Biden’s summits in South Korea and Japan strengthen anti-China alliances

Ben McGrath

US President Joe Biden concludes his trip to Northeast Asia today, his first to the region since taking office. Holding summits with South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on Saturday and Monday respectively, Biden’s goal has been to prepare allies for stepping up Washington’s confrontation with China.

His meetings in Seoul and Tokyo hit many of the same points, checking the many anti-China boxes, including demonizing Beijing over territorial disputes in the region and challenging Beijing over Taiwan. Though Biden’s joint statement with Yoon did not explicitly mention China, the target was clear. Biden and Kishida were far less restrained, however, criticizing Beijing over territorial disputes in the East and South China Seas and hypocritically expressing concerns over “human rights” in Hong Kong and Xinjiang.

U.S. President Joe Biden, left, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi speak at the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity launch event at the Izumi Garden Gallery, Monday, May 23, 2022, in Tokyo. [AP Photo/Evan Vucci]

Washington also hopes that Biden’s trip will help facilitate better relations between Seoul and Tokyo. For more than a decade now, bilateral relations between South Korea and Japan have been bitter, with Seoul exploiting anti-Japanese sentiment to distract from deteriorating domestic conditions and Tokyo’s remilitarization also raising concerns. Yoon’s new administration has pledged to improve relations with Tokyo.

In Seoul, Biden and Yoon announced that they would take steps to expand military cooperation as “both leaders agree to initiate discussions to expand the scope and scale of combined military exercises and training on and around the Korean Peninsula.” Biden also made clear that “the US extended deterrence commitment” to South Korea, included “using the full range of US defense capabilities, including nuclear, conventional, and missile defense capabilities.”

In addition, Biden and Yoon agreed to restart the Extended Deterrence Strategy and Consultation Group “at the earliest date.” The group, which has not met since January 2018, is a forum for discussing strategic and policy issues regarding so-called extended deterrence, including the use of nuclear weapons. Within South Korean ruling circles, conservatives are calling for the return of US nuclear weapons to the country.

Biden made similar assurances to Kishida while in Tokyo, including “the US commitment to the defense of Japan under the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, backed by the full range of capabilities, including nuclear.” In addition, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party initiated a debate in March over the possibility of hosting US nuclear weapons.

These measures are not aimed at impoverished North Korea, as is so often claimed, but at China. Even as Washington escalates its proxy war in Ukraine against Russia, the US is making clear to its allies that military preparations targeting Beijing are continuing unabated.

In fact, while Biden and Yoon made their customary denunciations of Pyongyang, they also extended an offer of “humanitarian aid” to deal with the massive COVID-19 outbreak in North Korea. Washington hopes to entice North Korea out of China’s orbit with promises of economic aid, thereby neutralizing Pyongyang in the event of war with Beijing, or even bringing the North in on the side of US imperialism. For that reason, Biden expressed support for Yoon’s “audacious” plan to strengthen the North Korean economy.

On the other hand, the US has sought to ramp up tensions over Taiwan in Tokyo and Seoul by challenging the “One China” policy, which states that Taiwan is a part of China and is formally accepted in Washington.

During a joint press conference with Kishida on Monday, Biden, when asked if the US would intervene militarily over Taiwan, the US president responded, “Yes. That’s the commitment we made.”

The White House tried to downplay the comment, saying there is no change in US policy. However, it is clear that Washington, first under Trump and now under Biden, intends to chip away at the “One China” policy while accusing Beijing of planning an invasion of Taiwan without any evidence. The purpose is to goad Beijing into taking military action in much the same way Washington did in Ukraine with Russia.

In addition to Biden’s comment on Monday, the US president made sure to include references to Taiwan in the joint statements with Yoon and Kishida, calling for “peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.” This is not an innocent remark, but a calculated inclusion meant to undermine the “One China” policy and Beijing’s legitimacy as the government of China.

Tokyo has also used the tensions instigated by Washington to justify remilitarization, with Tokyo declaring in the summit statement: “Prime Minister Kishida stated his determination to fundamentally reinforce Japan’s defense capabilities and secure substantial increase of its defense budget needed to effect it. President Biden strongly supported Prime Minister Kishida’s determination.”

Tokyo plans to further increase its military spending from the already record amounts to better project its military power overseas in the name of “collective self-defense,” the pretext used to override Article 9 of its constitution that nominally forbids Japan to maintain armed forces and use them to further its imperialist interests.

The economic aspect of Biden’s trip focused on securing supply chains is also part of Washington’s war preparations. While in South Korea, Biden toured a semiconductor plant, declaring afterwards that Washington would ensure “our economic and our national security are not dependent on countries that don’t share our values,” an obvious reference to China.

The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) launched on Monday is another component. Biden stated that 13 nations would initially take part in the plan, including both Japan and South Korea. The IPEF is meant to offset the economic influence of Beijing in the region and reduce reliance on the Chinese economy, facilitating the overall war drive. However, as Biden is pursuing the deal through executive orders so as not to risk opposition in Congress, any deal will be unable to offer access to US markets, making it far less attractive to join.

Biden will conclude his trip with a summit of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), a US-led quasi-military alliance aimed at China that includes Japan, Australia, and India. The purpose of Biden’s trip to Asia is to consolidate military alliances against China and reassure allies that the US/NATO proxy war in Ukraine is not a distraction from its preparations for war in Asia.

Sri Lanka defaults on foreign debts, prepares to implement IMF austerity

Saman Gunadasa

Sri Lanka missed its foreign debt repayments on May 18, amid a rapidly worsening economic and political crisis. The country was unable to pay $US78 million in interest on two sovereign bonds due on May 18, after one-month grace period.

Sri Lanka is the first country in the Asia-Pacific to default on its foreign debt in more than two decades since Pakistan defaulted in 1999. The Guardian warned: “Economists fear Sri Lanka could be first of several, with the IMF [International Monetary Fund] in talks with Egypt, Tunisia and Pakistan.”

Central Bank Governor Nandalal Weerasinghe [Image: CBSL Twitter]

Sri Lanka first declared its inability to make repayments on $51 billion foreign loans on their due dates on April 12, citing shortage of dollar reserves but insisting this was not a “hard default.” The Central Bank of Sri Lanka expected to establish a negotiated consensus with creditors for “debt restructuring” before the repayment dates.

However, the political crisis of the government led by President Gotabhaya Rajapakse has only intensified over the past month. Daily anti-government protests are widespread against unending price increases and shortages of essentials such as food, medicine, fuel, cooking gas as well as lengthy power cuts.

After a general strike on April 28, millions joined the general strike on May 6 that embraced every section of the working class. It was backed by the poor and oppressed and small businesses, shutting down almost the entire economy.

Then Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapakse was forced to resign on May 9 after his Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) thugs physically assaulted the anti-government protesters including those occupying Galle Face Green in central Colombo, provoking retaliatory attacks.

After imposing a state of emergency on May 6 and deploying military on the streets with orders to shoot rioters on sight since May 10, President Rajapakse appointed United National Party leader Ranil Wickremesinghe to be prime minister and implement the IMF’s austerity demands.

A disparate cabinet of 19 ministers has been cobbled together, picking up MPs from the opposition parties and also Rajapakse’s SLPP. Of them, eight were sworn in only yesterday. However, Rajapakse and Wickremesinghe have failed as yet to fill the key post of finance minister.

Central Bank Governor Nandalal Weerasinghe last Thursday said the default was announced in advance and claimed: “Our position is very clear. Until they [lenders] come and restructure, we can’t pay.”

On May 11, Weerasinghe was threatening to quit his post if there was no political stability. However, last Thursday he said he made the statement then because there was no prime minister or cabinet, and “there was a lot of violence and political instability.” Now, he claimed, “there is a significant improvement,” while acknowledging there was still no finance minister to sign a loan agreement with the IMF.

Weerasinghe did not reveal details of the IMF program. However, he admitted that inflation is expected to reach 40 percent during the next couple of months—up from 30 percent in April. In other words, there will be no end to the intolerable conditions facing workers and the poor, many of whom are now threatened with starvation.

Sri Lanka is expecting $3 to $4 billon from the IMF. The technical discussions with the IMF on a bailout loan are scheduled to conclude today. Its spokesman Gerry Rice Sunday said: “We remain committed to help Sri Lanka in line with the IMF policies …” However, finalizing the loan agreement will take another three months.

IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva speaking to the BBC yesterday declared: “Governments need to subsidise the cost of food and energy for the poorest members of society and without the correct support, the protests seen in Sri Lanka could be repeated in other countries.”

However, the IMF prescription for the bailout loan will deepen the attacks on the social rights and living standards of working people, pushing many more into poverty.

As part of its demands for “debt sustainability,” the IMF has proposed among other things the privatisation of public enterprises; the reduction of public spending to curtail the budget deficit; and increased direct and indirect taxes to enhance the state revenue.

These measures will be translated into severe cuts to jobs, wages and pensions. Welfare programs will be slashed in the guise of providing targeted support for the most vulnerable.

Addressing the nation on May 16, Prime Minster Wickremesinghe warned of what was to come, saying: “The next couple of months will be the most difficult ones of our lives. We must prepare ourselves to make some sacrifices and face the challenges of this period.”

He proposed the privatization of Sri Lankan Airlines and hinted at further privatizations, saying the government “can no longer bear the losses” of the Petroleum Corporation or Electricity Board.

The economic crisis in Sri Lanka has been fueled by the global COVID-19 pandemic and compounded by the US-NATO proxy war in Ukraine against Russia. The increases in interest rates by the US Federal Reserve Bank and other central banks and sharply rising inflation are adding to the economic turmoil in Sri Lanka as in other countries.

In line with the IMF’s demands, the Central Bank doubled the interest rates. Since early March, Sri Lanka’s exchange rate has been allowed to float according to market forces leading to a devaluation of the rupee by about 80 percent.

According to the Central Bank annual report issued on April 30, Sri Lanka’s real gross domestic product (GDP) growth for 2022 is projected to decline to 1 percent, downgraded from an earlier estimate of 5.5 percent. Per capita gross domestic product was $3,815 in 2021 and is expected to decline to $3,041 this year.

Within ruling circles there is no opposition to the IMF’s austerity agenda. The opposition Samagi Jana Balawegaya has repeatedly criticized the government for failing to seek emergency finance from the IMF sooner. The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) has remained silent on the issue, but has not opposed the IMF negotiations or proposed any alternative.

The trade unions have sought to shut down any industrial action by the working class as soon as possible. Like the political establishment as a whole, the unions were terrified by the extent of support for the two general strikes. Over the past year, there have a series of major workers’ struggles demanding higher wages and improved conditions.

Significantly, not a single trade union has publicly opposed the planned IMF austerity program and its far-reaching attacks on the living conditions of workers and the poor.

Oxfam report: As millions face starvation food giants’ profits soar

Nick Beams

Hundreds of millions of people around the world are being hit by unprecedented food price inflation and shortages and are confronting outright starvation. But the giant companies that dominate food production and distribution are raking in money like never before.

Malnourished children wait for treatment in the pediatric department of Boulmiougou hospital in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. (AP Photo/Sophie Garcia) [AP Photo/Sophie Garcia]

The food crisis, resulting from total subordination of the means of life to capitalist profit, forms a centrepiece of the latest update on global inequality prepared by the UK-based aid agency Oxfam. This is in advance of the World Economic Forum meeting, the gathering of the world’s economic and financial elites, being held in Davos, Switzerland, this week.

The inflationary food crisis, set off as a result of the refusal of capitalist governments to take action to eliminate the COVID-19 pandemic, has been intensified by the US-led NATO proxy war against Russia in Ukraine.

Last week UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said global hunger levels were at a new high, with the number of food insecure people doubling from 135 million to 276 million in the past two years.

With the supplies of fertilisers and other agricultural inputs severely disrupted, the crisis has no end in sight.

The latest Oxfam report details how global agribusinesses, as well as the energy companies, are profiting out of this human misery.

Global food prices have risen by 33.5 percent in the past two years and are expected to rise by another 23 percent this year. March recorded the biggest leap in food prices since the UN began collecting food price data in 1990.

“Corporations and the billionaire dynasties who control so much of our food system are seeing their profits soar. the report said, noting that 62 food billionaires had been created in the last two years.

The report directed particular attention to the global food giant Cargill, one of the world’s largest private companies and one of four firms that control more than 70 percent of the global market for agricultural products.

The combined wealth of Cargill family members has increased by $14.4 billion since 2020, a rise of 65 percent. It grew by almost $20 million a day during the pandemic, driven by food price rises, especially for grains.

The company had a net income of $5 billion during 2021, the biggest in its history, and paid out $1.13 billion in dividends largely to family members. It is expected to make record profits again this year.

Cargill is not the only one raking in the money. One of its main rivals, the agricultural trading firm Louis Dreyfus reported that its profits surged by 82 percent last year on the back of rising grain and oilseed prices.

At the other end of the food supply chain, Oxfam noted that the US supermarket chain Walmart paid out $16 billion last year in the form of dividends and share buybacks to holders of its stock. Just 5.9 percent of an average basket of groceries went to small-scale farmers.

The average annual salary for the Walmart employee is just $20,942 but if the money handed out to shareholders was devoted to the company’s 1.6 million employees average wages would rise to $30,904 per week.

The other major beneficiary of the inflation crisis, driving down the living conditions of workers all over the world, are the major oil companies which have doubled their profit margins in the two years of the pandemic. The price of crude oil has risen by 53 percent over the past year and natural gas by 148 percent. The energy price hikes are a significant contributor to the rise in food and transport costs.

“The companies that are part of the world’s energy supply chain are making a killing [quite literally in view of the threat of starvation] out of these prices increases. Over the past year, profits across the energy sector have increased by 45 percent… Billionaires in the oil, gas and coal sector have seen their wealth increase by $53.5 billion [24 percent] in real terms in the past two years,” the report said.

The same picture is revealed in the pharmaceutical industry where the pandemic has resulted in the creation of 43 new billionaires, “profiting from the monopolies their companies hold over vaccines, treatments, tests and personal protective equipment.”

When such issues are raised, the reply of the “free market” defenders is that this wealth is the justifiable “reward” for entrepreneurship and spending on research without which the development of new drugs and vaccines would not take place.

This has always been a lie and never more so. As the report noted, most of the fortunes of the new pharma billionaires “is thanks to billions in public funding—for instance, from R&D grants and procurement” by governments.

Moderna, whose only product is a COVID-19 vaccine, has a 70 percent profit margin. “It has been immensely successful in turning $10 billion government funding in the US… into around $12 billion vaccine profits to date.”

The company has created four vaccine billionaires with a combined personal wealth of $10 billion while just 1 percent of its vaccines have gone to poorer countries. At the same time, it has refused to cooperate with efforts to establish local manufacturing in low- and middle-income countries.

The story is the same at Pfizer. The profit margin on its vaccine is 43 percent and last year it paid out $8.7 billion in dividends. In order to protect its profit flow, Pfizer has joined with other pharmaceutical companies to prevent the waiver of intellectual property rights that would see vaccine prices fall sharply. Millions of dollars have been spent on lobbying operations to try to prevent this happening.

In its overall analysis of the inflationary crisis and the explosion of billionaire wealth, the report noted that billionaires have increased their wealth as much in 24 months as they did in the previous 23 years, with those in the food and energy sectors increasing their fortunes by a billion dollars every two days.

A new billionaire “has been minted on average every 30 hours during the pandemic,” while in the same amount of time one million people are being pushed into extreme poverty.

It noted that the increase in billionaire wealth has resulted from the injection of trillions of dollars into the financial system. On top of this, there has been a “profit bonanza” and the strengthening of monopoly control over the economy with estimates that in the US “expanding corporate profits are responsible for 60 percent of increases in inflation.”

The report continued Oxfam’s advocacy for a series of wealth taxes, noting that a progressive wealth tax starting at 2 percent for those with wealth above $5 million and rising to 5 percent for wealth above $1 billion could generate $2.52 trillion worldwide, enough to lift 2.3 billion people out of poverty and provide health care for 3.6 billion lower income countries.

Such calculations are valuable in as much as they demonstrate there are more than sufficient resources available to reconstruct the global economy on the basis of social equality. But the political perspective being presented, namely that reasonable measures can be advanced to convince the ruling elites to change course, is bankrupt.

In fact, it is refuted by some of the concluding comments in the report: “Oxfam is above all underlining that the rapid rise in billionaire wealth today and the cost-of-living crisis faced by billions of people are one and the same phenomenon. This is not something that is just happening on their watch but that has been deliberately crafted with their support.”

As it escalates war against Russia, Biden administration threatens war against China

Andre Damon

On Saturday, US President Joe Biden signed a bill authorizing $40 billion in spending, largely for weapons and other assistance to Ukraine.

One month ago, US military assistance to Ukraine under the Biden administration totaled $4 billion. With the stroke of a pen, Biden has expanded the US commitment to the conflict tenfold.

But with the ink barely dry on the latest weapons shipment, Washington went on to escalate the conflict further. On Monday, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced that the US would provide Ukraine with Harpoon anti-ship missiles via an intermediary, Denmark. The Harpoon is the standard anti-ship armament of the US Navy, capable of sinking large warships.

The USS Coronado (LCS 4) launches a Harpoon Block 1C missile.

On Friday, Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs adviser Anton Gerashchenko tweeted that “The US is preparing a plan to destroy the [Russian] Black Sea Fleet” as part of a “plan to unblock the ports.” He continued, “Deliveries of powerful anti-ship weapons (Harpoon and Naval Strike Missile with a range of 250–300 km) are being discussed.”

The Pentagon responded by officially denying that the US is actively planning operations to destroy Russia’s navy in the Black Sea. However, Monday’s announcement makes clear that it is engaged in precisely such an operation. The US was already directly involved in the sinking of the flagship of the Russian fleet, Moskva, last month.

As usual, military escalation by the United States is accompanied by a propaganda barrage. In this case, the apologists of US imperialism are declaring that greater involvement in military operations in the Black Sea is dictated by the need to open the ports for global food shipments.

The Washington Post published an editorial entitled “Putin is starving millions of people around the world.” It concludes, “with 20 million metric tons of grain and corn just sitting in storage at Ukrainian ports right now, there’s only so much the rest of the world can do. Mr. Putin’s war is on the verge of becoming Mr. Putin’s global famine.”

The Post’s hypocrisy is jaw-dropping. The United States is the world’s leading practitioner of using starvation as a “weapon” of foreign policy. In 1974, Secretary of Agriculture Earl Butz declared, “food is a weapon. It is now one of the principal tools in our negotiating kit.” In December 1980, John Block, Reagan’s secretary of agriculture, told reporters: “I believe food is the greatest weapon we have.”

The examples of the US using starvation as a weapon include withholding food aid to Chile in 1973 as part of a successful effort to overthrow the government of Salvador Allende and cutting food assistance to Bangladesh in 1974 during a massive famine to punish the country for trading with Cuba.

US sanctions on food and medicine imported by Iraq in the 1990s contributed to the preventable deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, while US sanctions against Iran led to runaway food price inflation, meaning that “following a healthy diet has become more difficult for most Iranians,” according to one study.

As for the present ongoing food crisis, fundamental responsibility lies with the US and NATO powers, which provoked the current conflict and have sought at every point to scuttle efforts at a negotiated solution to the war.

Establishing control over the Black Sea is a vital US war aim. This waterway connects Europe, Russia and the Middle East. It not only holds critical reserves of oil and gas, but serves as a nodal point for hydrocarbon pipelines connecting Europe and Asia.

Even as the United States was escalating its war with Russia, Biden openly threatened to go to war with China, the world’s most populous country and its second-largest economy.

Speaking at a press conference in Japan, Biden was asked, “Are you willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan if it comes to that?”

Biden replied, “Yes… That’s the commitment we made.”

Despite efforts by the media to present Biden’s comment as a misstatement or a “gaffe,” the reality is that Biden’s remark corresponds with the views of leading US foreign policy figures.

Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote on Twitter, “This is the third time @potus has spoken out in favor of strategic clarity on Taiwan and third time WH [White House] staff has tried to walk it back. Better to embrace it as new US stance.”

Supporting Biden’s declaration that the US should go to war with China over Taiwan, Haass declared, “The ‘Ukraine model’ [is] inadequate for Taiwan. Taiwan [is] an island that cannot be easily resupplied. Plus local partners & allies in Asia want direct US intervention. Plus Taiwan not nearly as strong as Ukraine. So direct US military involvement would be essential for defense vs China.”

The US-provoked war against Russia in Ukraine has already killed tens of thousands of people and displaced millions. The war against China Biden is threatening would turn the entire Asia-Pacific region, the world’s most populous area, into a war zone, with devastating and incalculable consequences.

Far-reaching plans for military escalation were in place long before Biden even reached the White House. In 2020, Biden published an article entitled “Rescuing U.S. Foreign Policy After Trump” in Foreign Affairs.

Biden pledged, “to counter Russian aggression, we must keep the alliance’s military capabilities sharp.” At the same time, the United States needs to “get tough with China,” he wrote. The “most effective way to meet that challenge is to build a united front of U.S. allies and partners to confront China.”

These plans were limited to the specialist foreign policy press read by beltway insiders, and Biden’s plans to provoke war with Russia and China played virtually no part in his appeal to voters. Instead, Biden publicly pledged to end “forever wars.”

In reality, Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan was a repositioning of US forces in preparation for an escalation of the US conflict with Russia and China.

In 2020, the World Socialist Web Site warned: “A Biden/Harris administration will not inaugurate a new dawn of American hegemony. Rather, the attempt to assert this hegemony will be through unprecedented violence. If it is brought to power—with the support of the assemblage of reactionaries responsible for the worst crimes of the 21st century—it will be committed to a vast expansion of war.”

These warnings have been confirmed. For years, the United States military has systematically emphasized its plans to wage “great-power conflict” with these two countries. Now, a war with Russia has already broken out, and Biden’s comments make it clear that the administration is systematically preparing for a war with China.

These conflicts threaten to escalate into a world war, waged between nuclear-armed powers, threatening Europe, Asia, North America and, indeed, the whole of human civilization with destruction.

The Biden administration’s war plans express the relentless drive by US imperialism to reverse its relative economic decline through military means.

Papua New Guinea elections loom amid growing domestic and global crisis

John Braddock

National elections in Papua New Guinea (PNG), due in July, are already facing mounting difficulties. The issuing of writs was postponed for a week on May 12 following the death of Deputy Prime Minister Sam Basil in a car accident.

James Marape (light shirt in the centre) campaigning in Tari with supporters [Image: pmjamesmarape.com]

The delay was to allow for a state funeral and for Basil’s United Labour Party to reorganise itself. Basil was a longstanding MP and member of the country’s ruling elite. He had held major portfolios over his career and had ambitions to be prime minister following the election.

In November 2020, Basil was one of 12 cabinet ministers who defected from the James Marape-led coalition government, plunging it into turmoil. The manoeuvre, designed to force a no confidence vote, was stymied when Marape abruptly adjourned parliament for four months. Basil then returned to the fold.

Polling is due to start on July 9 and finish on July 22, with writs returned on July 29. Normally, several thousand potential candidates come forward to nominate in PNG elections seeking to access money and favours. This year, it is predicted the figure could be as high as 4,000 to contest the 118 seats.

Seven new seats have been created in the parliament. However, ballot papers were printed before the government formally established the new seats. The ballots had to be destroyed and reprinted, and there is ongoing uncertainty over the new districts which have not yet been budgeted for. There could well be a court challenge to their validity.

University of Papua New Guinea academic Okole Midelit told Radio NZ on May 16 that the election poses significant “security risks.” Under-resourced police, widespread availability of illegal firearms, and the politicisation of the security force will present major issues, he warned. Low COVID-19 vaccination rates are also a particular concern, Midelit noted, with less than 3 percent of the population of nearly nine million fully vaccinated.

More than 200 people died in violent clashes during the widely discredited 2017 election. The poll was mired in bribery and corruption, ballot rigging and the wholesale omission of names from the electoral roll. Protests erupted over accusations that vote counting was hijacked.

The narrow victory of then Prime Minister Peter O’Neill was regarded as illegitimate. Explosive social tensions produced by the government’s austerity policies in response to the deepening economic crisis, including the collapse in global energy prices, saw ongoing turmoil over the following year.

In 2019, O’Neill avoided a vote of no confidence by resigning his position and has since faced corruption charges. He was replaced as prime minister by former ally and finance minister Marape, leader of the Pangu Party, who has in turn fended off a series shifting allegiances from within the unstable and corrupt political establishment.

Marape has presided over an escalating economic and social disaster. His government has been criticised for its handling of the closure of the Porgera goldmine and alleged misuse of international funds for PNG’s COVID response. Budget shortfalls have resulted in government debt rising to 40 percent of GDP.

O’Neill, who leads the People’s National Congress Party (PNC), appears to be the main electoral threat to Marape. According to the Post-Courier, O’Neill told a pre-election crowd last week that the PNC is ready to return and “remove thieves, liars and false prophets that have mismanaged and critically run the economy of the country.”

O’Neill, however, remains deeply unpopular. In 2016, police opened fire and injured dozens of people at a protest demanding that O’Neill step down and face fraud charges.

The cynical manoeuvring between rival groups of parliamentarians highlights the vast gulf that separates the poverty-stricken PNG masses and the country’s corrupt and venal political elite. Trust in the government has disintegrated following decades of social deprivation and growing wealth inequality, buttressed by authoritarian military-police measures.

The crisis has been intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic. The government, which ditched national pandemic lockdowns in mid-2020, is responsible for an unfolding disaster. PNG has officially recorded 43,900 cases of COVID and 651 deaths but with testing all but abandoned the figures are meaningless. In March this year most remaining restrictions were removed, including the need for booster shots to be fully vaccinated.

Hospitals have been overwhelmed. Last October, health authorities organised a mass burial of 253 bodies, to relieve pressure on the Port Moresby General Hospital morgue, where bodies were stacked on top of each other as COVID-19 cases surged. Now, the country has begun grappling with a tuberculosis epidemic.

Tens of thousands of workers, estimated as high as 25 percent of the workforce, have meanwhile lost their jobs. Meagre government relief measures such as tax deferrals and loan repayment holidays have been woefully insufficient. According to UN figures, 39 percent of the people live below the poverty line of $US1.90 a day.

There is growing resistance in the working class. In March 2020, 600 nurses in Port Moresby held a sit-in over concerns about the lack of personal protective equipment. Four thousand nurses were then ready to strike over the lack of COVID preparedness, until the strike was called off by the union. More stoppages and sit-in protests took place late last year over nurses’ pay and working conditions.

Marape has appealed for “peace and order” during the elections, declaring there will be “zero tolerance” for any violence. Highlighting the fears within the ruling establishment, Police Commissioner David Manning felt it necessary to warn all candidates and supporters to refrain from violence. “Do not bribe your voters. Do not threaten them,” he said.

The election will be closely scrutinised by both Washington and Canberra. External interference by either or both powers to influence the outcome cannot be ruled out. Australia, the country’s colonial master until 1975, has a long and dirty history in PNG defending the interests of its multinational  mining companies and Canberra’s geo-strategic interests in the Asia-Pacific.

The PNG ruling elite has maintained a precarious balancing act between economic and diplomatic relations with China on the one hand, and the demands of the imperialist powers on the other. PNG’s involvement in China’s Belt and Road Initiative and Beijing’s funding for infrastructure projects has increasingly alarmed Washington and Canberra.

The Australian on Saturday cited unnamed sources saying that China is offering “security support” to help PNG prevent political and ethnic violence during the election. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi is reportedly planning to visit PNG in June. The paper also noted that “Australia is providing about $30m in support towards the conduct of PNG’s elections, while Australian Defence Force aircraft and about 140 personnel will assist with logistics and planning.”

During his term of office, O’Neill turned towards Beijing for financial support, followed by Marape seeking to reduce reliance on Australian aid. Marape said regarding China that PNG is a “friend to all, enemy to none.” His government has meanwhile maintained strong security ties with the US, including holding joint military exercises in each of the last two years.

PNG was pushed more sharply into focus in April when China and the Solomon Islands signed a security pact allowing for Chinese presence. US Indo-Pacific coordinator Kurt Campbell was promptly dispatched to Honiara, to warn the Sogavare government Washington would “respond accordingly,” if China were to establish any basing arrangements.

Underscoring Washington’s wider intent to block any Chinese presence in the Pacific, the US delegation also visited Fiji and PNG and bluntly warned them against any similar treaties with China. The diplomatic intimidation included threats by then Australian Prime Minister Morrison, who said a Chinese base in the Solomons would be a “red line”—that is, a trigger for military intervention.

US/NATO-provoked war in Ukraine creates food crisis in Africa

Jean Shaoul

The war in Ukraine deliberately provoked by United States and its NATO partners, together with sanctions on Russia, have triggered the biggest rise in global commodity prices in more than 50 years.

The United Nations has warned that the war risks tipping 1.7 billion people, one-fifth of the world’s population, into poverty, destitution and hunger—a horrifying scenario the imperialist powers are utilising to step up their warmongering in the Black Sea.

Nowhere is this threat more acute than in Africa.

Malnourished children wait for treatment in the pediatric department of Boulmiougou hospital in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. (AP Photo/Sophie Garcia) [AP Photo/Sophie Garcia]

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization’s food price index, a gauge of food prices around the world, hit an all-time high in March, with food now costing 42 percent more than in 2014-2016. This comes at a time when food insecurity is already rising following the COVID-19 pandemic. It is the world’s biggest food crisis since World War II. According to the latest estimates from the State of Food Security and Nutrition around the World, the number of people facing food insufficiency has reached 811 million, up 161 million people in 2019, meaning around one in 10 of the world’s people went to bed hungry.

Africa has suffered more than any other continent. A total of 282 million people or 21 percent of Africans suffered from hunger in 2020, up 46 million on the previous year. Households in sub-Saharan Africa spend 40 percent of their incomes on food, a much higher proportion than those living in the advanced countries who spend 17 percent, according to the Financial Times based on figures from the International Monetary Fund. The African Development Bank puts this figure at 65 percent.

The joint impacts of the pandemic, unemployment, loss of earnings and the lack of social protection have pushed people into long-term poverty and destitution. Today, one in three Africans—422 million people—live below the global poverty line, defined as living on less than $1 per day.

Exports from Ukraine and Russia are at a virtual standstill, where according to UN General Secretary Antonio Guterres there are “nearly 25 million tons of grain that could be exported but that cannot leave the country [Ukraine].” Last year, Russia and Ukraine accounted for nearly one third of the world’s grain exports, one fifth of its corn trade and almost 80 percent of sunflower oil production. According to the US Department of Agriculture, world wheat supplies will tighten, with exports from Russia and Ukraine likely to be 7 million tonnes lower than expected before the war.

According to the African Development Bank, wheat imports make up 90 percent of Africa’s $4 billion trade with Russia and almost half of its $4.5 billion trade with Ukraine. Twenty-three of Africa’s 54 countries depend on Russia and Ukraine for more than half the imports of one of their staple goods. Some countries are even more reliant: Sudan, Egypt, Tanzania, Eritrea and Benin import 80 percent of their wheat and Algeria, Sudan and Tunisia more than 95 percent of sunflower oil from Russia and Ukraine. They are seeing higher prices across the board, under conditions where most African elites provide no social safety net.

The food crisis has been intensified by the multiyear droughts in the Horn, East Africa and the Sahel, locust swarms in East Africa, wars and conflicts, climate-induced floods and food protectionism, while the rampant corruption and economic mismanagement by the continent’s kleptocrats have added to the suffering.

David Beasley, Executive Director of the UN’s World Food programme (WFP), warned recently of the terrible situation in the Sahel, saying, “Around 11 million people in the Sahel area don't know where their next meal is coming from. If they do not get the help they need now, we are talking about starvation, migration and destabilization.”

The UN is warning that 18 million people in the Sahel face food insecurity in the next three months. The worst affected—Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali and Niger—are facing “alarming levels” with nearly 1.7 million people facing emergency levels of food shortages. This takes place as the European powers send troops to suppress the impoverished masses in the region and prevent them from fleeing to Europe.

Conflicts, wars and climate-induced droughts have hit the Central African Republic, Sudan, South Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia and Kenya. The Horn of Africa/East Africa is facing its worst drought in 40 years, with three consecutive rainy seasons bringing little rain. When it did rain as in 2019, it was torrential, affecting some 3.4 million people and bringing a swarm of locusts that devoured crops. Temperatures have soared to record highs, resulting in the deaths of three million livestock across southern Ethiopia and the arid and semi-arid regions of Kenya since mid-2021. The UN has warned that up to 20 million people in the Horn of Africa could go hungry this year.

Herder Yusuf Abdullahi walks past the carcasses of his forty goats that died of hunger in Dertu, Wajir County, Kenya on Oct. 24, 2021. The aid agency Oxfam International warned Tuesday, March 22, 2022 that widespread hunger across East Africa could become "a catastrophe" without an injection of funds to the region's most vulnerable communities. (AP Photo/Brian Inganga, File)

The cost of fertilizers has risen beyond what most farmers can afford, threatening next year’s harvest. Russia produces around 18 percent of the world’s potash market, 20 percent of ammonia exports and 15 percent of urea. In Ethiopia, amid the war ongoing since November 2020 in the northern Tigray region, the price of fertilizer has shot up 200 percent and food inflation has reached 43 percent. In neighbouring Kenya, drought had already caused a 70 percent slump in crop production even before the war in Ukraine, leaving more than 3 million people facing acute hunger. In Somalia, if no rain has fallen by the end of this month, around 6 million people—38 percent of the population—face extreme food insecurity.

Just as people’s needs are escalating, the aid agencies are struggling to find resources. The WFP requires US$18.9 billion to reach 137 million people in 2022, but its funding gap is bigger than ever. The war is pushing up its costs by $71 million as rising food, fuel and shipping costs reach $850 million for the year. As a result, there will be four million less people reached by the programme. The WFP will have to cut rations in order to reach more people. The UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said that aid groups had launched appeals earlier this year seeking $3.8 billion in aid for the Sahel, but had only received 12 percent of its target.

Many of the world’s largest donors have diverted resources to Ukraine. The UK announced £220 million in humanitarian and development aid for Ukraine as part of its effort to support the US/NATO proxy war. In November 2020, Britain already cut its overall aid budget from 0.7 percent to 0.5 percent of GDP leading to a halving of the UK’s direct humanitarian aid to foreign countries last year, from £1.53 billion in 2020 to just £744 million.

A further factor exacerbating Africa’s food crisis is food protectionism as 23 countries clamp down on the export of food staples or impose restrictions such as taxes or quotas, according to the US think-tank International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Food protectionism has led to a 17 percent reduction in total world food trade as measured in calories, the same level seen during the 2007-08 food and energy crisis. Since then, Indonesia and India have banned the export of palm oil and wheat respectively.

The continent’s rising debt crisis means that few countries have the means to buy or subsidise food prices, with Ghana, Zambia and Tunisia among the 20 or so countries close to defaulting on international loans.

The food crisis, the result of decisions taken by the world’s capitalist governments, is creating untold suffering for millions, exacerbating the class struggle. United Nations Development Programme Africa’s chief economist Raymond Gilpin warned the world’s financial elites, “Tensions, particularly in urban area, low-income communities, could spill over and lead to violent protests and violent riots.”

The Persistence of Childhood Poverty in the US

Callie Freitag & Heather D. Hill

In the United States, children are more likely to experience poverty than people over 18.

In 2020, about 1 in 6 kids, 16% of all children, were living in families with incomes below the official poverty line – an income threshold the government set that year at about US$26,500 for a family of four. Only 10% of Americans ages 18 to 64 and 9% of those 65 and up were experiencing poverty, according to the most recent data available.

The official child poverty rate ticks down when the economy grows and up during downturns. It stood at 17% in 1967 – just about the same as in 2020. In many recent years the rate hovered even higher – around 20%.

Another way to measure poverty

Researchers calculate the official poverty rate by adding up a household’s income and comparing it with a threshold of what is needed to survive.

The government has calculated this rate the same way since the 1960s.

One of its shortcomings is that it excludes several sources of income, including tax credits and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which are intended to reduce poverty.

In 2011, the government began to calculate an alternative metric: the supplemental poverty measure. It includes SNAP and tax credits. It also uses thresholds based on the cost of living in different areas of the country. For a family of four, this threshold currently ranges from $24,000 to $35,000, depending on where a family lives and whether they own or rent housing.

According to this alternative measure, 10% of children were living in poverty in 2020, the lowest rate ever recorded.

Depending on which measure you use, either 7 million or 11.7 million U.S. children lived in poverty in 2020.

By both metrics, poverty is higher for children of color. The official poverty rate for Black children stood at 26%, and 23% for Hispanic children, while for white, non-Hispanic children it was 10%.

Before and after 2020

Both child poverty rates had been declining before the COVID-19 pandemic.

The official rate dipped to 14% in 2019 from 21% five years earlier. It shot back up to 16% in 2020, when the pandemic compounded economic hardships for many families.

The supplemental measure of child poverty tells a more complete story.

Steps the government took during the pandemic, including its series of economic impact payments, the child tax credit expansion and a boost in SNAP benefits, led the supplemental child poverty rate to keep declining even during the economic crisis.

The government will release its child poverty data for 2022 in September 2023. But some researchers at Columbia University have monthly data suggesting that child poverty rose steeply after the expiration of the pandemic-era programs. They estimate that 3.7 million more children were living in poverty in January 2022 than in December 2021 because of the expiration of the child tax credit expansion.