA, and NATO are not concerned with the “freedom” of Ukraine and the welfare of its people. They are waging a proxy war against Russia in order to conquer it—as Hitler once did—and divide it up among themselves. In doing so, they consciously accept the risk of a third, nuclear world war. The population and the army of Ukraine, which they are arming to the teeth, serve as their cannon fodder.

The reactionary, nationalist regime of Vladimir Putin, which represents the interests of the Russian oligarchs, has nothing to oppose this. It vacillates between offers of negotiations with the imperialist powers, nuclear sabre-rattling and brutal military actions that play into the hands of imperialist propaganda.

US Justice Department expanding probe of taxes, business dealings of Hunter Biden

Jacob Crosse


In recent days, a longstanding investigation by the Department of Justice (DoJ) into the taxes and financial affairs of Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, has become the subject of prominent news reports in the mainstream press. The reports, nearly all citing anonymous sources within the DoJ, confirm that the investigation, which began during the Trump administration but was not disclosed by Hunter Biden until December 2020, has broadened in scope.

As of this writing, no official charges have been made against Hunter Biden or any other member of the Biden family.

Prominent articles on the federal investigation into the younger Biden’s international business dealings began to appear in mid-March. On March 16, the New York Times reported that the president’s son recently paid off an outstanding tax liability of over $1 million. Nevertheless, “a grand jury continued to gather evidence in a wide-ranging examination of his international business dealings, according to people familiar with the case,” the newspaper wrote.

Subsequent reports, citing sources within the DoJ, confirmed that witnesses with close ties to Hunter Biden, including former business and romantic partners, are being interviewed by a federal grand jury located in Wilmington, Delaware. Among them is former business associate and fellow Yale University alumnus Devon Archer.

Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, centre, his son Hunter Biden, left, and his sister Valerie Biden Owens, right (AP Photo/Visar Kryeziu)

Archer was sentenced to 13 months imprisonment in February for his participation in a fraud scheme, following his conviction in 2018. The operation involved defrauding the Oglala Sioux tribe of roughly $60 million in bonds.

While Hunter Biden was not involved in Archer’s fraud case, the former friends and business partners both sat on the board of the Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings, which, the DoJ has confirmed, is under investigation.

Hunter Biden was appointed to the Burisma board, despite having no experience in the field, during the period when his father, then vice president, served as the point-man for the Obama administration’s imperialist operations in Ukraine following the US-backed Maidan coup of February 2014.

Burisma paid Hunter Biden roughly $50,000 a month between 2014 and 2019. The money was wired to a Delaware-based corporation called Rosemont Seneca Bohai LLC, which was owned by Archer and registered by him on February 13, 2014. The company, according to a September 2020 report by Senate Republicans, acted as “a shell entity” to receive an estimated $3.5 million in payments from Burisma to Archer and Hunter Biden. In the same report, the Republicans detailed Hunter Biden’s business dealings in China.

Citing emails on Biden’s laptop, the Washington Post on March 30 confirmed that over a 14- month period, Hunter and his uncle, James Biden, received $4.8 million in “consulting fees” from the China Energy Company Limited (CEFC).

The fees were part of a contract signed by Biden and Dong Gongwen, president of CEFC, on August 2, 2017. In its article on the contract, the Washington Post reported that Hunter Biden “would get a one-time retainer of $500,000 and would then receive a monthly stipend of $100,000, with his uncle James Biden getting $65,000 a month.”

The Republicans are seeking to make these shady dealings a centerpiece of their 2022 midterm election campaign. Spearheaded by Trump’s fascist former White House adviser Stephen Bannon and Trump’s coup lawyer Rudy Giuliani, they are presenting Joe Biden as the head of a crime family that is in the thrall of the Chinese Communist Party. According to their conspiracy theory, the CCP, seeking to protect its “investment” in the Bidens, intervened in the 2020 presidential election to falsify the vote in favor of its preferred candidate.

While the federal investigation was originally centered on alleged tax violations and money laundering by Hunter Biden, recent press reports indicate that the government is also looking into whether Biden violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) by failing to register with the State Department.

The reports confirm evidence of self-dealing and corruption on the part of Hunter Biden, which one would be safe in assuming did not stop with him. Corruption is pervasive in the bourgeois political system and both of its corporate-controlled parties.

Under conditions of a global pandemic in which the financial oligarchy has enriched itself fabulously over the bodies of millions of workers, it is not surprising that its political puppets exploit their office for personal gain.

That, however, does not alter the fact that the Republican Party is massively implicated in the attempted coup of January 6, 2021 and is being transformed under its “Fuehrer” Trump into a fascistic party. The petty, or not-so-petty, corruption of the Bidens (as well as the Obamas, the Clintons, etc.) in no way lessens the danger to the working class represented by the growth of a fascist movement in the US.

In this connection, it is noteworthy that as evidence of widespread support for Trump’s coup attempt within the ruling class and its military, police and intelligence agencies has mounted, extending to the Supreme Court itself, Democratic-aligned organs such as the Washington Post and New York Times have taken to reporting details of Hunter Biden’s business dealings that were previously the specialty of right-wing, pro-Trump news outlets such as the New York Post .

When the latter began publishing articles on the subject in October 2020, the Washington Post and the Times dismissed them as “Russian disinformation.”

Last Monday, March 28, during a meeting of the House Select Committee on January 6 that voted unanimously to refer Trump accomplices Dan Scavino and Peter Navarro to Congress on criminal contempt charges, several committee members, including Democrats Elaine Luria, Adam Schiff and Zoe Lofgren, forcefully called on Attorney General Merrick Garland to bring charges against those previously referred to the DoJ for contempt of Congress.

“This committee is doing its job. The Department of Justice needs to do theirs,” demanded Lofgren. So far, only Bannon has been arraigned on criminal contempt of Congress charges, while former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, whom Congress voted to hold in contempt in December 2020, has yet to be arraigned.

Less than a week later, the New York Times published a front-page article titled “Garland Faces Growing Pressure as Jan. 6 Investigation Widens.” The Times reported that while “there is no indication that federal prosecutors are close to charging the former president,” Joe Biden was allegedly “aghast” that Trump’s inner circle could defy congressional subpoenas.

The Times reported that Biden expressed frustration “to his inner circle” late last year regarding Garland’s refusal to date to launch high-level prosecutions.

The very next day, White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain, appearing on ABC News’ “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” denied the reporting in the Times, telling his host, “I’ve never heard the president say that.” He hastened to add that Biden “has confidence in the attorney general.”

One day later, on Monday, April 4, Politico ran an interview with Lofgren in which the January 6 Committee member suggested there was no point in the committee sending a criminal referral against Trump to the Justice Department.

“A referral doesn’t mean anything,” Lofgren said. “It has no legal weight whatsoever.”

These developments underscore the role of the Democratic Party in covering up the fascist plot that culminated in the January 6, 2021 attempt to overthrow the US Constitution, and in keeping the working class in the dark about the ongoing and accelerating preparations for dictatorial rule.

Sri Lanka’s ruling coalition crumbles, but president refuses to resign

Saman Gunadasa


The Sri Lankan government of President Gotabhaya Rajapakse holds an unstable, wafer-thin majority in parliament amid widening anti-government protests fueled by desperate shortages of food items, fuel, medicines and electricity. Working people are compelled to wait for hours in long queues just to secure the essentials for life and then at exorbitant and rising prices.

The parliamentary session was called yesterday in the wake of the resignation of the entire cabinet except Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapakse, the president’s brother. President Rajapakse appealed to the opposition parties on Monday to take part in a new cabinet but was flatly rejected by the three major opposition parties—the Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB), Tamil National Alliance (TNA) and the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP).

Under the pressure of mass protests demanding the resignation of the president and the government, the ruling coalition is crumbling. Groups of government parliamentarians and minor coalition parties announced their decision in parliament to leave the government yesterday and sit as “independents”.

These included 12 members of Rajapakse’s own Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna, 16 from ten smaller parties, 14 from the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), and two from the plantation-based Ceylon Workers Congress. As a result, the government commands just 114 seats in the 225-seat parliament—as of yesterday at least.

Anti-government demonstration in Hatton on April 4 [WSWS Media]

President Rajapakse has bluntly rejected the demands of protesters for his resignation and has instead offered to swear in as the next government any party that can demonstrate a majority in parliament. The offer is a desperate and cynical offer to the opposition parties. Under the executive presidency, Rajapakse retained enormous powers, including to sack the government at any time.

The president also understands that for all their posturing, none of the opposition parties has any solution to the crisis, other than impose further burdens on working people. All of them defend the capitalist system to the hilt, which means putting corporate profits and repayments on huge foreign debt ahead of the essential needs of the majority. The SJB’s criticism of the government is that it should have begged for an IMF bailout sooner—in other words more austerity, sooner.

The immense political crisis of the government was underscored by the resignation yesterday of the newly appointed Finance Minister Ali Sabri and finance ministry secretary S.R. Artygala. Sabri’s resignation came less than 24 hours after his appointment on Monday, along with three other ministers to form a skeleton cabinet.

Sabri, who was the president’s personal lawyer, took over from Basil Rajapakse, who was due to go to Washington this week for discussions over an IMF bailout package. The turmoil in the finance ministry as well as central bank, whose governor resigned on Monday, is a measure of the country’s deep economic crisis.

March in Kandy demands Rajapakse resign, 4 April [WSWS Media]

The country which was hit hard by the pandemic as well as the government’s criminal “let it rip” policy that allowed COVID-19 to spread island-wide. The economic crisis dramatically escalated following global dislocation produced by the US-NATO proxy war with Russia in Ukraine.

Sri Lanka’s dwindling foreign reserves mean that it has no money to pay for imports of essential items. The country is on the brink of default. The country’s stock and bond markets have been stumbling due to the escalating crisis. On April 4, the All Share Price Index was down by 32.5 percent this year. Bloomberg labeled the Colombo Stock Exchange as the second-worst performer after Russia.

In parliament yesterday, Minister of Education and leader of the house Dinesh Gunawardane challenged the opposition to demonstrate that it has a majority and to inform the president that it can form government. No such demonstration took place.

In a demagogic speech, SJB leader Sajith Premadasa, who is also opposition leader, called on the president and the entire government to resign. “The time has come to change the executive presidency. Let us use this opportunity,” he declared. But neither Premadasa nor the leaders of the other opposition leaders outlined what they would do to address the economic and social crisis.

Protesting health workers from Balapitya Hospital in the south, 5 April [WSWS Media]

Premadasa’s call to “change the executive presidency” is a ruse to appeal to popular sentiment for an end to the autocratic presidential powers. Opposition parties have routinely called for changes to the executive presidency but when in office have done little or nothing to modify it. Premadasa’s failure to outline a single concrete measure is to hide the austerity agenda that the SJB would institute if in office.

The executive presidency must not simply be changed or modified. It must be abolished. Rajapakse holds sweeping powers not just to install or dismiss governments, but to arrogate to himself ministries and to rule by decree. He is currently defence minister which gives him control not only of Sri Lanka’s huge military apparatus but also the police.

The SJB is the majority breakaway from the right-wing United National Party, which changed the constitution to institute the executive presidency in 1978. Neither the SJB nor any of the other opposition parties has any intention of abolishing the executive presidency which has served the ruling class in times of crisis—such as the present—as the lever to marshal the state apparatus and security forces against the working class.

Yesterday Rajapakse ended the state of emergency, which can be reimposed at any time. He still has a battery of anti-democratic laws—including the ability to ban strikes in key public sectors. While offering to install an opposition government, which he can dispense with as he wishes, he is certainly involved in close talks with the military top brass, with whom he has the closest of relationships.

Workers and youth march in Galle to demand resignation of President Rajapakse, 5 April [WSWS Media]

Defence Secretary Kamal Gunaratna yesterday issued a thinly-veiled threat to protesters saying security forces will not hesitate to enforce the law against those involving in violence. He accused some protesters “of deliberately engaging in violent protests in an organised manner causing damage to public and private properties and disrupting the day-to-day life of the people on main roads and in public places.”

These comments are a warning that the current regime is prepared to exploit any pretext to mobilise the security forces to suppress the nation-wide protests. Rajapakse, who billed himself during the 2019 presidential election as the strongman needed to save Sri Lanka, has installed former and serving generals into key administrative powers, and has the power to impose dictatorial forms of rule.

The central demand of the protests is that Rajapakse has to resign. There is no question that Gota has got to go! But who and what government is to replace him? No faith can be placed in any of the opposition parties or combinations of parties—all of which have a proven track record of defending the interest of big business, the super-rich, foreign investors and above all, international finance capital.

Where the Nuclear Weapons Are and Who Has Them

Miles A. Pomper & Vasilii Tuganov



A U.S. Air Force jet performs a test drop of a B61-12 bomb in December 2021. That bomb can contain a nuclear warhead for use in wartime. Los Alamos National Laboratory.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has raised fears among the public about the use of nuclear weapons in Europe or against the United States. This level of concern has not been seen since the end of the Cold War.

NATO countries have been taken aback by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s implied threats to use nuclear weapons against “whoever interferes with us” in Ukraine, and his placement of additional nuclear officers on shifts under a “special regime of combat duty.”

Both Russia and the U.S. have thousands of nuclear weapons, most of which are five or more times more powerful than the atomic bombs that leveled Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. These include about 1,600 weapons on standby on each side that are capable of hitting targets across the globe. Those numbers are near the limits permitted under the 2011 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, often called “New START,” which is the only currently active nuclear arms control treaty between Russia and the U.S. Their arsenals include intercontinental ballistic missiles, better known as ICBMs, and submarine-launched ballistic missiles, as well as missiles launched from specialized aircraft. Many of those missiles can be equipped with multiple nuclear warheads that can independently hit different locations.

To ensure that countries follow the limits on warheads and missiles, the treaty includes methods for both sides to monitor and verify compliance. By 2018, both Russia and the U.S. had met their obligations under the New START, and in early 2021 the treaty was extended for five more years.

Both nations’ nuclear arsenals also include hundreds of shorter-range nuclear weapons, which are not covered by any treaty. Currently, Russia has nearly 2,000 of those, about 10 times as many as the United States, according to the most widely cited nongovernmental estimates.

About half of the roughly 200 U.S. shorter-range weapons are believed to be deployed in five NATO countries in Europe: Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey – though the U.S. does not confirm or deny their locations. In wartime, allied planes would take off from those locations and fly toward their targets before dropping the bombs.

Two other NATO members, France and the United Kingdom, also possess their own nuclear arsenals. They have several hundred nuclear weapons each – far fewer than the nuclear superpowers. France has both submarine-launched nuclear missiles and airplane-launched nuclear cruise missiles; the United Kingdom has only submarine-launched nuclear weapons. Both countries have publicly disclosed the size and nature of their arsenals, but neither country is or has been a party to U.S.-Russian arms control agreements.

The U.S., U.K. and France protect other NATO allies under their “nuclear umbrellas” in line with the NATO commitment that an attack on any one ally will be viewed as an attack on the entire alliance.

China’s nuclear arsenal is currently similar in size to the U.K. and French arsenals. But it’s growing rapidly, and some U.S. officials fear China is seeking parity with the United States. China, France and the U.K. are not subject to any arms control treaties.

IndiaPakistan and Israel have dozens of nuclear weapons each. None of them has signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, in which signatories agree to limit the ownership of nuclear weapons to the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, each of which possessed nuclear weapons before it was signed.

North Korea, which also has dozens of nuclear weapons, signed that treaty in 1985 but withdrew in 2003. North Korea has repeatedly tested nuclear weapons and the missiles to carry them.

There used to be nuclear weapons in other places, too. At the time the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the republics that became Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan had former Soviet nuclear weapons on their territory. In exchange for international assurances for their security, all three countries transferred their weapons to Russia.

Fortunately, none of these weapons have been used in war since the U.S. bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. But as recent events remind us, the risk of their use remains a frightening possibility.

War Crimes Will Only Make Things Worse for Russia as Ukrainians Prepare for a Fight to the Bitter End

Patrick Cockburn



Emergency servicemen carry a dead body found under rubble in Malyn city, Zhytomyr Oblast, after a Russian airstrike. Photograph Source: State Emergency Service of Ukraine – https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=329249785909584&set=pcb.329249925909570 – CC BY 4.0

As the bodies of Ukrainian civilians murdered by Russian soldiers are discovered in the streets and cellars of towns around Kyiv, the chances plummet of a compromise peace in the Ukrainian war. The likelihood of this happening was never high, but the slaughter will persuade many Ukrainians that they have no choice but to fight to a finish or at least until Russia troops are forced out of the country.

Massacres are the all-important staging posts of history – their influence often greater than that of famous battles – because they send a message to whole communities that their existence is threatened by a common enemy. If the aim of a mass killing is to intimidate a whole population, then experience from Amritsar to My-Lai shows that it usually has precisely the opposite effect. The death of 410 civilians at the hands of the Russian army in the town of Bucha outside Kyiv may well join the grisly list of massacres that permanently shape relations between nations.

Why did the Russian army carry out these crimes? They are much against the interests of the Kremlin, which five weeks ago had persuaded itself that part of the Ukrainian population would welcome Russian intervention with open arms. The atrocities were the more-or-less inevitable outcome of this ill-conceived invasion plan, rooted in wishful thinking and carried out by ill-disciplined and ill-trained troops. Poor-quality soldiers like this facing a hostile population are particularly dangerous in my experience, because they quickly come to believe that they are being spied on, sniped at and generally betrayed by the local population.


This is typical of troops who come under fire and are in a high state of paranoia as they look for somebody to blame. But, though the decision to execute an innocent villager is made on the spot by some frightened 20-year-old, this does not absolve the generals and politicians who have a fair idea of what is going on even if they have not given direct orders for the killings. They may privately imagine that “a whiff of grapeshot” will suppress local opposition, blind to the fact that it promotes it and legitimises it.

Massacres everywhere have common features, but those carried out by Russian troops in north Ukraine are typified by feckless violence by troops, frequently drunk going by the number of discarded vodka and whiskey bottles around their positions, who see all civilians as hostile and fair game, even when they are obviously families in flight.

Paradoxically, the corpses of the dead are only being found now because Russian negotiators announced last week during peace talks with a Ukrainian delegation in Istanbul that it was pulling back its forces around Kyiv and Chernihiv in the north of the country as a gesture of goodwill. It is a measure of the disconnected nature of the Russian war effort that no attempt was made to remove evidence of atrocities before the retreat took place, aside from a few botched attempts to burn bodies.

Images of these ill-concealed murders are horrifying the world, but diverting attention from an undoubted Russian failure in north Ukraine. A few Russian troops were said to be still present on Monday around Chernihiv, which is close to the Belarus border, but they have gone from around Kyiv. These forces are likely to be moved to reinforce Russian positions in the Donbas in south-east Ukraine but are reported to have suffered heavy casualties and loss of equipment so they will need to refit and reorganise.

The Russian retreat and the revelations about atrocities and possible war crimes will impact the way other nations view the war, tipping the balance towards those who want to see Russia defeated in Ukraine, and against those who want a compromise peace with President Putin, allowing him to say that he achieved something by his war. Meanwhile, those who argue for a total ban on the import of Russian oil and gas into Europe will be strengthened and will have greater popular support.

Such a furious reaction to the latest butchery may be understandable, but it will not necessarily be good for the 44 million Ukrainians. Monstrous though the killings are, the war could get a lot worse yet if Russia engages in so-called “meat-grinder” tactics in south-east Ukraine, pounding cities into submission or destruction. Russia may have done badly on the battlefield so far, but it is by no means defeated. It has tactics it has not used – such as destroying the Ukrainian electricity grid as the US did in Iraq 1991. It has vast reserves of manpower it could still mobilise. If Putin used poison gas, Ukraine refugees fleeing to the rest of the Europe would be numbered in the tens of millions.

Most important, there is no sign of Putin changing his mind about the war or being influenced by who would like to change it. Opposition to his invasion in Russia has ebbed since the period immediately after it had taken place because of wall-to-wall propaganda in state-controlled media, repression of open dissent – and a sense among Russians that they are all bring targeted because they are Russians, and not just because of Ukraine.

Oligarchs who once lived partly in the West have been forced back to Russia, making them more dependent than previously on the Kremlin. Prolonged economic sanctions and consequent unemployment might eventually cause discontent, but Russia is self-reliant in oil, gas and foodstuffs.

The only way to stop atrocities in Ukraine is to end a war which is unlikely to produce a clear winner. But in the wake of the latest killings this looks less and less likely. Russia, Ukraine and its backers all have reasons to end the war, but perhaps even stronger motives for fighting even harder.

German federal and state governments end coronavirus protection measures

Tamino Dreisam


The last coronavirus protective measures expired across Germany over the weekend, even as around 300 people are dying every day from COVID-19 with more than 200,000 infections. The federal and state governments are taking their policy of deliberate mass infection to extremes in the interests of big business. They are making it clear there can be no restrictions whatsoever that may limit profit maximisation—even if this costs hundreds of lives every day.

On March 18, the Bundestag (federal parliament) passed a new Infection Protection Act that reduces the pandemic measures to so-called “basic protections” consisting of mandatory mask wearing and testing in a few places. The federal states were allowed to adopt a two-week transitional rule consisting of mandatory mask wearing, which most states did, with rules for accessing certain public venues for 2G individuals (those recovered or fully vaccinated) and 3G (those recovered, fully vaccinated or with a negative test). This expired on April 2.

Health Minister Karl Lauterbach (right) and Chancellor Olaf Scholz (both SPD) (Photo: SPD/Twitter)

From now on, masks will only need to be worn in nursing homes, hospitals and local and long-distance public transport. Masks are not compulsory in shops, nurseries or schools. In Germany’s most populous state, North Rhine-Westphalia, state Education Minister Yvonne Gebauer (Liberal Democratic Party, FDP), explicitly instructed schools to no longer make masks compulsory. With an incidence rate of over 2,000 per 100,000 in some schools, this is tantamount to a policy of deliberate infection.

The new Infection Protection Act provides for the possibility of stricter measures in so-called “hotspot areas,” but even these are limited to mandatory FFP2 masks in more areas, a 1.5-metre social distancing rule indoors and 3G and 2G regulations. These are all completely inadequate measures, as the current wave of infections shows.

Moreover, the decision as to when a region is considered a hotspot lies in the hands of the state parliaments, and they are signaling their refusal to do so. Up to now, only two federal states, Hamburg and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, have declared that they will resort to the hotspot regulation. Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Berlin, Brandenburg, Lower Saxony, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saxony and Schleswig-Holstein have explicitly ruled this out.

The ruling class is fully aware of the consequences of its policies. A particularly foul role is being played by Federal Health Minister Karl Lauterbach (Social Democratic Party, SPD), a trained medical doctor and epidemiologist, who regularly warns of the consequences of mass infections, which he then organises himself.

On Wednesday, he wrote on Twitter: “Long COVID leaves tens of thousands chronically ill, that doesn’t make it flu. We have no treatment. Even vaccinated people infected with Omicron are getting hit, so be careful.” And on Saturday he said the risk of getting infected had “rarely been higher than it is now. Epidemiologically, it would have been right to stick to the mask wearing requirement. But legally it was not possible ...”

He could hardly have been more brazen. The “legal” basis for ending compulsory mask wearing and all other measures was created by the coalition government itself. Their first official act was to end the legal designation of a “national epidemic emergency.” Lauterbach’s public crocodile tears over coronavirus deaths—“That is not acceptable. It’s a plane crash every day,” he recently declared—are hypocrisy of the first order. He and the entire ruling class are responsible for these deaths.

With the government’s latest decisions, many more will be added to the nearly 130,000 coronavirus deaths in Germany. The situation is out of control, and both the number of infections and the number of severe outcomes are increasing rapidly. Within one week, the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) registered 1.5 million infections. The nationwide incidence rate is over 1,500. Some 123 districts have an incidence level of over 2,000, with 7 even over 3,000.

The actual numbers, however, are far higher. The overloading of public health offices and the lack of public testing capacities mean there is a very high number of unreported cases. Lauterbach himself recently admitted that the infection figures were actually “more than twice as high.” Moreover, individual states such as Baden-Württemberg and Brandenburg do not report their data every weekday.

The drastic levels of infection are also reflected in the peaking of sick leave due to illness with the virus. According to an evaluation by the Barmer Institute for Health Care Systems Research (BifG), for example, 52,100 people were unable to work due to infections in the week from February 13 to 19. At the crest of the first wave, the number was 25,100. On a national average, 139 out of 10,000 people are currently unable to work.

The ruling class, which sees the maximisation of profits endangered by high labour absences, is increasingly concerned. But instead of responding with protective measures, quarantine and isolation, rules continue to be adjusted to force even infected and potentially infected people into work.

In January, the quarantine period was shortened to 10 days, with a release option after 7 days. Now, a draft regulation by the federal Health Ministry and the RKI, which was sent to the federal states on Wednesday, envisages reducing quarantine for infected persons and contacts to as little as 5 days. The formal ordering of quarantine by the health authorities is to be dropped, effectively making quarantining purely voluntary.

Scientists and epidemiologists warn of the dramatic consequences of the present government course. “Infections [will] thus also be carried back into the layers that have been able to protect themselves well up to now—in nursing homes, workshops for the disabled, i.e., the vulnerable groups,” explained infection modeler Thorsten Lehr, professor of clinical pharmacy at the University of Saarbrücken.

There is already an increase in severe outcomes, which disproves the myth of Omicron as a “milder variant.” On March 31 alone, 2,061 people had to be hospitalised. The adjusted hospitalisation rate is already close to 15 per 100,000, which corresponds to about 12,000 hospitalisations per week.

Intensive care units are also filling up. Currently, 2,332 people require intensive care, and between 200 and 300 new people enter ICUs every day. At 9.4 percent, the proportion of free intensive care beds is already below the 10 percent level considered the threshold for hospital responsiveness and which hospitals try not to fall below.

The German Hospital Federation (DKG) also expects an even stronger increase in the number of intensive care patients. DKG Board Chairman Gerald Gaß told Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland: “We will also see a stronger increase in the number of patients in intensive care units in the coming weeks.” The many staff absences are also particularly problematic. “Three out of four hospitals must restrict services because staff are absent,” he said. “This is due to infections, quarantine, or care for children who have tested positive.”

There is widespread popular opposition to the government’s herd immunity policy. A survey by the opinion research institute Forsa (Institute for Social Research and Statistical Analysis), commissioned by broadcaster RTL, showed that a clear majority rejects the relaxation of the coronavirus protective measures: 65 percent consider the lifting of nationwide uniform measures premature; 69 percent think compulsory mask wearing should remain in place in most areas. While 61 percent think the introduction of compulsory vaccination is the right thing to do, only 16 percent believe the government will introduce it.

UK: British ruling elite imposes “historic shock to real incomes” of the working class

Robert Stevens & Chris Marsden


Every household in Britain was hit by a crushing rise in energy bills on April 1. A staggering 54 percent rise means an average annual increase of £693 (from £1,277 to £1,971), or £57.75 a month. For the 4.5 million of people on pre-payment meters, the poorest in society, the price hike is worse, at £708, taking an average annual bill from £1,309 to £2,017 (an extra £59 a month).

Another rise in the cap by a projected 42 percent this October will cost a further £830 a year, cumulatively doubling the average annual bill to around £2,800.

Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak leaves No11 Downing Street to deliver his 2021 Budget to the House of Commons. 27/10/2021. (Picture by Luca Boffa / No 10 Downing Street/FlickR)

Many customers have reported suppliers more than doubling direct debit payments. Several supplier websites crashed Thursday as customers tried to submit meter readings to pre-empt price rises.

The energy price increase is regressive, with the poorest and most vulnerable hardest hit—those on benefits or with severe medical conditions, the disabled, the working poor, single people and pensioners. Many pensioners now face starvation.

The energy price increase follows Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s spring budget that merely reduced fuel duty by a negligible 5 pence a litre, a measure quickly negated by price rises at the pumps.

Faced with a hike in fuel bills dwarfing any one-off cost of living increase in history, Sunak delivered another kick in the teeth. He would only grant households £200 off their energy bills in October, but this must be paid back to the state by households at a rate of £40 a year over five years from 2023.

The price hike takes place even though between 2016 and 2020 Britain’s main five energy companies pulled in £7.7 billion in profit. It spearheads a broader cost-of-living crisis dragging millions over the edge when 14 million in Britain are already classed as living in poverty.

As the government fully reopened the economy last summer, Sunak cut the £20 weekly uplift in the Universal Credit benefit relied on by the poorest, including over two million low-paid workers. It was the largest ever one-off cut to welfare benefits in history. What is coming is far worse, and many people will be unable to heat their homes, buy food or travel.

Inflation is surging towards 10 percent, its highest in 40 years. Already between January 2021 and January 2022, food prices increased by five percent. Many food items have surged by over 10 percent and up to 16 percent. Lateral flow tests are now to cost £3 each, or £20 for a box of seven. Broadband, phone, and TV contracts are rising by at least £42 a year.

Petrol is up 39 percent, or £23 per tank. The cost of filling an average family car is now above £90 for the first time. The highest train fare rises for nine years came into force in March after a 3.8 percent rise. An average commuter will now pay £3,263 for a train season ticket, 49 percent more than in 2010.

Among other measures set to seize hundreds more pounds annually from workers are the 10 percent increase in national insurance taxation from April 1 and a rise in the VAT sales tax. VAT in the hospitality sector was reduced to five percent during the pandemic. But last October the cut was partially reversed, going to 12.5 percent, and this week it was back to 20 percent.

Council tax is set to rise by around 3 percent, with payments for those in properties in the average Band D rising by £67 to nearly £2,000 a year. Overall, water bills will increase by 1.7 percent from April, by £7 to £419, but some regions are seeing hikes of up to 10.8 percent.

Bank of England interest rate increases will hit the average family in the pocket by £295.

Taking every increase into account, households face a staggering and unaffordable increase of £2,620 in their bills and other costs.

De facto fuel and food rationing is already taking place, with the Office for National Statistics stating that 34 percent of those reporting rising living costs are using less gas and electricity at home and 31 percent are cutting their food shop. Half have cut back on non-essentials.

Low-income households that spend a far larger proportion of their income on energy and food will be significantly more impacted. The Resolution Foundation estimates an extra 1.3 million people will fall into absolute poverty in 2023, including 500,000 children.

The money being gouged from the working class is meant to claw back the hundreds of billions in public spending during the pandemic, most of which was handed over to the corporations and super-rich. Last week, Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey declared that events in Ukraine had accelerated the stagflation crisis and Britons faced an “historic shock to real incomes”.

Bailey only last month insisted that the cost-of-living crisis meant that workers’ pay rise demands should be opposed.

Friedrich Engels, the co-founder with Karl Marx of scientific socialism, wrote in The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1845 that due to the “social warfare” of the bourgeoisie against the working class, “every man’s house is in a state of siege”. He described the “barbarous indifference” of the ruling class to the distress of the population. These observations sum up the agenda of the ruling class today.

It can only organise and impose this historic assault on living standards because it is the agreed policy of not just the Conservative government, but its de facto coalition partners, the Labour Party and the trade unions.

Labour now advances itself as the party of “low taxation”, with Sir Keir Starmer telling the Confederation of British Industry in November that he represented “the party of business… We really don’t think that the solution to every problem is to throw cash at it.” In line with this pledge, Starmer is only calling on the Tories to implement a “windfall tax” on North Sea oil and gas producers “to reduce those energy bills by up to £600 pounds for those that need it most.” He stressed that this would be a “one off” tax to “deal with the immediate crisis”.

Starmer’s proposal is made only to conceal the fact that workers are being impoverished by companies making a financial killing from the real killing taking place in Ukraine, due to rising global fuel prices. Exxon Mobil Corp’s first-quarter production results, for example, are set for a seven-year quarterly record, with operating profits of up to $9.3 billion. This takes place as the Centre for Economics and Business Research has warned of four more years of massive energy bills, until 2026, due to a war deliberately provoked by NATO, with household energy costs likely reaching £400 in a single month next winter.

In this desperate situation for workers, what is offered by the still acknowledged head of the Labour “left”? Former party leader Jeremy Corbyn spoke Saturday at a tiny protest outside Downing Street organised by the People’s Assembly, offering as his proposed solution a “price cap on gas and electricity bills and for energy companies to be taken into public ownership”—a policy just as anathema to his own party as it is for the Tories.