2 Jun 2022

A pair of experiments reveal new details regarding the origin of life on Earth

Philip Guelpa


One of the central questions in biology is how life first evolved from inanimate matter, known as abiogenesis. It has long been hypothesized that the origin of life on Earth involved the evolution of molecules, floating in the “primordial soup” 4 billion years ago, that assembled themselves into structures that self-replicate. Two recently reported research projects bring us closer to an understanding of possible mechanisms by which that took place.

At the most basic level, a living organism is one that can reproduce itself by incorporating raw materials from its environment (i.e., nutrients) and use these materials to make more or less identical copies of itself. In order for the copies to resemble the original, there must be a recorded pattern, a code, which determines the form of the copies.

All life on Earth is based on two complex molecules: deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and ribonucleic acid (RNA), which constitute the code by which the information to construct and reproduce an organism is recorded and implemented. Both are composed of chains of chemicals known as nucleotides. Sets of three nucleotides specify a particular amino acid. The sequence of these nucleotide “triplets” in any given DNA or RNA molecule constitutes a code that can specify a series of amino acids which together compose a particular protein. Proteins are a basic building block of living organisms.

Graphic representation of a loop of RNA. Highlighted are the nucleotide bases (green) and the ribose-phosphate backbone (blue). This is a single strand of RNA that folds back upon itself. (Credit: Vossman , via Wikimedia Commons).

DNA is the famous double helix, the structure of which was first discovered by James Watson and Francis Crick. Its structure consists of two parallel strands of nucleotides entwined helically. RNA exists as a single strand of nucleotides, though it can form double strands and thereby replicate itself.

In addition, not only must living organisms reproduce themselves, but they must have the ability to adapt to a changing environment, in other words, to evolve through succeeding generations, classically known by the Darwinian phrase “descent with modification.” Otherwise, if replication were perfect every time, no change would occur, and the pattern would simply be repeated ad infinitum, like the growth of a crystal, and the myriad living organisms that have existed on Earth would never have evolved.

How did these properties originate?

The current dominant theory, known as the “RNA world,” formulated by Walter Gilbert in 1986, holds that the first living organisms were based on RNA as their genetic material, with DNA-based organisms evolving later, presumably as an evolutionary development from an RNA ancestor.

In the first of the two recent studies, a Japanese team, based at the University of Tokyo, used RNA sequences that, under specific conditions, spontaneously replicated themselves and underwent modification in subsequent generations (Mizuuchi, Furubayashi, and Ichihashi, “Evolutionary transition from a single RNA replicator to a multiple replicator network,” Nature Communications, March 18, 2022).

They posed their research question as follows. “An origins-of-life scenario depicts Darwinian evolution from self-replicating molecules, such as RNA, toward complex living systems. How molecular replicators could develop complexity by continuously expanding information and functions is a central issue in prebiotic evolution.”

This team conducted a long-term experiment in which they encased RNA molecules obtained from Escherichia coli (a common bacteria), in water-in-oil droplets, heating them, and introducing additional nucleotides as raw material. They found that over time, as new copies of the RNA molecules were generated, the original sequences mutated, creating distinct lineages. Notably, the new lineages did not undergo further mutations at the same rate and began to differentiate due to imperfect replication, indicating the potential for different evolutionary trajectories and, in effect, manifesting the potential for different evolutionary “fitness” which would have been subject to natural selection. They also found that different lineages interacted with each other in replication, creating a complex, interdependent system.

The researchers concluded, “Our results provide evidence that Darwinian evolution drives complexification of molecular replicators, paving the way toward the emergence of living systems.” Thus, natural chemical processes not only produce molecules that replicate themselves but launch a self-sustaining trajectory to increasing complexity.

One of the team, Ryo Mizuuchi, explained to OnlySky, “The simplicity of our molecular replication system, compared with biological organisms, allows us to examine evolutionary phenomena with unprecedented resolution. The evolution of complexity seen in our experiment is just the beginning. Many more events should occur towards the emergence of living systems.”

He added, “We found that the single RNA species evolved into a complex replication system: a replicator network comprising five types of RNAs with diverse interactions, supporting the plausibility of a long-envisioned evolutionary transition scenario.”

A second experiment was conducted by a different set of researchers, based at the Ludwig-Maximilian University in Munich, Germany (Muller et al, “A prebiotically plausible scenario of an RNA-peptide world,” Nature, May 11, 2022). This team set out to examine how, prior to the appearance of DNA, the first life forms, based on RNA, could begin to assemble amino acids into proteins. It had been previously observed that RNA strands become increasingly fragile as they lengthen, thus posing the question of how RNA could assemble more than short segments of amino acids, also known as peptides, which are intermediate steps in the construction of proteins.

It has long been known that nucleic acid strands in both RNA and DNA contain segments that code specifically for the assembly of amino acids into proteins and others the function of which was unclear. The research by Muller et al demonstrates that these “non-coding” segments of RNA can bond with amino acids to form structures, some relatively complex, that strengthen the RNA strand and form a “scaffolding” on which longer segments of amino acids can be assembled by the “coding” sections of the RNA.

The German research appears to address earlier criticisms of the RNA-world scenario which contend that RNA alone could not have fulfilled the necessary replicatory and information storage functions necessary to initiate life. RNA by itself does not have what one critic called “computational reflexivity,” the capacity to accurately reproduce itself. These critics proposed an RNA-peptide world in which combinations of these two molecules had this property. This is what the German team has found.

In many modern organisms, DNA functions as the primary mechanism by which genetic information is stored in order not only to direct the growth and function of an individual organism but also to transmit the code to produce the next generation. RNA operates in a “supportive” role within a cell, functioning to transfer sections of code to assemble the necessary amino acids to construct specific proteins in intra-cellular structures called ribosomes.

The combined results of these two studies provide key details regarding the initial evolution of life from “non-life.” Many questions remain. How did DNA develop? How did RNA become incorporated in a “subordinate” role within cells where DNA functions as the primary information repository?

Nevertheless, the results of these two research projects contribute to the demystification of the origin of life and reinforce our understanding that living things, including humans, do not embody some mysterious “divine spark,” as religion would have it, but instead are the product of natural, scientifically understandable laws of the material world. And, furthermore, that if suitable, though not necessarily identical, conditions exist on other planets in the Universe, life is likely to exist elsewhere as well.

1 Jun 2022

A New Colombia? Petro Wins First-Round Victory in Presidential Vote

W.T. Whitney Jr.



Photograph Source: National Police of Colombia – CC BY-SA 2.0

During 212 years of Colombia’s national independence, the propertied and wealthy classes, with military backing, have held the reins of power. Gustavo Petro and Francia Marquez, presidential and vice-presidential candidates of the Historical Pact coalition, scored a first-round victory in elections held on May 29. They are forerunners of a new kind of government for Colombia.

If they prevail in second-round voting on June 19, they will head Colombia’s first ever people-centered government. Petro’s opponent will be the May 29 runner-up Rodolfo Hernández.

The tallies were: Petro, 40.3 percent (8.333.338 votes); Hernández, 28.1 percent (5.815.377 votes); Federico Gutiérrez, 23.9 percent (4.939.579 votes). Other candidates shared the remaining votes. The voter participation rate was 54 percent, standard for Colombia.

Petro’s rightwing electoral opponents represented varying degrees of attachment to the extremist ex-President Alvaro Uribe (2002-2010) and his protegee, current President Ivan Duque, who was not a candidate.

Oscar Zuluaga, the early standard-bearer for the Uribe cause ended his non-prospering campaign in March in favor of Federico Gutiérrez and his “Team for Colombia” party. Opinion polls showed Gutiérrez losing ground while, coincidentally, the candidacy of the conservative Hernández was gaining support.

Petro, 62 years old, was a leader of the radical April 19 Movement, mayor of Bogota, twice a presidential candidate, and has been a senator. As such, he led in calling to account ex- President Uribe for political corruption and ties with paramilitaries. He defines his politics as “not based on building socialism, but on building democracy and peace, period.”

Vice-presidential candidate Francia Márquez projects what looks, from this vantage point, to be star-power. She is a 40-year-old African-descended lawyer and award-winning environmentalist who, from her rural base, organized against plunder of natural resources. As a presidential candidate in the primary elections in March, she gained 780,000 votes from Historical Pact electors – third place within that coalition. Her candidacy reflects a merger of sorts between social-movement and political-party kinds of activism.

Candidate Rodolfo Hernández is a special case. Analyst Horacio Duque claims that, “The Gringos’ Embassy and the [Colombian] ultraright are moving to catapult” this former mayor of Bucaramanga “onto a platform for existential salvation … by forcing a way toward a second round.” The wealthy real estate profiteer and mega landlord for low-income renters faces bribery charges relating to a “brokerage contract” and trash disposal. With a slogan of “no lying, no stealing, and no treason,” Hernández is a self-described enemy of the “traditional clans.” He is a devotee of social media.

The Historical Pact campaign benefited from circumstances. The failings of 2016 Peace Agreement with the FARC insurgency are clear, namely: persisting violence, no agrarian reform, and continuing drug war in the countryside. Blame falls upon Uribe’s machinations and the Duque government.

The campaign follows two years of demonstrations that, led by young people, were violently repressed by the police. Protesters called for full access to healthcare and education, pension reforms and new labor legislation. They set an agenda for change.

Death threats greeting Petro and Francia Márquez on the campaign trail forced them to cancel some events and deliver speeches from behind protective shields. Earlier popular mobilizations had also triggered ugly reactions.

Commentators recalled the assassinations of four leftist or liberal presidential candidates between 1987 and 1990 and the murder of prospective presidential candidate Jorge Eliécer Gaitán on April 9, 1948. Petro and Gaitan are the only progressively-oriented political figures in Colombia’s history to have had realistic hopes for becoming president.

For a few days in early May the “Clan del Golfo” paramilitary group reacted to its leader’s extradition to the United States on drug-trafficking charges; paramilitaries “stole, threatened, killed, and burned trucks and taxis” throughout northern Colombia. They coordinated their mayhem with the police and soldiers, and “the Duque government didn’t move a finger to contain them.” Reasserting their role as enforcers and destabilizers, the paramilitaries disrupted the Historical Pact’s campaign.

Petro and Márquez promised much. They would improve food security, education, healthcare, pensions and reverse the privatization of human services. Petro would rein in extractive industries, cut back on fossil-fuel use, and renegotiate free trade agreements. He called for land for small farmers, peace with insurgent National Liberation Army, and for restraining the paramilitaries. He promised to respect Venezuela’s sovereignty.

Colombia’s military is displeased about a prospective Petro government. In April, Petro criticized military commanders’ close ties with paramilitary bosses. In a revealing response that violated constitutional norms, General Eduardo Zapateiro accused Petro of harassing the military for political reasons and of having taken illegal campaign funds.

An interventionist U.S. government is uneasy about a change-oriented government in Colombia. U.S. General Laura Richardson, head of the U.S. Southern Command, met with Colombian General Luis Navarro in March. She sought assurance that a Petro victory would not lead to the dismantling of seven U.S. Air Force bases in Colombia. Navarro indicated military leaders and most congresspersons would oppose such a step. The Southern Command issued a press release confirming that “Colombia is a staunch security partner.”

U.S. Ambassador Phillip Goldberg used an interview in mid-May to reflect upon electoral fraud. He mentioned the “real risk posed by the eventual interference in the elections by the Russians, Venezuelans, or Cubans.” As U.S. ambassador in Bolivia in 2019, Goldberg had taken the lead in advancing false accusations of electoral fraud that fueled the coup against President Evo Morales.

The U.S. impulse to determine who governs in Colombia was on display on May 13 with a debate involving Colombian vice-presidential candidates. It was staged in Washington, not in Colombia. The congressionally-funded U.S. Institute of Peace session hosted the session. The appearance was that of a junior partner auditioning, as in seeking approval from a boss.

Commenting on his victory, Petro remarked that “forces allied to Duque have been defeated … The message to the world is that an era is finished.” Reaching out to “fearful businesspersons,” he proposed that “social justice and economic stability are good for productivity.”

The Historical Pact faces an uphill battle as it approaches the voting on June 19. According to an observer, opposition candidate Rodolfo Hernández will inherit the institutional and personnel resources the Duque government dedicated to the Federico Gutiérrez campaign. First – round voters for the several rightwing candidates will now turn to Hernández. The Historical Pact will have to engage with Colombians who did not vote on May 29.

31 May 2022

UK civil servants face crucial fight against jobs massacre

Paul Bond & Robert Stevens


Boris Johnson’s Conservative government has set a deadline of June 30 for secretaries of state to present plans for slashing jobs in their departments, as part of a proposed cull of 91,000 civil service jobs.

The civil service covers every aspect of public service and government policy support, encompassing daily necessities for millions of people, including welfare benefits, passports and vehicle registration. Final decisions on a three-year programme of cuts are planned for the autumn.

Johnson announced the jobs massacre a fortnight ago, calling for a reduction of civil service numbers by one-fifth, from 475,000 back to 2016 levels. In 2016, after five years of austerity under David Cameron’s Conservative-Liberal Democrats coalition, the civil service employed 384,000, the lowest number since the end of World War II.

Britain's Brexit Opportunities and Government Efficiency Secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg arrives for a regional cabinet meeting at Middleport Pottery in Stoke on Trent, England, Thursday, May 12, 2022. (Oli Scarff/Pool Photo via AP)

Nothing is off the table. Rees-Mogg, the Minister for Brexit Opportunities and Government Efficiency, has mooted that the “simplest way” to achieve the job cuts is via a blanket recruitment freeze, as up to 38,000 staff leave the Civil Service each year.

A move towards that was this week’s announcement that the Civil Service “fast stream” is to close for at least one year. The scheme offers a fast-track to senior roles, with more than 3,000 graduates joining via this route over past three years. The decision to freeze the scheme was pushed by Johnson and agreed at a Cabinet Office meeting on May 19.

The scale of cuts will eviscerate and destroy services. Two months ago, it was announced that 42 Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) offices will close, 13 with “no other strategic site nearby” for staff.

An ideological element is undoubtedly at play, with the Tories intent on destroying “big government”. The Daily Mail cited government sources complaining that civil service numbers have ballooned due to Brexit and the COVID-19 pandemic, “We cannot let this bigger state become the new normal.” Labour meanwhile will continue its role of “constructive opposition”, helping Johnson and his cronies to complete the Thatcher revolution.

Johnson and Rees-Mogg have cynically presented their civil service cuts as a move to help those struggling with the cost-of-living crisis. This from a government that has refused even to reinstate the £20 weekly uplift to the main Universal Credit benefit, put in place during the pandemic but scrapped last October. The Resolution Foundation has assessed that an extra 1.3 million people, including 500,000 children, will be left in poverty this year as a result.

As ever greater numbers of people are thrown into poverty, the DWP plans to employ fewer staff to assist them. Therese Coffey, secretary of state for work and pensions, has unveiled her department’s 2022-25 plan that includes a 12 percent cut in staff funding.

In opposing the job losses, workers are being pitched into a struggle not just against the Tories, but against the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS). The PCS, with 180,000 members, is the largest union in the sector, with tens of thousands of members in the civil service.

In a consultative ballot held earlier this year, PCS civil service members voted by an 81 percent majority that they would be willing to strike after rejecting a pay offer of just 2 percent along with attacks on their pensions. However, after years of the PCS refusing to fight anything, including throughout the pandemic, members expressed their frustration in a turnout of just 45 percent below the 50 percent required for a ballot to be recognised under anti-strike laws.

The PCS is attempting to stifle industrial action and keep the pay and pensions fight separate from any struggle against 91,000 job losses.

At its conference last week, the PSC put forward an emergency motion on pay and pensions, stating only that, “Conference agrees that we should work towards a national statutory ballot on industrial action in the early autumn, and that the form and scope of the ballot should take account of the consultative ballot results.” With criminal complacency it said, “Conference instructs the NEC to: Declare a national dispute over pay, pensions and the CSCS… [Civil Service Compensation Scheme]: Hold a statutory industrial action ballot to begin in September 2022.”

On the jobs cull, a PCS statement ahead of conference made clear there would be no immediate mobilisation. A statement read, “We have set our stall to protect the civil service by demanding the government fully consults with union officials about its plans…”

Presenting a separate motion on the jobs cull to conference, PCS DWP Group President Martin Cavanagh said it was made, “without consultation with staff or unions.” Ignoring the mass sentiment that already exists in the membership for a fight, the motion merely proposed that “Conference instructs the NEC to: Build a campaign against the government’s planned job cuts and for increased resourcing to deliver adequate public services.” It would, “Work with the PCS Parliamentary Group to advance our campaign.” No industrial action was proposed—even in the autumn—with the resolution stating the PCS would, “Use all means at our disposal to defend member’s jobs and public services including industrial action when appropriate.”

Both motions were passed unanimously by delegates, indicating willingness to fightback against the government’s attacks.

Mark Serwotka (Credit:Trades Union Congress/Twitter)

The PCS has betrayed its members’ struggles for decades. It has long been a base of operations for various pseudo-left tendencies whose members have worked as part of the union bureaucracy. The union is headed by Mark Serwotka, a member of the pseudo-left Socialist Organiser group in the 1980s and early 1990s, who became a supporter of the Socialist Workers Party-led Socialist Alliance, followed by the Respect organisation led by the SWP and George Galloway. With the backing of pseudo-left groups, Serwotka’s speciality is bragging of his constant readiness to fight for his members and the entire working class—alone if necessary—while not lifting a finger to genuinely oppose the decimation of PCS members’ pay, terms and conditions.

At the conference, Serwotka described the campaign against civil servants during the pandemic, “They came for our integrity, accusing us of being lazy because we worked from home. But then they came for our jobs …” #

In fact, at the pandemic’s height, when workers were dying on the job through their criminal exposure to the virus, the PCS held just one union-authorised action over COVID workplace safety. The Swansea office of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency experienced the largest number of COVID infections linked to a single employer or workplace in Britain. PCS members took concerted strike action against management plans to bring hundreds of staff back into the office.

The DVLA headquarters in Swansea (credit: Wikimedia Commons)

But the PCS refused to call for any broader mobilisation of its membership, instead criticising the government for prolonging the dispute and preventing an agreement between the PCS and management. The union devoted more effort to isolating and ending the dispute than to safeguarding workers’ health.

The PSC is suffocating any industrial action, fully aware of the collective strength that its members wield. Speaking to the Times as the PCS conference was underway, Serwotka said, “What people would see [with the job losses] is that job centres would close, there would be nobody there overseeing collection of taxes, overseeing the minimum wage; the justice system would come to a halt… We have people at the ports, the airports, checking the passports, issuing driving licences, issuing passports and so much more. So clearly if those people were to take industrial action there would be a huge effect.

“It would certainly be something that the government couldn’t ignore and I think our message will be today that nobody wants to go on strike, but it appears to be that unless we have that vote [at the conference] all our persuasive arguments to government have just been, frankly, ignored.”

One-day general strike against war and social cuts in Italy

Marianne Arens


Large parts of Italy were paralyzed in a one-day general strike organised by grassroots unions May 20. The strike was directed against NATO’s war policy and Mario Draghi’s government, as well as the social consequences of the war that are being imposed on the working class.

Workers of TNT/FEDEX near Milan airport strike against 176 dismissals and the sell-out by the CGIL, CISL and UIL unions [Photo by S.I. Cobas Peschiera Borromeo]. [Photo by S.I. Cobas Peschiera Borromeo]

The strikers also demanded higher wages, a sliding scale of wages to counter inflation (Scala mobile), improved social spending and secure jobs. “When, if not now” and “Get out of the war!” were the main slogans.

Train services were severely restricted nationwide throughout the day Friday, May 20. Public transport in Milan, Rome and elsewhere only maintained emergency services at peak times. Workers running ferry services to the islands, along with many flights and motorway toll booths were on strike.

Many state schools remained closed, as did supermarkets such as Lidl and large parts of the transport and logistics sector. There were also stoppages in industry, for example at commercial vehicle manufacturer Iveco in Turin. Delivery drivers in Milan and textile workers in Prato near Florence also stopped work. Rallies and demonstrations were held in the centres of Rome, Bologna, Genoa, Milan, Turin, Venice, Florence, Naples, Palermo and Taranto, as well as in many other cities.

The call to strike was made by the Italian grassroots unions, S.I. Cobas, Sgb, Unicobas, Cub and others. They have been gaining influence for years because the traditional trade union confederations CGIL, CISL and UIL are losing members in droves due to their pro-government and pro-business policies.

Many factories participating in the strike have been fighting ruthless levels of exploitation for years, such as garment workers in Prato and parcel delivery workers and drivers working for DHL, TNT and FEDEX. For example, FEDEX drivers in Peschiera Borromeo, where Milan airport is located, are on strike against a sellout by the union confederations, which have agreed to 176 redundancies.

The strikes against war and massive social cuts are an expression of the growing militancy of the international working class, fighting against growing inequality, the consequences of the coronavirus pandemic and the social effects of government war policies.

Moreover, the pandemic is by no means over. On the day of the recent general strike over 26,500 new infections and 89 COVID-19 deaths were reported in Italy.

Added to this are the price increases for fuel and food. The average price of heating gas in May 2022 is almost seven times higher than before the pandemic. The cost of bread has increased by 30 percent, and oil and pasta are also becoming more expensive. Purchasing power has fallen by at least 5 percent in the first quarter of 2022.

The crisis is hitting the Italian working class hard, which is already suffering from unemployment, precarious work and poverty among the elderly. With the approval of the government and trade unions, the corporations have used the pandemic to pile the costs onto the backs of workers in the form of layoffs, wage cuts and extended periods of short-time working. According to the Istat statistics office, more than 3.5 million workers are currently precariously employed; 430,000 were added in 2021 alone. Youth unemployment is officially 24.5 percent, but is much higher in real terms, especially in the south.

State employees, teaching staff and care workers are also coming under increasing pressure. Italy supports the Ukraine war—a proxy war by NATO against Russia—supplying it with weapons and stepping up spending on the Italian armed forces. In this context, the Draghi government has presented a new austerity budget. Among other things, it plans to cut the state education budget and to eliminate 9,600 teaching positions.

The general strike on May 20 was not the first in recent times. On April 22, workers all over Italy stopped work for one day under the slogan “Up wages, down arms!”

On March 14, ramp workers at Pisa airport refused to load weapons and ammunition for Ukraine, which were to be disguised as “humanitarian aid.” At the end of March, an arms shipment was stopped that was supposed to go to Yemen via the port of Genoa. The boycott by dockworkers in Genoa was also joined by colleagues in the port of Livorno.

These strikes are being organised by grassroots unions, which have gained great influence in recent years mainly because the traditional trade union confederations CGL, CISL, UIL, which are linked to the establishment parties, shamelessly support the government. Time and again they have sold out workers.

Shortly after the strikes and boycott actions began, the government organised a police raid on the premises of the grassroots union USB (Unione sindacale di base) in Rome on April 6, ostensibly to search for hidden weapons. It was a provocation and a transparent attempt to intimidate the growing resistance.

All this has contributed to even more workers taking part in the general strikes of April 22 and May 20.

The growing readiness to fight raises more and more urgently the question of an independent perspective and orientation. While workers want to fight against the war, social cuts and the government’s herd immunity policies, the grassroots unions organise strike actions in order to keep control of the growing class struggle movement and steer it into harmless channels.

Organisations like the USB and Cobas pursue a nationally limited, syndicalist perspective that has failed in every country and ultimately falls in behind the government and its capitalist policies. Despite their nominal grassroots orientation and federal structure, they are not fundamentally different in political orientation from the hated national trade union confederations.

At the same time, the grassroots unions are closely linked to Italy’s stale pseudo-left and Stalinist parties such as Rifondazione Comunista (PRC, Communist Refoundation), the Partito Comunista Italiano (PCI, Italian Communist Party) and Potere al Popolo (PaP, Power to the People), all of which supported the May 20 strike call. For example, USB leader Pierpaolo Leonardi is a member of the PCI, which was newly formed in 2016. The leader of Cobas, Piero Bernocchi, has close links to Rifondazione Comunista, which supported Romano Prodi’s government’s policies of cuts and war between 2006 and 2008.

In the best Stalinist tradition, in their call for action distributed on May 20 the grassroots unions and their supporters appeal to “diplomacy.” They place responsibility in the hands of the UN, with one appeal saying, “We should fully involve the United Nations to envisage an aid plan for the Ukrainian people, international observers and free elections.”

In this way, they appeal to the same capitalist forces that are organising the war; the UN Security Council includes representatives of the US, France and the UK, together with those of Russia and China.

COVID-19 cases rise in the Mid-Atlantic as school districts refuse to impose any safety measures

Pete Salmon



Customers, some wearing face masks to protect against the spread of the coronavirus, dine at the Reading Terminal Market in Philadelphia, Friday, April 22, 2022. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

The Mid-Atlantic United States, home to nearly 60 million people, has seen a drastic increase in the number of people infected with the latest coronavirus variants. However, the official response to this alarming trend has been mostly silence in order to make it so the virus is not as serious as it appears.

Last week, the School District of Philadelphia (SDP) began to reinstate its mask mandate in schools. This occurred one month after a city-wide order calling for indoor masking was rescinded, reducing the requirement for masks to a “strong recommendation.”

In addition, the city eliminated its tiered COVID response system. For the week of May 15–21, 592 new cases were reported, representing a gradual increase in numbers from week to week despite low testing numbers. Over 16,100 cases of COVID-19 have been reported since the beginning of the year.

The SDP introduced a “Mask to Stay” option on May 13 where students exposed to COVID-19 but not showing any symptoms would be permitted to remain in school if they wore a mask 10 days following exposure and are self-monitored. Otherwise, the student would have to quarantine for 10 days.

“Requiring students who have been exposed to COVID-19 but are not exhibiting any symptoms to quarantine at home has the unintended consequence of reducing in-school learning,” lamented the SDP.

In Maryland, Baltimore City Public Schools (BCPS) reported 1,121 cases from May 19 through May 28, including 78 cases at Francis Scott Key Elementary/Middle School. The quarantine and isolation period is five days, reduced from 10 days on January 18. Masks have been optional in the BCPS system since March 14.

In the Washington D.C. region, COVID-19 cases have risen exponentially. In the week ending May 26, the District of Columbia reported 11,934 cases in a “school setting.”

The Washington Post week wrote last week, “4,698 D.C. Public Schools students had been identified as a close contact of someone who tested positive within the last 10 days.” But far from taking a public health-conscious approach such as returning to remote learning, “Students who are vaccinated, or contracted the virus in the last 90 days, are not required to quarantine.”

In early May the Post reported that the Democratic Party-led D.C. government had stopped giving its daily case numbers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) because “it was time to treat coronavirus less like an emergency and more like an endemic illness.” On April 27, the “sporadic but fairly frequent” reports stopped altogether. Nearly two weeks went by before the city again reported case numbers, with no explanations given for the lapse.

The mask mandate for DCPS was dropped effective March 16. Public schools may choose to utilize the CDC’s “Test to Stay” program, designed to allow people who would otherwise go into quarantine to remain in school, with a negative COVID test and no symptoms. Quarantine period: 0 days for vaccinated people if no symptoms; 7 to 10 days for unvaccinated “close contacts.”

“It reflects the difficult reality for schools more than two years into the pandemic: Covid is still here, even as they seek a return to normalcy,” the Post declared.

The situation is little better in the District’s near suburbs. In Montgomery County, Maryland, the richest and most populous county in the state, Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) reported 2,034 cases in the last 10 days as of May 28.

The Montgomery County Board of Education voted to make indoor masking optional during a March 8 business meeting, in line with new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines that no longer recommend universal mask-wearing.

The county, which earlier in the pandemic rejected Maryland’s Republican Governor Larry Hogan’s effort to return to in-person learning when cases were roughly 1,000 a day, has initiated a ridiculous campaign, “On or Off, It’s Just Me.” The program, which combines anti-scientific public health advice with the most selfish forms of individualism, purports to be a “reminder that wearing masks may be an individual choice and we must respect each other’s choices.”

Written in the framework of an individual’s “personal space,” the guideline completely ignores the well-being of MCPS’s immunocompromised children and their families. The isolation and quarantine period for students was reduced to five days from 10 on March 1.

In nearby Prince George’s County, 479 separate incidents of COVID-19 were reported between May 18 and 24. Although the county’s indoor mask mandate was lifted on February 28, PGCPS continues to require the use of masks in schools regardless of vaccination status, and claims that schools are cleaned and filtrated daily. Isolation/quarantine is five days, or 10 if the student is unable to wear a form-fitting mask correctly.

A teacher in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, near the state capital Annapolis, told the World Socialist Web Site that the promises school boards have made in order to lure educators and students back to school were “frankly, a lie.”

“They never improved the ventilation system. There are still many classrooms that are hot during the summer and cold during the winter.” According to the teacher, who wished to remain anonymous for fear of victimization, ventilation improvements were limited to the replacement of air conditioning filters.

Anne Arundel County Public Schools (AACPS) reported 298 active cases on May 28 and over 15,000 in total since the beginning of the school year last September 8; an active case is defined by an individual who tested positive that is “still under isolation. That period is 5 days for students and adults.”

New COVID mitigation “strategies” were put into place on May 23, in which students and staff of any school with a 5 percent positivity rate over a 14-day period would be “asked, not mandated” to wear masks for 10 days.

“Whatever the philosophical disagreements on masking and other issues this school year, there is almost universal agreement on one thing: We should do everything we can to keep students in classrooms, where we know the best instruction and learning takes place,” said school superintendent George Arlotto.

The aversion toward public health measures is strongest in Republican Party-controlled Virginia, where Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin imposed a ban on mask mandates in February. Over 8,000 cases have been reported in Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) since the beginning of May, an exponential jump from its previous highs, including over 800 reported cases on both May 16 and May 23.

FCPS made mask-wearing in schools optional effective March 1, as long as community transmission was “low” or “medium” under the new CDC community risk guidelines as explained earlier. FCPS no longer contact traces individual cases.

Even with these alarming increases in cases, the school districts have done little to stem the rising tide, and in some cases intentionally make matters worse, in order to keep the region’s economy open. “With COVID-19, American society has even come to accept the deaths of children from a preventable cause,” states an Associated Press article (“COVID-19, shootings: Is mass death now tolerated in America?”).

The article cites pediatrician Dr. Mark W. Kline, declaring “there was a time in pediatrics when ‘children were not supposed to die.’ There was no acceptable pediatric body count. … At least, not before the first pandemic of the social media age, COVID-19, changed everything.”

China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi tours the Pacific

John Braddock


On Monday, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi convened a meeting of foreign ministers from 10 Pacific Island nations in Suva, Fiji. It was the second China-Pacific Island Countries Foreign Ministers’ Meeting following its inaugural gathering, conducted remotely in October 2021.

In this photo supplied by the Fiji government, the President of Fiji, Ratu Wiliame Katonivere, right, gestures with the Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi at the State House in Suva, Fiji, Monday, May 30, 2022. (Fiji Government via AP)

All the Pacific countries which recognise China attended the on-line meeting: Solomon Islands, Kiribati, Samoa, Fiji, Tonga, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, Cook Islands, Niue and Federated States of Micronesia. Those maintaining ties with Taiwan—Tuvalu, Palau, the Marshall Islands and Nauru—were absent.

China presented a major document, leaked last week, which advanced a sweeping region-wide strategy boosting economic and security co-operation. Despite a direct appeal from Premier Xi Jinping, China announced after the meeting it would shelve the proposals and prepare a “position paper,” so that “going forward” it can “shape more consensus and cooperation.” China’s Ambassador to Fiji, Qian Bo, said there had been “general support” for the plan, but some leaders had concerns about “specific issues.”

Pacific Islands Forum general secretary Henry Puna and Fiji’s Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama emphasised that the major issue for Pacific leaders is climate change. Bainimarama told the joint press conference that “geopolitical point scoring” means “less than nothing” to those threatened by climate change. He had urged China, he said, as he did with all major countries, to make stronger climate commitments.

The meeting came midway through an unprecedented tour of the Pacific by Wang and a 20-strong delegation of Chinese officials. It began in the Solomon Islands last Thursday with the signing of a security agreement between the two countries.

The pact, which was agreed in April, was furiously denounced by Washington, Australia and New Zealand, which claimed it would open the way for a Chinese military base in the southwest Pacific. Beijing has repeatedly said it has no interest in establishing such a base.

Wang’s tour takes place in the wake of a US-led diplomatic offensive in Asia, including the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) Tokyo meeting and President Biden’s visits to South Korea and Japan, intended to strengthen its encirclement of China.

Beijing is facing the mounting threat of war as the US seeks to prevent any challenge to its global dominance amid a worsening global economic crisis. Last week, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken delivered a speech to the Asia Society Policy Institute in Washington describing China as “the most serious long-term challenge to the international order.”

The Chinese proposals offered the Pacific states millions of dollars in financial assistance, the prospect of a China-Pacific Islands free trade agreement and access to China's market of 1.4 billion people. It also involved police training, cybersecurity and an expanded place in disaster and humanitarian relief and fisheries.

Beijing sought to shift from a series of bilateral arrangements towards multilateralism. It would appoint a special envoy for Pacific Affairs to advance political relations and a comprehensive partnership, including aligning its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) with the Pacific Island Forum’s “Blue Pacific” plans.

The President of Micronesia David Panuelo, who is more closely aligned with Washington, warned China’s proposal could spark a new Cold War in the region. He declared that Pacific Island states risked being pulled into Beijing’s orbit, suggesting they would lose sovereignty and independence.

Australia and New Zealand, backed by Washington, reacted with alarm at what they regard as an intrusion into their “backyard.” Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese accused China of seeking to increase its influence “in the region of the world where Australia has been the security partner of choice since the Second World War.”

Albanese revealed a “step-up” in Pacific engagement, with $A500 million ($US350 million) in additional aid for defence training, maritime security and infrastructure to combat the effects of climate change.

Foreign Minister Penny Wong was hurriedly dispatched to Fiji days before Wang’s visit. Wong bluntly warned the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat that Pacific leaders should weigh up the “consequences” of accepting security offers from Beijing.

The shelving of Beijing’s strategic plan has not stopped negotiations with individual Pacific governments. Wang arrived in Fiji from stopovers in Kiribati and Samoa. In Samoa an Economic & Technical Cooperation Agreement was signed, effectively reversing the FAST (Faith in the One True God) party government’s anti-China position at the 2021 election.

In Kiribati the two parties signed documents on climate change, tourism, infrastructure, marine transportation and COVID-19 medical supplies. Wang also spoke with Niue’s Foreign Minister Dalton Tagelagi via video link, both committing to extend cooperation including on the BRI.

The White House revealed last week that Fiji would join Biden’s newly-formed Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), the first Pacific Island nation to sign on. The protectionist IPEF is designed to bolster US access to regional markets without offering reduced tariffs or greater access to US markets. The White House said it would enable the US and its allies “to decide on rules of the road.” 

The Financial Times promptly trumpeted Fiji’s involvement in IPEF as “a victory in its [Washington’s] competition with Beijing over influence in the Pacific.” Bainimarama declared he had enjoyed a “wonderful meeting” with Australia’s foreign minister, tweeting; “Fiji is not anyone’s backyard—we are a part of a Pacific family. And our greatest concern isn’t geopolitics—it’s climate change.”

When Wang and Bainimarama met separately on Monday, they signed several agreements to expand cooperation with Fiji over the economy, trade, agriculture, fisheries, tourism, civil aviation, education, law enforcement, and emergency management. Wang said that China would provide assistance to Pacific countries with “no political strings attached.”

Fiji, the second largest country in the Pacific after Papua New Guinea, occupies a pivotal strategic role. Following Bainimarama’s 2006 military coup he established a “Look North” policy towards China and Russia to counter moves by Canberra and Wellington to isolate the regime. He also encouraged other Pacific countries to take a more “independent” line.

With Fiji’s elections due this year, the opposition SODELPA leader Sitiveni Rabuka, who staged two military coups between 1987 and 1995, said China’s influence in the South Pacific will take a “king hit” if he returns to power. Rabuka has been sharply critical of debt repayments, claiming Beijing will take over “some of the public facilities we have, our ports and airports,” adding: “It’s happening around the world.”

The entire region is facing an economic and social catastrophe. According to the Lowy Institute, the Pacific is staring at a “potential lost decade” from the economic and social devastation wreaked by the COVID pandemic. Without an “ambitious and urgent increase in outside assistance,” it declared, the Pacific faces a permanently lower economic and developmental trajectory. The Institute estimates the Pacific will need at least US$3.5 billion over three years in additional international assistance.

Wang’s tour still has nearly a week to run. After he leaves Fiji he visits Tonga, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea and Timor-Leste, all deeply impoverished countries that maintain existing links to Beijing.

Peruvian government uses “slight increase” in COVID numbers to extend state of emergency

Cesar Uco


A recent article in the WSWS examined the threat of a new wave of COVID-19 in South America, focusing on rising numbers in Chile, Argentina and Brazil, which have shot up to several tens of thousands per week.

COVID-19 vaccination in Lima (Credit: (ANDINA/Eddy Ramos)

While conceding the possibility of a COVID-19 fourth wave arriving by the last quarter of 2022, the Peruvian Ministry of Health (Minsa) reported on May 25 what it termed 'small' increases: eight deaths and 369 new COVID cases in the previous 24 hours, and six deaths and 522 new infections the day before that. Further minimizing the uptick, Minsa attributed the increase in new variants to Easter and Mother's Day celebrations. 

Extrapolating, the number of positive cases to a per week basis would be around 3,200 people, and 49 deaths. But to be sure, the actual numbers are well above those reported, due to the decline in testing during the short period of declining infection since the end of last year. 

The myopia of the experts in Lima leads them to ignore the rising numbers in nearby countries, even though different strains of COVID previously arrived in Peru through commerce with these same countries, along with travel to and from them. 

For example, the deadly Brazilian strain, Gamma, originated in the Amazon, exploded in the city of Manaus, and then went up the Amazon River to Peruvian territory. Then it spread to the Andes, crossing them until it reached Lima, Peru’s capital city, where it claimed the greatest number of deaths.

In the past, the pandemic in Peru has been as contagious and deadly, if not more so, than in other Latin American countries. Peru had the highest per capita mortality rate worldwide since the beginning of the pandemic, until it was recently surpassed by Bolivia. Total reported cases last week reached 3.57 million and deaths 213,134.

Peru is also the origin of the Lambda (Peruvian or Andean) variant of COVID, which studies show is highly contagious and potentially resistant to vaccines.

Instead of facing the growing and apparent risks head-on with a panoply of non-pharmaceutical measures, such as increased masking, testing, and contact tracing, Minsa is at present only calling for a third and possibly fourth dose for older adults. 

Minsa says it will not pursue additional measures until there is an increase of additional positive cases for at least a five-week period. Thus, for example, capacity in classrooms and school buses will remain at the current 100 percent.

The government’s current “vaccine only” policy is a recipe for failure. It is motivated by the interests of keeping workers on the job, in order to generate profits for the capitalists.

While diminishing the current COVID risk, the Peruvian government, talking out of both sides of its mouth, is nevertheless using the “slight” increase in COVID cases to order the extension of the national state of emergency decreed as a result of the pandemic, for the first time in March 2020. 

The rule expressly indicates that the measure to continue with the national state of emergency responds to a recommendation from the National Center for Epidemiology, Disease Prevention and Control (CDC) of Minsa.

According to a decree published May 26 in the official gazette El Peruano, the extension will be extended for a period of 30 calendar days, starting on Wednesday, June 1.

The decree specifies that, during the continued state of emergency, various constitutional rights related to freedom and security, the inviolability of the home and freedom of assembly and transit will be restricted.

This pretext gives carte blanche to pseudo-left President Pedro Castillo’s reactionary bourgeois government to continue to call in the army and police to violently repress the population, which has protested en masse against rising fuel and food prices and hunger since the end of March.