Thousands of Ukrainian soldiers training in the UK for NATO proxy war with Russia

Thomas Scripps

More than 2,300 Ukrainian soldiers have been trained in marksmanship, battlefield first aid and urban warfare at four British military bases in the last six weeks.

The operation underscores the imperialist proxy war character of the conflict in Ukraine. While the war’s front is in the Donbass and along the Black Sea Coast, its rear extends across the NATO military alliance.

Over 1,000 British soldiers from the 11th Security Force Assistance Brigade are involved in training the Ukrainian troops. They are joined by over a hundred soldiers each from the Canadian Armed Forces, Swedish Armed Forces and New Zealand Defence Forces, with more pledged by Norway, Denmark, Finland, Latvia, Germany and the Netherlands.

Ukrainian volunteer military recruits take part in an urban battle exercise whilst being trained by British Armed Forces at a military base in Southern England, August 15, 2022. Ministry of Defence and British Army as the UK Armed Forces continue to deliver international training of Ukrainian Armed Forces recruits in the United Kingdom. [AP Photo/Frank Augstein]

Norway, Latvia, Germany and the Netherlands announced their contingents at the Copenhagen Conference for Northern European Defence Allies co-hosted by Britain, Denmark and Ukraine last Thursday. The group of 26 countries pledged an additional 1.5 billion euros in funds, equipment and training for the Ukrainian military. According to Reuters, the Polish, Slovakian and Czech defence ministers “signaled willingness to expand production of artillery systems, munitions, and other military equipment.”

The UK gave £250 millionand promised to send additional multiple-launch rocket systems (MLRS) and precision-guided M31A1 missiles, with a range of 80km.

A government press release explained that British funds “will ensure a steady flow of money not just for the provision of vital new weapons, but the essential maintenance and repair of existing kit, and training to maximise the Armed Forces of Ukraine’s effectiveness on the battlefield.”

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace commented, “This conference sends a clear message to Russia. We will not tire and we will stand by Ukraine today, tomorrow and in the months to come.

“The UK and partner nations have agreed to provide long-term military funding, ensuring a steady flow of finance to provide vital military equipment, essential maintenance of existing kit and maximising our UK-led international training programme for Ukraine’s Armed Forces.”

Britain and its allies are providing fodder for the bloody war with Russia, in which the Ukrainian military is reported to be losing up to 200 soldiers a day. A senior UK officer explained the training programme was designed to produce “battle casualty replacements.”

Those being trained are new civilian recruits, taken through a version of the six-month basic infantry training course in three weeks. Britain is committed to preparing 10,000 in the 120 days by October, but Wallace made clear in Copenhagen, “We’re committed now to really going beyond that. We are going to train more and for longer.”

The intensive course is intended to provide a higher level of training than the Ukrainian Armed Forces can provide, at an instructor to trainee ratio of 1:10 or 1:15, with a heavy focus on urban warfare.

Ukrainian soldiers will be schooled in the tactics learned in the imperialist invasions and brutal occupations of the Middle East. One trainee told the New York Times, “The British officers training us have experienced this warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan—so now it is very useful for us.” At least one of the army bases involved was used to prepare British troops to fight in Northern Ireland.

In a statement announcing the start of the programme, the British Ministry of Defence said Ukrainian Army recruits were “being given the skills needed to be effective and lethal on the frontline and defend their homeland.”

Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Patrick Sanders, the head of the British Army, visited the Kent military base in its first 10 days of providing training in mid-July, praising the “fighting spirit of the Ukrainian soldiers” and promising, “We will continue our work to scale up the ambition and pace of the training to maximise support to Ukraine.”

Weeks earlier he had told the Royal United Services Institute’s (RUSI) annual Land Warfare Conference that the Russian invasion meant the UK had to be “prepared to fight … This means focusing on winning the war, working with these allies, against this threat and in this location.”

He added, “Ukraine has also shown that engaging with our adversaries and training, assisting and reassuring our partners is high payoff activity.”

The British Army, too, “must be prepared to engage in warfare at its most violent.”

Britain’s recruit training programme is in addition to the specialist military training it is giving hundreds of Ukrainian soldiers in how to use heavy equipment.

Six days of instruction have been given in the use of the L119 light gun howitzer, with a range of 12km—Britain is sending 36 pieces to Ukraine, along with 20 M109 howitzers. Soldiers spend three weeks—the usual time is five—on the MLRS, Britain’s most advanced long range artillery weapon, similar to US HIMARS launchers. London has sent three of these systems to Ukraine already and will send three more.

Ukrainian troops have also spent several weeks being trained on 120 donated British armoured vehicles, including Mastiff, Husky and Wolfhound protected mobility vehicles, Spartan combat reconnaissance vehicles, Sultan armoured command and Samson armoured recovery vehicles, and Samaritan ambulances.

Over 100 Ukrainian sailors are being trained by the Royal Navy in Scotland at its Rosyth naval base.

Outside of the UK, British forces are reportedly in Poland training Ukrainians in using the Starstreak missile air defence system and its Stormer launch vehicles. In April, it was revealed that British SAS special forces were training soldiers on the ground in Ukraine in the use of NLAW anti-tank missiles—the UK has shipped more than 5,000. The news prompted commentary in Russia that “World War Three” and a “full-scale multi-level war” had begun against the “collective West.”

The US is carrying out military training as well. Over a hundred New York Army National Guard Soldiers travelled to Germany in July. Florida National Guardsmen have also been deployed. They are training Ukrainian personnel in the use of artillery, radar and other systems. Other US soldiers are doing the same in Poland.

Leading Ukrainian Armed Forces generals—including Oleksiy Nozdrachov, its chief of coordination centre in Kyiv—have passed through the US Army Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas. Ukrainian officers started attending the school in the 1990s, immediately after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The BBC reports, “Today, experts say, the knowledge they gain there is helping Ukrainians mount a fierce defence of their country.”

NATO’s training programmes are a continuation of long-held plans to use Ukraine in a military conflict with Russia. Military newspaper Stars and Stripes reported Lt. Col. Todd Hopkins, deputy commander of the Florida National Guard’s 53rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team, echoing the words of a Ukrainian officer who told US soldiers, “the biggest mistake that the Russians made was giving us eight years to prepare for this.”

Under Operation Orbital, the UK trained 22,000 Ukrainian soldiers between 2015 and the start of the war. The United States trained 23,000 through its Joint Multinational Training Group Ukraine in the same time, backed by Canada, Lithuania, Denmark, Poland, Sweden and the UK. Canada has trained 33,000 since 2015 under Operation Unifier, also with Swedish participation.

All this points to the imperialist war against Russia being extensively prepared, with massive resources and systems put in place to sustain it through to its bloody intended conclusion—the collapse and subjugation of the Russian state. As the war progresses, and the fiction that NATO is some third party in the conflict evaporates completely, the danger of a direct clash between nuclear-armed powers becomes ever more real.

Taiwan and the Virtues of Ambiguity

John Feffer

Photograph Source: 總統府 – 08.03 總統與美國聯邦眾議院議長裴洛西媒體互動會 – CC BY 2.0

When I visited Taiwan in the early 2000s, I was struck by how politically vibrant the country was: the accessibility of the leadership, the intensity of the civil society, the diversity of the culture. How far the county had come from its authoritarian roots!

At that time, it was not uncommon for analysts to look at Taiwan as the future of China. Beijing might aspire to absorb the island militarily, but Taiwan aspired to transform the mainland by the inevitability of its example.

In 20 years, the geopolitical environment has changed dramatically. Beijing has abrogated Hong Kong’s status as a semi-independent entrepot on the edge of the mainland. Russia has invaded Ukraine, reviving the prerogative of superpowers to absorb whatever territory they can swallow on their borders. And U.S.-China relations have entered a downward spiral of mutual recriminations. Against this backdrop, Taiwan no longer looks like the future of the People’s Republic of China except perhaps as an occupied province.

Enter Nancy Pelosi.

The Speaker of the House visited Taiwan at the beginning of August, the first person of her position to do so since Newt Gingrich traveled there in the 1990s as a way to stick his thumb in the eye of the Clinton administration. Pelosi wasn’t going at the behest of President Biden. Indeed, the Biden administration was cool to her trip, conscious that it would unnecessarily provoke Beijing. The president even talked with Chinese leader Xi Jinping to explain that Pelosi was acting as a free agent and he couldn’t control her travel itinerary.

As a critic of Beijing’s human rights record, Pelosi has also been a long-time defender of Taiwan. Her visit sends a strong signal, ahead of the November mid-term elections, that the Democrats can be just as hawkish on China as the Republicans. Indeed, her visit garnered praise from those very Republicans, even as it, interestingly, generated criticism across the spectrum of the foreign policy commentariat. In The New York Times, Thomas Friedman led the charge by calling her visit “utterly reckless, dangerous and irresponsible” (largely because it detracts from U.S. efforts to aid Ukraine). Over at the Hoover Institution, Larry Diamond concurred: “It provoked a serious escalation of Beijing’s military intimidation without really doing anything to make Taiwan more secure.”

The commentariat can generally be counted on to support the status quo, which in this case is “strategic ambiguity.” The United States recognizes the People’s Republic of China as the “one China.” Yet it maintains economic ties to Taiwan, provides it with substantial military assistance, and sends periodic delegations of officials there to consult with their Taiwanese counterparts. What the United States won’t do—except when President Biden misspeaks—is promise to come to Taiwan’s aid in the case of an invasion from the mainland.

In other words, the U.S. commitment to Taiwan is roughly similar to its commitment to Ukraine. It will send both countries the means to defend themselves. But it won’t directly intervene against either Russia or China. In the case of Taiwan, this strategic ambiguity allows the United States to have its mooncake and eat it too: simultaneously maintain a strong economic relationship with Beijing and beef up the military capacity of Taipei.

There has been some movement in the United States, particularly in Congress, to eliminate this strategic ambiguity. The pending Taiwan Policy Act is designed not only to increase military assistance to the island but to elevate the country’s status to a “major non-NATO ally.” There is bipartisan support in Congress to end the “One China” policy and clearly state that the United States will directly defend the country in the case of attack. Proponents of this view believe that it will deter China from invading.

Beijing has certainly made more noises about Taiwan in recent years. “Taiwan independence separatism is the biggest obstacle to achieving the reunification of the motherland, and the most serious hidden danger to national rejuvenation,” Xi said in 2021. He has vowed to reunify the two lands on many occasions. He is being pushed toward a more aggressive stance by nationalist voices that Xi himself has encouraged over the years.

As he prepares to assume his third term as the head of the ruling Communist Party, Xi Jinping remains focused on keeping the Chinese economy humming along. The Party believes that it can maintain its hold over the political realm as long as the populace sees continuing economic progress. Economic growth also helps to maintain the country’s global status as a superpower, which also keeps Chinese nationalists happy. International sanctions against China in the event of a war with Taiwan would seriously compromise this economic vision.

In response to Pelosi’s trip, Beijing has ramped up military exercises in the Taiwan Strait. It conducted live-fire drills and missile launches to demonstrate “how China could cut off Taiwan’s ports, attack its most important military installations, and sever access for foreign forces that may come to Taiwan’s aid.” China also suspended discussions with the United States on military matters and climate cooperation as well as imposed trade sanctions on Taiwan. Pelosi has remained unapologetic, calling Xi a “scared bully.”

Of course, China is not the only country engaged in provocative maneuvers in the region. The United States, still eager to assert itself as a preeminent Pacific power, has conducted numerous operations in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea, as documented on this useful webpage maintained by the Committee on a Sane U.S.-China Policy. The enormous RIMPAC exercises, coordinated by the United States with its allies and just finishing up this week, must look from Beijing’s standpoint like a dress rehearsal for either a military campaign or an economic strangulation policy like the one directed at Russia.

Strategic ambiguity is not an ideal policy. The best-case scenario is for Beijing to back off, for Taiwan to make a democratic choice about its status, for the Taiwan Strait to be demilitarized, and for the United States to reduce its military footprint in the region. Such strategic clarity would be most welcome.

But second best is a continuation of the status quo in which all sides play-act and thus preserve space for diplomacy. It’s not too late for all three sides to back away slowly from the current confrontation. Beneath all the harsh words and the military preparations, the economic relationships remain strong. China absorbs 37 percent of all of Taiwan’s exports, and those imports have increased by 14.2% so far this year. Taiwan, meanwhile, relies on nearly 20 percent of its imports from China, which increased by 9.5 percent this year. The two countries also face a raft of mutual challenges—from depletion of fishing stocks to kinks in the global supply chain—that require coordination and cooperation.

For the adherents of strategic ambiguity in the United States, Pelosi’s trip was a mistake because it was no substitute for providing more useful, asymmetric means for Taiwan to defend itself. That means air defense and drones and naval mines rather than tanks or even big ships or fancy jets. The idea is that Taiwan needs to build up its capacity to deny China the ability to invade rather than fight the People’s Liberation Army in a more conventional war on the seas and in the air. The virtue of such a strategy is that it’s cheaper and doesn’t present as much of a potential offensive threat to China.

Pelosi would be well-advised to take another look at the uses of strategic ambiguity. Taiwan is indeed worth defending, both rhetorically and militarily. But there are better ways of doing that than waving a red flag in front of China and daring it to charge.

Environmental disaster triggers mass fish die-off in the Oder River bordering Germany and Poland

Martin Nowak

Since the end of July, tons of dead fish have been floating in the Oder River, which runs between Germany and Poland. This is an environmental disaster of enormous proportions, the cause of which has not yet been clarified and the full extent of which cannot yet be foreseen.

Dead fish in the Oder [Photo by Youtube-Video OderSpreeAngler] [Photo by Youtube-Video OderSpreeAngler]

The first reports began to arrive on July 26. Senator Wadim Tyszkiewicz, formerly the mayor of Nowa Sól, which lies on the Polish banks of the Oder, wrote on his Facebook page: “A catastrophe. The fish that didn’t die are swimming in agony. ... Pike are swimming amok, snatching oxygen from the surface of the water. The water in the river is murky and the foam smells of chlorine and septic tank. There are thousands of dead fish.”

At 866 kilometres, the Oder is the eighth longest river in Central Europe. It begins in the Czech Republic, flows through Sląskie (Silesia) and becomes the border river between Poland and Germany at Schiedlo, just before Eisenhüttenstadt, before flowing into the Baltic Sea at Stettin.

On Wednesday, the first dead fish also appeared on the German banks in the Oder-Spree district. The city of Frankfurt an der Oder issued a warning that a massive fish die-off had been observed for “unexplained reasons.” On Thursday, the toxic flood passed Schwedt. By now, it is expected to enter the Lower Odertal German-Polish nature reserve and from there flow further towards the Baltic Sea via the Stettiner Haff.

In Poland, the anglers’ association has organised volunteers to remove the fish carcasses. According to their own statements, they had recovered more than 10 tonnes of dead fish from the Oder within a few days. This Facebook page from one of the volunteers shows the tragic scale of the disaster.

Several tonnes of fish carcasses were also recovered in the German section of the Oder. After reports of mercury contamination of the Oder were received, some volunteers stopped the disposal operation for their own protection. Others, however, continued wearing personal protective gear, as mass decomposition in the river is an ecological hazard in itself, especially if the carcasses contain toxic chemicals.

What remains unknown so far is the impact on the entire river biotope—on plant life, on the micro-organisms in the river and its countless tributaries, as well as on birds and other animals that feed on fish. There are reports from Poland of dead seabirds and beavers.

“It seems that everything that breathes air from the water has died,” Johannes Giebermann of the Frankfurt/Oder Landscape Management Office told Der Spiegel. “Not only fish on a large scale, but also mussels and snails, for example. We can’t even estimate the dimension of it right now.”

“At the moment, tons of dead fish are floating in the Oder—and that at an extremely low water level and in great heat,” Spiegel reports. “One thing is clear: the carcasses have to be removed from the water. Meanwhile, it is still unclear what the exact reason for the mass deaths is.”

Without knowing the reason for the die-off, however, it will be difficult to stop it. “Only if we know this can we act properly now,” emphasized Giebermann, who used to work for the German Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union (Nabu).

The public prosecutor’s office in Wrocław and the Brandenburg State Criminal Investigation Office (LKA) have started investigations into a possible environmental crime. German authorities detected an elevated concentration of mercury in water samples on Thursday, Polish authorities an elevated concentration of the solvent mesitylene (or 1,3,5,-trimethylbenzene) a week earlier. Nevertheless, there is still no clear finding as to what caused the disaster.

According to Germany’s Federal Environment Minister Steffi Lemke (Greens), the fish deaths may be due to chemical poisoning. “It does seem that it is chemical substances from industrial production,” she said after a meeting with her Polish counterpart Anna Moskwa in Szczecin, Poland, on Sunday. “But we don’t know that conclusively.”

The Polish government currently claims the disaster was not caused by heavy metals. This was the result of the latest analysis of dead fish by the state veterinary institute, Moskwa wrote on Twitter on Saturday evening. The analysis, however, pointed to elevated salt levels in the water and thus agreed with the findings of the German authorities. Warsaw also expressed the suspicion that the Oder had been poisoned with chemical waste and the Polish police offered a reward of the equivalent of 210,000 euros for anyone providing evidence.

When the reports of countless dead fish piled up, the Voivodeship Inspectorate for Environmental Protection in Wrocław ordered water samples on July 28. These invalidated the initial suspicion of deoxidation of the river water. Such a lack of oxygen in the water occurs frequently, especially in hot summer months, as warm water binds oxygen more poorly than cold water. An excess of oxygen was even found, which had to be of unnatural origin. The detailed laboratory results confirmed this suspicion.

At the small town of Oława, located about 30 kilometres before Wrocław, and at the Lipki lock further upstream, mesitylene (1,3,5,-trimethylbenzene) was detected with eighty percent probability. Further downstream, only derivatives, i.e., remnants, of cyclic and aromatic hydrocarbons (such as mesitylene) could be found.

Mesitylene is used as a solvent, among other things, and is highly toxic to aquatic organisms. In humans, inhalation or ingestion may cause drowsiness, headache, cough, faintness, and a sore throat. The substance is irritating to the skin, eyes, and respiratory organs. In addition, the vapours have a narcotic effect in higher concentrations. Because of this, an official warning was issued to avoid contact with the water and not to consume any fish from the region.

Based on the locations of the water samples, the Environmental Protection Inspectorate concluded that the pollution must have originated upstream in the area of the Opole Voivodeship, which begins after the Lipki lock.

And indeed, the Environmental Protection Inspectorate of the Opole Voivodeship admitted that on July 14 “an incident occurred in the Gliwice canal, where dead fish turned up. Investigations revealed a very high water temperature of 25 degrees Celsius and an excessive concentration of chlorides.” Attempting to downplay the situation, the authorities assured: “These were not large quantities of fish, and research has shown that such a quantity of chlorides cannot be the direct cause of the deaths.”

The canal, which is over 40 kilometres long, connects the Oder River with the port of the industrial city of Gliwice. However, the mouth of the canal is about 100km from the downstream Lipki lock, and there are no reports of mass dead fish between these two points.

Another case of pollution was reported by Gazetta Wyborcza from Oława itself, the city where the first mesitylene pollution was detected.

The focus is on two paper mills, a new one owned by Jack-Pol and a half-defunct one owned by PPHU Karaś, both of which are located on a sluice canal and, according to the citizens’ initiative “Everything for Oława,” discharge their wastewater into the Oder River. The citizens’ initiative has detailed proof of the fraud committed by the two companies and has been trying in vain for years to get the authorities to act.

The citizens’ initiative wrote: “For several years, state institutions had been unable to locate the culprit releasing the poison and to examine its chemical composition. This shows the helplessness of the system we live in today. We pay taxes, maintain these institutions, and yet this is how it is.”

They also clearly stated the reasons: “It’s about money. This waste should be disposed of properly. That costs money, of course, so the easiest thing to do is to dump it directly into the river. That’s a huge saving for the factory. Over a dozen years or so it could be hundreds or even thousands of tonnes ...!”

Wyborcza also points to this aspect, writing: “The most harmful stage [of papermaking] is bleaching the pulp using chlorine gas or chlorine compounds, which releases dangerous organic halogen impurities into paper mill wastewater. When organic chlorine compounds are exposed to high temperatures, as is the case during bleaching, they often turn into persistent and highly toxic compounds called dioxins.”

Downstream, all the way to the German border, countless people have reported that the Oder stinks of chlorine.

At a city council meeting in February, Jack-Pol management dismissed such accusations as “nonsense” and “slander” and called for a little more respect for “a company that has been in this market for 25 years, employs 130 people and pays property taxes to the city.”

It is possible there is an interaction, not yet fully explained, between the effects of the drought and the restraints put on the watercourse by countless locks that make the Oder navigable. This could explain why the mass mortality only started now, in midsummer.

It is also still unclear what caused a 30-centimetre-high toxic wave, which, according to German measuring stations, sloshed along the Oder. The last sluice is located at the hydroelectric power plant in Waly, Poland, about 30km after Wrocław. Was it opened to wash away the pollution more quickly?

In addition to chemical pollution, the Oder, like all rivers in the region, is currently suffering from extremely low water levels. In Eisenhüttenstadt, the water level is currently 1.61 metres—60 centimetres below the average for August. Numerous sandbanks are impeding navigation and reducing the flow to 53 percent of the long-term comparative value, reports the Berliner Zeitung, citing WSA hydrologist Cornelia Lauschke.

Przemysław Daca, president of the Polish Water Authority (PGW WP), believes the current disaster is certainly influenced by the drought and low water flows. “All you need is a small factor, some element of sewage, from a septic tank or pollution in small quantities, which until now was not a problem and was diluted in the river, but now has caused an ecological disaster,” Daca told the Wyborzca newspaper.

Since August 1, Polish water sampling stations have reported no mesitylene pollution, but still record excessive oxygen saturation. After the weekend, the Polish authorities plan to announce the results of autopsies carried out on fish.

Some of those affected by the die-off have react angrily: “You had two weeks to find the culprit! You had two weeks to warn people!” residents in Zielona Góra shouted at Deputy Environment Minister Jacek Ozdoba during a press conference.

From the German side, Poland is often criticised for not reporting incidents on the upper Oder. But the German authorities have also “failed to deal with the problems that have arisen within a reasonable period of time,” as the mayor of Frankfurt Oder, René Wilke, stated. He also spoke of “state failure.”

The same pattern is found in Poland. Members of the opposition Civic Platform (PO) criticise the failures of the PiS-led central government, which in turn points to the responsibility of the PO-led local governments. It is clear that a cover-up like the one in Oława is only possible in the long term if state authorities at all levels support or at least tolerate it.

The tragedy highlights the deep-seated nationalism of all the establishment parties and its practical effects. Eighteen years after Poland’s accession to the European Union, there is obviously neither functioning cross-border environmental protection, nor an efficient exchange of information between municipalities along the border.

Green politicians from the state of Brandenburg point the finger at Poland, speaking of a “failure to provide information” and call on the federal government in Berlin to intervene. Green politicians from Poland point the finger at the PiS in Warsaw.

In reality, this natural disaster reveals the bankruptcy of the whole capitalist system. One of the main causes is, in all likelihood, the greed for profits of a company that discharges toxic substances into the river and can rely on the subservience of the local authorities because it promises tax revenues and jobs—or greases politicians’ palms.

At the same time, the state authorities demonstrate the same criminal indifference that has been seen in the coronavirus pandemic and the climate change catastrophe. To date, neither the German nor the Polish government has initiated central measures against the environmental disaster on the Oder, neither to dispose of the presumably toxic carcasses in a coordinated manner, nor to stop the further contamination of the river. There is not even a joint effort to coordinate the fight against the natural disaster and its consequences.

Creeping martial law in the Philippines as poverty grows

Joseph Scalice

Ferdinand Marcos Jr was elected president of the Philippines in May. In his inaugural address, delivered on June 30, Marcos pledged that his presidency would be like that of his father, the country’s brutal and corrupt dictator who ruled a martial law regime for a decade and a half. Citing his father’s example, Marcos Jr vowed he would “get it done.”

Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. speaking at Uniteam election rally in Batasan Hills, Quezon City, 13 May 2022 (Image: Wikimedia)

During the socially explosive years of 1970–72, Ferdinand Marcos Sr methodically deployed, tested, and prepared the legal apparatus of state repression prior to the full imposition of military rule in September 1972. The months since the election of Marcos Jr have been marked by the incremental tightening of the authoritarian rule.

On August 8, Walden Bello, chair of the political party Laban ng Masa [Fight of the masses], who ran for vice president in the May elections, was arrested and charged with cyber-libel. Bello is a former senator with a prominent international reputation as a figure of the left and an opponent of globalization. He promotes reformist politics as if it were a type of socialism.

Bello famously called vice presidential candidate Sara Duterte, daughter of the previous president Rodrigo Duterte, a “coward” for her refusal to engage in public debates during the election campaign. When Duterte was elected vice president, her close aide filed libel charges against Bello for his campaign statements. Bello was dragged through the humiliating process of arrest and had his mugshot taken—barefoot—at a local police station before being released on bail a day later.

Bello is scheduled to be arraigned before the Regional Trial Court in Davao City in September. He has filed an appeal with the Department of Justice on the entirely justified grounds that the libel complaint constituted “political persecution.”

The arrest of Bello is a direct attack on the right to free speech and an indication that the Marcos II government is preparing to crackdown on all forms of dissent.

Sixteen priests, nuns, and lay persons, all members of the Catholic church organization, Rural Missionaries of the Philippines, were indicted on August 15 on charges of funding the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), which is classified as a terrorist organization, and have been denied bail.

The sixteen are charged on the basis of testimony provided by two anonymous witnesses, who the government claims are defecting members of the CPP’s New People’s Army (NPA). The Marcos Sr dictatorship routinely employed secret witnesses in its military courts to label political opponents “Communists,” and this practice is being brought back.

When Marcos Sr imposed martial law, he shut down all news, television, and radio broadcasts that he did not directly control, and only allowed them to reopen when they acquiesced to his dictatorship. Marcos Jr is shutting down the opposition media and banning alternative sources of news and political perspective.

On June 8, the National Telecommunication Commission ordered 27 websites blocked at the “request” of the National Security Council which cited the reactionary Anti-Terror Law passed under the Rodrigo Duterte administration.

The banned websites include those associated with the Stalinist Communist Party of the Philippines, as well as the personal page of CPP founder and ideological leader, Jose Maria Sison. Bundled up with the CPP in the ban were websites of legal political organizations, including BAYAN, and alternative news sites, such as Bulatlat and Pinoy Weekly. International publications, including Monthly Review and Counterpunch, which had in the past published material favorable to the CPP have been banned as well.

On June 29, the Security and Exchange Commission ordered the revocation of the certificates of Rappler, one of the country’s leading news publications critical of the Duterte and Marcos administrations. The revocation is currently under appeal.

Fundamental to these authoritarian maneuvers is the rewriting of the past and the rehabilitation of the martial law regime. The Presidential Museum and Library, which contains valuable documents on the Marcos dictatorship, has been taken offline. The anti-Terrorist law is being used to ban a growing list of books, which are deemed “subversive” from libraries, schools and universities. The attack is sweeping. Among the authors listed is poet and National Artist for Literature Bien Lumbera.

Mandatory military training is being brought back. Vice President Duterte, who is secretary of education, announced that she intended to make Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) a requirement, rehabilitating a Marcos-era policy that only ended in 2002, and which was long associated with brutal hazings and indoctrination.

Unadulterated propaganda is being mass produced. A major film recently released, Maid in Malacañang, depicts the overthrow of the Marcos regime as the ouster of a wise and kindly presidential family by an ungrateful mob. Government announcements are now being routinely made over the television stations of Sonshine Media Network, headed by an anti-Communist cult leader loyal to Marcos and Duterte, Apollo Quiboloy, who is wanted for sex trafficking and who claims to be the Son of God incarnate.

We are witnessing a creeping martial law.

The repressive apparatus of the Marcos II administration builds upon the measures taken by the fascistic presidency of Rodrigo Duterte, but there is something qualitatively new as well. Duterte’s rule was marked by the crudity and volatility of a provincial warlord vaulted to the heights of Philippine society. He unleashed police violence against the poor, in the name of a war on drugs, and oversaw the extrajudicial killing of over 30,000 people.

The Marcos II administration is less personalistic. There is a calculated “legality” to its systematic repressive measures that is starkly reminiscent of those taken by Marcos Sr.

Duterte expressed a global phenomenon: the turn by the ruling elite to authoritarian forms of rule in the face of mounting social crisis and unrest. Marcos Jr represents a significant further step in the open embrace of dictatorship.

Marcos Jr has the backing of a super-majority in both the Senate and Congress, which represents the support of a substantial majority of the bourgeoisie. The embrace by the ruling class of dictatorship, and the targeting of all forms of opposition for repression, expresses at the most fundamental level the political preparations to crush the emergence of mass opposition from the working class and oppressed masses. The ruling elite are keenly nervous as they confront immense crisis.

The Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) reported on August 15 that 20 million Filipinos live below the poverty line. That number has gone up by 2.3 million people since the last time data was collected in 2018. The poverty threshold is defined as an income of P12,030 ($US215) a month for a family of five. More than 18 percent of the country’s population falls below this meager measurement.

An even more dire statistic is the proportion of Filipinos unable to meet basic food needs, defined as making P8,379 ($US150) a month for a family of five. Some 5.9 percent of the population could not afford adequate food on a daily basis, 200,000 more people fell into this category since 2018.

The average income of Filipino households declined by 2 percent since 2018 in absolute terms and fell by 10 percent when adjusted for inflation. Minimum wage has fallen even farther. Minimum wages in the Philippines vary throughout the country and are established by a regional wage board. BusinessWorld calculated that minimum wages, when adjusted for price increases over the past year, had fallen by somewhere from 10.7–16.9 percent since July 2021. For working families on the brink of poverty these figures are catastrophic.

Philippine society is a powder keg. An op-ed published in the Philippine Star following Marcos’ election made clear that the Philippine ruling class shares the same fears as their counterparts around the globe: “Marcos must resist going Sri Lanka’s way.”

Marcos’ campaign for presidency relied on lies about the past which were made possible by the historical ignorance of broad layers of the public, who have been systematically miseducated. He secured a good deal of support, however, through populist promises. In late April, in the final stages of the campaign, he pledged to lower market rice prices to P20 ($US0.36) a kilo through subsidies and price caps, a pledge that if implemented would have cut the price of the most basic food necessity in half.

The Marcos II administration, however, has not brought down food prices; it has shutdown news organizations. There are no substantive palliative measures forthcoming. Like his father, Marcos Jr sees the solution to the growing unrest in repression and dictatorship.

Nine in 10 UK dental practises not accepting new adult patients for NHS paid for treatment

Richard Tyler

In vast swathes of the UK, it is now impossible to find a dental practice willing to enroll new patients onto their National Health Service (NHS) lists. Millions can no longer access routine inspections, extractions or treatment for tooth and gum disease.

A survey of 7,000 NHS dental practices conducted by the BBC found that nine out of 10 were not accepting new adult patients for any treatment paid for under the health service, with adult patients unable to register in a third of the UK’s 200 local authority areas.

A dental centre in Croydon, London [Photo by Kake/Flickr / CC BY-NC-SA 4.0]

The crisis is particularly acute in working-class areas. In Yorkshire and the Humber, the North West and the South West of England, 98 percent of practices are not accepting new adult patients.

Eight in 10 practices are not accepting children and one in ten local authorities have no practices taking on the under-16s.

The BBC found that most practices did not even have waiting lists which prospective patients could join. Of those that did, the length lists at some meant it could take years to access treatment.

In the aftermath of the BBC report, local media were full of stories about people unable to access a dentist in their area.

The Sheffield Star reported patients having to travel miles for a dentist. According to Nottinghamshire Live, no dentists in Nottingham were taking on new NHS patients, with 96 percent of practices in the county closed to new patients. A reporter from the Liverpool Echo “spent hours trying to get an NHS dentist appointment” in the city, without success after ringing 50 practices. The Manchester Evening News reported that nine in 10 practices in the city were not accepting new adult patients.

British Dental Association (BDA) spokesman Phil Gowers, who also chairs the Hampshire and Isle of Wight local dental committee told the Times, “In Hampshire four surgeries stopped doing NHS work in the last three months. And that’s going to continue more and more.”

The situation is not much better in Wales and Scotland, which have devolved responsibility for health issues. Wales is run by a Labour administration and Scotland by the Scottish National Party. For example, WalesOnline found only three practices out of 43 in Cardiff were taking NHS patients. According to the Daily Record, older people in Scotland face particular difficulties, with four out of five practices turning away new adult patients.

People unable to access dental treatment are resorting to desperate measures. The Independent reported a mother pulling out her own teeth three times after being unable to find treatment for tooth infection at a dentist within 70 miles of her home. A woman in Blackpool told the BBC she had been forced to make her own dentures after failing to find a dentist in her home city.

Regular dental inspections and treatment are not only important for maintaining oral health—they can provide an early warning of more serious medical conditions such as cancer. Jane Wilcock, chair of the Royal College of General Practioners North-West faculty told the Daily Mail, “Patients often aren’t aware of a problem in the mouth until a dental hygienist or dentist notices something suspicious, such as a red or white patch inside the cheek or on the gums.”

“The problem is many people just can’t get to see an NHS dentist at the moment. With fewer examinations, inevitably cases of mouth cancer will go undiagnosed,” she warned.

Professor Patricia Price, chair of Radiotherapy UK and co-founder of the #CatchUpWithCancer campaign, told the paper, “With oral cancer, speed of diagnosis and treatment is hugely important. If opportunities to catch it early are missed, more oral cancer patients will die needlessly.”

In a press release, Shawn Charlwood, Chair of the British Dental Association’s (BDA) General Dental Practice Committee said NHS dentistry was “at a tipping point, with millions unable to get the care they need and more dentists leaving every day.” This was the result of “years of chronic neglect, set into overdrive by the pressures of the pandemic.”

“Nothing we’ve heard from government to date gives us any confidence this service has a future. Without real reform and fair funding NHS dentistry will die, and our patients will pay the price.”

The BDA press release points to a decade of savage cuts, estimating it would take an additional £880 million a year just to restore funding to its 2010 level. The organisation accuses the government of “putting targets ahead of patient care” under a funding regime that barely provides resources for half the population.

After years of austerity and cuts, the coronavirus pandemic has severely exacerbated the situation facing patients and dentists.

Surrey dentist Nighat Rasool told the Times the pandemic had led to massive backlog. “In my NHS list I’m probably fully booked for about two months, so I haven’t got capacity to see new patients. If my own patients are waiting two months, it’s not fair. And this is the situation across the board.”

She knew of many dentists who had left the profession, “It’s not easy wearing all the PPE and seeing patients face to face in very high-risk procedures.”

This has led to increasing workloads for dentists who remain and take on NHS patients, with take-home pay for associates in dental practices having dropped by 40 percent over the past 10 years as a result of government cutbacks.

Dental treatment on the NHS is only free for those aged under 18 (or 19 if in full-time education), pregnant women or those who have had a baby in the last year, and those receiving certain means-tested benefits. For everyone else, treatment is subsidised and typically costs between about £24 for emergency pain relief and temporary fillings, routine inspections and cleaning if clinically needed. Those requiring fillings, root canal work or extractions pay £65 and £283 for fitting crowns, dentures, bridges, and other laboratory work.

Having such procedures done privately can cost between £85 (scale and polish), £175 (filling), £970 (root canal), £1,180 (crowns), £2,520 (dentures/bridges). Such charges are way beyond the reach of millions on minimum wage. Even families with those in better-paying jobs would struggle to afford such costs with incomes drastically squeezed by inflation.

Lutheran World Federation Scholarships in Theology, Diaconal and Development 2023

Application Deadline: 15th October 2022.

Eligible Countries: Developing countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean.

About the Lutheran World Federation Scholarships: Through the LWF scholarships program LWF works alongside its member churches in developing their capacity to serve effectively in their contexts. The scholarship program helps churches to acquire qualified personnel for spiritual care and diaconal work. The main criteria for a candidate approval is the church’s corresponding need to increase its human and institutional capacity, either in areas of theology or diakonia/development.

Type: Undergraduate, Masters, PhD/Postdoctoral, Research

Eligibility: 

• Church affiliation of the candidate: Only applications from active members of LWF member churches are considered. All applications must be endorsed and submitted by the church. No applications submitted by individuals will be considered.
• Nationality of the candidate: Only candidates from developing countries are eligible for scholarships in fields of diakonia/development. The theological scholarships are, in principle, open to candidates from all regions and countries.
• Age limits: Only candidates up to a certain age are eligible for Lutheran World Federation scholarships, depending on the pursued degree:

  Degree	Maximum age at the time of application*
  Bachelor degrees	35
  Master degrees	40
  Doctorate	45
  Post-doctoral/research	50
  *Special considerations: For candidates who are church employees at the time of application, age limits may be exceeded by up to 7 years for female candidates and up to 5 years for male candidates. For candidates who are actively engaged in the church’s theological or diaconal work at the time of application, age limits may be exceeded by up to 5 years for female candidates and up to 3 years for male candidates. Relatively higher consideration is made for female candidates due to social and cultural factors which cause them to pursue studies later. Selection Criteria:  HICD needs of the church: The proposed training field and degree has to respond well to the human and institutional capacity development needs of the church. The requesting church must demonstrate convincingly how a given application would meet a specific and crucial personnel need in its overall ministry in church and society. Current and future position of the candidate: All candidates are expected to have been in the service of the church and/or community as employees or volunteers. There has to be a clear commitment by the church to engage the candidate as employee or volunteer in an area related to the proposed training after completion of the candidate’s studies/training. Quality of the application: The candidate must demonstrate convincingly his/her commitment, ability and motivation to pursue the training and to support the church afterwards (good educational and professional qualifications, recommendations and certificates, convincing character). Study place. The LWF encourages candidates to study in their home country or home region. In case a study or training program abroad is proposed, convincing reasons must be given in the application. Gender and youth quota: At least 40% of the approved candidates will be female; at least 20% will be youth below the age of 30 years. These quotas will not only apply to the overall approvals, but also to each church and region. Regional balance: The LWF seeks to ensure that candidates from different regions, countries and churches are being supported. Number and Value of Lutheran World Federation Scholarships: In total, 50-70 scholarships will be awarded for studies in diaconia and development and 20-25 for theological studies. Duration of Lutheran World Federation Scholarships:   Regular scholarships for study programs of at least 1 year: The candidates are approved for at least 1 year of support to take up or complete their proposed study program. For candidates who have already started with their study program, this means that the study program has to last for at least 1.5 years at the time of application, hence 1 year at the time of approval. Short-term scholarships for training of up to 6 months: The candidates are approved for a short-term training which may last up to 6 months. This may include training courses, workshops, exchange programs or research projects which respond to the needs of the applying church. Application forms and selection criteria are the same as for regular scholarships. How to Apply for the Lutheran World Federation Scholarships: You should apply via the new online application system. Applications can only be submitted through LWF member churches. Individuals interested in a scholarship should contact their church office. Visit Lutheran World Federation Scholarships Webpage for Details