11 Nov 2022

COVID-19 reinfections substantially increase risk of death and Long COVID

Benjamin Mateus & Evan Blake


A major study published today in the scientific journal Nature Medicine found that each COVID-19 reinfection causes cumulative damage to patients and significantly increases their risk of death, hospitalization, and long-term sequelae referred to under the umbrella term “Long COVID.”

The study, titled “Acute and post-acute sequelae associated with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection,” was conducted by noted COVID-19 researcher Dr. Ziyad Al-Aly and his colleagues from Washington University in St. Louis. It is believed to be the first study to date on the risks associated with COVID-19 reinfections, which have become increasingly common over the past year with the highly infectious and immune-resistant Omicron subvariants. Official data from Singapore indicates that at the peak of the recent surge of the Omicron XBB subvariant, roughly 18 percent of all cases were reinfections.

More so than any other study, this paper exposes the horrifying reality of the “forever COVID” policy imposed by the Biden administration in the United States and nearly every other world government outside China. Upending Biden’s lie that “the pandemic is over,” the study makes clear that each new wave of COVID-19 infections and reinfections will progressively kill and debilitate wider sections of the population.

Summarizing their findings, the authors write, “Compared to no reinfection, reinfection contributed additional risks of death… hospitalization… and sequelae including pulmonary, cardiovascular, hematological, diabetes, gastrointestinal, kidney, mental health, musculoskeletal and neurological disorders. The risks were evident regardless of vaccination status. The risks were most pronounced in the acute phase but persisted in the post-acute phase at 6 months. Compared to noninfected controls, cumulative risks and burdens of repeat infection increased according to the number of infections.”

Figure 1: Risk and 6-month excess burden of all-cause mortality, hospitalization, at least one sequela and sequelae by organ system. [Photo by Benjamin Bowe et al / CC BY 4.0]

When the preprint version of this study was published in June, its dire findings were denounced by various right-wing figures and unprincipled scientists who have minimized the ongoing dangers of the pandemic. However, the fundamental results and analysis have weathered the objective process of professional review and remain unchanged from the preprint version.

All-cause mortality risk more than doubles after reinfection

As in their previous studies documenting the impacts of Long COVID, the research team relied on enormous electronic healthcare databases from the US Department of Veterans Affairs.

The study compared 443,588 people with a single COVID-19 infection with 40,947 who had reinfections. Of those reinfected, 37,997 had two infections, 2,572 had three infections, and 378 suffered four or more infections. All were followed-up 180 days after their last infection or reinfection and their risks for various health outcomes including mortality were assessed and compared.

In the study, the mean age of the group with one infection and the reinfection group was the same at roughly 60 years of age. Although the study does not provide all-cause mortality rates for the non-infected in the same 180-day window, life tables from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) indicate that before the pandemic, a person that was 60 years old had a burden of death of 11.5 per 1,000 people over a 12-month window, meaning that around 1.15 percent of all people 60 years of age would have died before reaching 61.

According to the data from the reinfections study, for those with only one COVID-19 infection, the burden of death at six months post-infection was 16.77 for 1,000 people. Thus, a single COVID-19 infection significantly increases one’s chances of dying should they survive the acute phase of their infection.

However, among those who were reinfected with COVID-19, the burden of deaths per 1,000 people jumped to a staggering 36.10. This figure is more than three-fold higher than what would be expected before the pandemic and more than double the burden of mortality of the first infection. In essence, having a single COVID-19 reinfection is equivalent to having aged several years beyond one’s stated age.

Vaccines, “hybrid immunity” and Long COVID

One of the most alarming aspects of the study is its finding that prior vaccination with one, two or more jabs before reinfection did not curtail long-term all-cause mortality risks. Although all-cause mortality risks declined after the acute phase of the infection (the first 30 days), after three months the risk of dying plateaued above the baseline throughout the six-month period of analysis.

Figure 2: Risk of all-cause mortality, hospitalization, at least one sequela and sequelae by organ system are plotted. At the time of comparison, there were 51.3%, 12.6% and 36.2% with no, one and two or more vaccinations, respectively, among those who had reinfection. At the time of comparison, there were 41.1%, 11.7% and 47.2% with no, one and two or more vaccinations, respectively, among the no reinfection group. [Photo by Benjamin Bowe et al / CC BY 4.0]

The authors note that the compounding damage of reinfections “was evident even among fully vaccinated people, suggesting that even combined (a hybrid of) natural immunity (from previous infection) and vaccine-induced immunity does not abrogate the risk of adverse health effects after reinfection.”

They add, “The mechanism underpinning the increased risks of death and adverse health outcomes in reinfection are not completely clear. Previous exposure to the virus may be expected to hypothetically reduce risk of reinfection and its severity; however, SARS-CoV-2 is mutating rapidly and new variants and subvariants are replacing older ones every few months. Evidence suggests that the reinfection risk is especially higher with the Omicron variant, which has shown to have a marked ability to evade immunity from previous infections.”

These findings are a damning indictment of the false and unscientific conception of “hybrid immunity,” advanced by most politicians and official scientists worldwide, in which “natural” infections with Omicron have been touted as a positive good that will cause COVID-19 to become “endemic.”

Last January, Dr. Anthony Fauci stated, “It is an open question as to whether or not Omicron is going to be the live virus vaccination that everyone is hoping for.” These lies went unchallenged by every political tendency and media outlet except the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) and the World Socialist Web Site.

Significantly, the study finds that long-term sequelae affecting various organs like the heart, kidneys, lungs, brain, and general constitution were all persistently elevated throughout the six-month post-reinfection assessment. Additionally, this burden of poorer health was cumulative between first, second, third and fourth reinfections. In particular, the lungs, heart, and vascular system were most impacted by repeat infections, leading to a considerable burden of disease.

Figure 4: Risk and 6-month excess burden of sequelae by organ system of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection versus no reinfection in 30-d intervals covering the acute and postacute phases of reinfection. [Photo by Benjamin Bowe et al / CC BY 4.0]

In another study published earlier this year, Dr. Al-Aly and his team found that people with breakthrough infection after being vaccinated only had a 15 percent lower chance of developing Long COVID and were at increased risk of death and organ damage compared to controls who never were infected.

In their reinfections study, the authors hypothesize that “impaired health as a consequence of the first infection” might increase one’s risk of more adverse health outcomes with repeat infections. Indeed, studies have shown that COVID-19 can injure one’s immune system, potentially setting them up for more onerous sequalae upon reinfection with COVID-19 or other viruses. These studies provide firm evidence that infection with SARS-CoV-2 qualifies as a consequential pre-existing health condition irrespective of one’s vaccination status.

recent report in The Tyee reviews the science behind these concerns and the critical role of immunologist Dr. Anthony Leonardi, who has spoken out continuously on dangers of the “herd immunity” strategy, particularly for children. Ultimately at play here is the idea that allowing the virus to rip through communities, wave after wave, is a public health hazard that is having dire repercussions.

Conclusion

The results of the reinfection study are of immense importance in that they validate in the negative the precautionary principle that many scientists have advocated against the “forever COVID” policy that places the interests of Wall Street above humanity.

They also underscore the salient point that COVID is in no way comparable to the flu. Indeed, SARS-CoV-2, if not fatal, can lead to multi-organ injury with long-term consequences to the health of those infected, with compounding risks upon each reinfection.

Due to the conscious repudiation of all public health measures to mitigate against COVID-19, society confronts the unimpeded evolution of increasingly immune-evasive variants which steadily raise the risk of reinfections. Each wave of infection will further drive non-COVID excess deaths, which remain invisible to the public, and further strain healthcare systems already brought to their knees globally after three years of the pandemic.

Figure 5: Risk and 1-year excess burden of hospitalization, at least one sequela and sequelae by organ system are plotted. Results from one SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 234,990), two SARS-CoV-2 infections (n = 28,509) and three or more SARS-CoV-2 infections (n = 1,023) versus noninfected controls (n = 5,334,729), in those with a first infection before the Omicron wave, are compared. [Photo by Benjamin Bowe et al / CC BY 4.0]

Despite repeated claims that the number of deaths caused by COVID-19 are at pandemic lows, excess non-COVID deaths reported by various countries such as Peru, the UK, Northern European countries, and Australia are anywhere from five to 20 percent over pre-pandemic baselines. These are astronomical figures of which there is no mention in the corporate media.

These extra deaths can only be explained by the horrendous experiences of the last three years, in which the population has been left to fend for itself and subject to unending waves of mass infection, death and debilitation.

In many respects, the reports by Dr. Al-Aly and his colleagues have an evidentiary quality to them. They function as a forensic analysis of the crime of “social murder” committed by the ruling elites globally. Although an autopsy report is detached and formal in meticulously describing the trauma or disease sustained by the deceased, a dispassionate and objective introduction of the facts in an inquest, once made conscious of them, cannot be overlooked.

The policy makers guilty of this social crime must be held to account for the deaths of an estimated over 20 million people worldwide and the disabling of hundreds of millions more with Long COVID. Fundamentally, the ongoing disaster of the pandemic is an irrefutable indictment of world capitalism, which subordinates all social needs to the profit interests of a rapacious financial oligarchy. This outmoded system must be replaced by a world socialist society which reorganizes world economy to ensure the health and decent living conditions of all of humanity.

German companies announce mass redundancies and social cuts

Christopher Lehmann


A series of announcements by German companies, administrations, commerce and the social sector is having dramatic consequences for many thousands of workers. Hardly a day passes without the announcement of new company insolvencies, redundancies and rationalisation measures, involving huge cuts to wages and working conditions.

Protest against job cuts at the Daimler plant in Berlin Marienfelde, November 2020. [Photo: WSWS]

The ruling elite in Germany and throughout Europe are using the economic crisis and galloping inflation to implement a massive assault on social gains. German banks have been able to profit from huge state handouts and the country’s major energy and car companies are reporting record profits, while at the same time small and medium-sized enterprises are being driven en masse into insolvency and tens of thousands of workers laid off.

In the process, corporate bosses are relying on plans drawn up long ago, aimed at maximising their profits. According to a survey of 1,060 companies by the Ifo Institute, 25 percent plan to cut jobs in Germany. In the last Ifo survey in April, this figure stood at 14 percent. About 90 percent expect price increases. A complete production stop is currently considered likely by 13 percent of companies and the relocation of operations abroad by 9 percent.

In their onslaught against the working class, employers and their business associations are working closely together with the trade unions and the government. To this end, this spring the so-called Concerted Action was revived—a corporatist mechanism, which already served to suppress class struggles in the 1970s.

The federal government in Berlin is using the Ukraine war to press ahead with a comprehensive military build-up, which has also been planned and prepared for a long time. At the same time, corporate Germany is using the sanctions and its economic war against Russia to strengthen its dominance in Europe and worldwide with the costs of this great power policy imposed on the working class. This is the background to the massive social attacks that are currently taking place.

The following is an overview of the latest news, but it does not claim to be complete and must be updated daily. The WSWS editorial board calls on its readers to inform us about further dismissals and their own experiences in order to organise and coordinate resistance against these attacks.

Retail: The Galeria department stores group is cancelling its “Reorganisation Contract Agreement' agreed to by the Verdi trade union in 2019. The company wants to reorganise but, as Verdi admits, at the expense of its workers. They will lose their contractual security of pay, employment and location. Numerous branches of the group will have to close. In addition, no new temporary workers are likely to be hired. Only last January, the company received a €220 million bailout from the federal government.

Foodstuffs: At the pasta producer Riesa Nudeln in Saxony, negotiations between the NGG (food workers) trade union and the Freidler family of entrepreneurs broke down after four weeks of strike action. The NGG union wanted to raise the minimum wage of €12.51 for many of the 140 workers (in addition to the 30-40 temporary workers not affected) by one euro immediately and another euro sometime next year. Even this measly offer was rejected by management.

Dr. Oetker food products has announced plans to save €250 million a year and cut jobs in all areas of the company and in all of its affiliated branches in 40 different countries.

Electronics: The new head of the Dutch global corporation Philips plans to cut 4,000 of the company’s total of 78,000 jobs.

Bosch is closing its plant in Arnstad, Thuringia, and sacking 100 workers. Alternator regulators have been produced there since 2014. At the company’s Eisenach plant, also in Thuringia, 600 Bosch colleagues recently took part in a short-term warning strike. In Bühl, Baden-Württemberg, the works council cancelled a long-planned meeting for all three shifts at short notice because, it claimed, the company had problems with its financing. The company intends to lay off 300 of its 3,500 strong workforce and relocate production to Eastern Europe where, according to the works council chair, there is no protection against dismissal and workers work a 12-hour day.

Siemens Gamesa is cutting 2,900 jobs worldwide, or about 10 percent of its workforce. The wind turbine manufacturer, a subsidiary of the power engineering group Siemens Energy, plans to cut 800 jobs in Denmark, 475 in Spain and 300 in Germany.

Chemical Industry: With a new savings programme, BASF plans to save €500 million annually from 2025 and cut jobs in a yet unspecified number. Last year, BASF had already laid off 6,000 workers. The job cuts will mainly affect the company's main site in Ludwigshafen, where 39,000 of its 110,700 employees are currently working; €250 million are to be saved there.

At the chemical company Grace in Worms, Rhineland-Palatinate, 100 of 840 jobs are to be terminated. A total of 4,300 employees in over 60 countries currently work for the company.

Metal and mining industries: In Eisenhüttenstadt, Brandenburg, 900 steelworkers are on short-time work. At a protest last month they demanded an end to the war in Ukraine and affordable energy.

In Nordenham, Lower Saxony, 400 workers have also been forced to work short-time with the zinc smelter plant to suspend production for a full year.

Mechanical engineering: The special machinery manufacturer Zippel in Neutraubling, Bavaria, is insolvent and 94 workers are due to lose their jobs.

Contrary to earlier claims, FLSmidth, a conveyor technology supplier, now wants to cut almost all 140 jobs at its site in St. Ingbert-Rohrbach. The company had only bought the plant from steel giant ThyssenKrupp last September.

Auto industry: According to an S&P report, Europe’s car production could fall by more than one million vehicles per quarter in 2023. Rising energy costs are putting a strain on supply chains. Parts shortages and bottlenecks could even lead companies to stop production altogether. In this case, S&P expects a production shortfall of 4.8 million to 6.8 million units on an annual basis.

In Ingolstadt, Bavaria, Audi is experiencing shift cancellations on two out of three production lines due to supply problems with semiconductors, among other things. The entire auto industry was already struggling due to supply problems linked to wiring harnesses at the very beginning of the NATO proxy war in Ukraine.

Opel partner Segula plans to shed 250 of 750 workers in Rüsselsheim, Hesse.

The Ford plant in Saarlouis will be gradually shut down and around 4,000 of the factory’s 4,600 employees are to be laid off. This will lead to the elimination of many thousands more jobs in supplier factories in an already structurally weak region.

Mercedes is forcing up to 2,500 employees in Bremen to work short-time.

After protests against the dismissal of 690 workers at ZF (Zahnradfabrik Friedrichshafen) in Eitorf, the IG Metall trade union intervened, requesting the company organise the job cuts in a “socially acceptable” way.

The auto supplier Schaeffler is cutting an additional 1,300 jobs in Ingolstadt and Morbach and stresses: “The measure should be as socially acceptable as possible on the basis of the agreement struck with IG Metall in 2018.” In the coming months, “location concepts are to be developed together with the employees’ representatives.”

At Volkswagen, the no-strike period laid down by the current contract ends on November 30, 2022. The new negotiations will affect VW’s core workforce in Braunschweig, Wolfsburg, Kassel, Salzgitter, Hanover, Emden and other plants. For the approximately 125,000 employees, the first round of negotiations ended without a result. Despite a historic record dividend for shareholders, similar to that awarded by Mercedes-Benz and BMW, the union is demanding only a little more than 8 percent, i.e., far less than the rate of inflation.

Based on the contract bargaining rounds in the public sector and the engineering sector, the WSWS wrote: “The current round of collective bargaining and the great willingness of workers to resist sliding into poverty and subsistence must be made the starting point for an offensive against the war and its social consequences. To compensate for the current rate of inflation and earlier real wage cuts, high double-digit wage increases must be fought for, not just 8 percent.”

In this struggle, workers face concerted opposition from the unions, which support the federal government’s war policy against Russia and operate as company police, an extended arm of management with the task of thwarting all the demands of workers in the factories.

October inflation report: Prices continue to devastate living standards of US workers

Kevin Reed


Inflation rose at an unadjusted annual rate of 7.7 percent in October, according to data published by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Thursday morning. The report noted that consumer prices rose by 0.4 percent over September, the same rate as the previous month.

While consumer prices are still rising at a pace not seen since the early 1980s, with devastating consequences for working class living standards, the October rate was less than the 7.9 percent that had been predicted by analysts.

The BLS Consumer Pricing Index (CPI) summary said the inflation rate for October was “the smallest 12-month increase since the period ending January 2022,” and was down from the September rate of 8.2 percent.

The statement said that the “all items less food and energy index rose 6.3 percent over the last 12 months.” But in the critical categories of energy and food, prices increased by 17.6 percent and 10.9 percent respectively.

People shop at the Homeland grocery store in Oklahoma City. [AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki, File]

The apparent slowing of inflation was welcomed in the corporate press as a sign of “cooling.” This was presented entirely from the standpoint of the concerns of the wealthy over the long-term effect of rising interest rates on their asset portfolios.

The New York Times said the October inflation report “provides early evidence that the Fed’s campaign to slow rapid inflation may be combining with supply chain healing to ease price pressures.” The Federal Reserve has raised interest rates by an unprecedented 0.75 basis points in four consecutive meetings, with the explicit aim of driving up unemployment and driving down working class wages.

The financial elite celebrated the inflation report with the biggest Wall Street rally since 2020. The Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 1,201 points, or 3.7 percent. The S&P 500 rose 5.4 percent and the NASDAQ gained 7.35 percent.

The stock market surge was not driven by concerns over the impossible situation facing workers, whose living costs are exploding while their real wages stagnate or decline. It shot up because billionaire investors see in the inflation report the possibility of a return to easy money that existed prior to the Fed interest rate hikes that began early this year.

They were also cheered by the prospect of an economic slowdown engineered by the Fed undercutting a growing rebellion among workers against the corporations and the pro-corporate union bureaucracies. Already 120,000 rail workers are poised to strike against contracts dictated by the companies and pushed by the Biden administration—defying union leaders who are working with the White House to block strike action—that would maintain inhuman working conditions and impose further cuts in real wages.

As the New York Times reported, “The palpable sense of relief in markets is reflective of the pain wrought by inflation this year, as rising prices have increased costs for companies and dragged earnings lower.”

The Times added that “a chorus of Federal Reserve officials on Thursday made it clear that central bankers would stick with their plans to raise interest rates to an economy-restricting level and hold them there for some time, even if they slow the pace of those moves in coming months.”

Lorie K. Logan, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, explained in a speech Thursday morning that interest rates will remain high and the Fed’s instigation of a recession will continue. She said, “This morning’s C.P.I. data were a welcome relief. But there is still a long way to go.”

The October BLS inflation report showed that food at work and school was up 95.2 percent so far this year, airline fees were up 42.9 percent, public transportation was up 28.1 percent, health insurance was up 20.6 percent, gasoline was up 17.5 percent, electricity was up 14.1 percent, motor vehicle insurance was up 12.9 percent and food at home was up 12.4 percent.

Rent was up 0.7 percent compared to the month before and is up 7.5 percent over the year. Home mortgage rates continue to soar, with the 30-year fixed rate heading toward 8 percent.

The inflation report arrived two days after the 2022 midterm elections, in which, as of this writing, votes were still being counted in several contested races and political control of both the House and Senate was still undetermined.

Whatever the outcome of the vote, it is clear that the Democrats will move further to the right and join with the increasingly fascistic Republican Party to continue the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine and mount further attacks on government spending on social programs.

Ron Johnson, the third-term Republican senator from Wisconsin who was reelected by a margin of just over 26,000 votes on Tuesday, published a column in the Wall Street Journal on Thursday that outlined a program of nationalism, militarism, austerity and further deregulation of the energy industry.

With control of the House likely to shift by a narrow margin to the Republicans and the Senate outcome uncertain, Johnson wrote that the agenda of the US government going forward should be: “[O]ther than national defense, don’t consider any bill that would increase the size, scope or cost of the federal government.”

Johnson, who calls for ending Social Security and Medicare as mandatory spending programs, continued: “[F]ocus congressional attention on oversight of existing programs to determine which should be reformed, reduced or eliminated. Concentrate on areas of the budget that have the greatest negative effect on freedom, our economy and people’s lives.”

In other words, anything that does not benefit big business should be cut back or scrapped entirely. Furthermore, Johnson says, “The agenda items should be obvious: secure the border, regain energy independence, restore fiscal sanity, ease the regulatory burden, and ensure a competitive tax environment.”

Under conditions of an intensifying crisis of the US political system and growing social opposition from the working class, Biden and the Democrats have already signaled their readiness to “focus on the future,” i.e., forget about the Republican Party’s support for Donald Trump’s attempted coup of January 6, 2021, and find “common ground” for a bipartisan program of war and austerity.

Brazilian military’s report on elections lends ammunition to coup plots

Tomas Castanheira


This Wednesday saw the publication of the Brazilian military’s report on its “parallel audit” of the recent election in which Workers Party (PT) candidate and former President Luís Inácio Lula da Silva defeated the country’s fascistic incumbent president, Jair Bolsonaro.

Military parade on the commemoration of Brazil’s independence, September 7, 2022. [Photo: Alan Santos/PR]

The Armed Forces had previously stated that their results would be made available only in early January at the time of the inauguration. Far from representing a conclusion to the military’s conspiracy against democracy in Brazil, the accelerated release of the report only opens up new avenues for the deepening of ongoing coup plots.

The report, signed by a representative of each of the country’s three Armed Forces, was sent to the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) accompanied by a letter from Minister of Defense Gen. Paulo Sérgio Oliveira. Its main conclusion is that the “military technicians” identified electoral procedures that imply “relevant risk to the security of the process,” adding that “it is not possible to affirm that the electronic voting system is free from the influence of a possible malicious code that could alter its operation.”

The report contains repeated statements that “the tools and procedures made available by the TSE technical team for the work of the inspection entities were not sufficient for a more complete technical analysis” and “hindered the search for possible vulnerabilities of the SEV [Electronic Voting System].”

In light of these allegations, General Oliveira demanded that the High Court urgently organize an external commission to “conduct a technical investigation of what happened in the compiling of the source code and its possible effects” and to “promote a thorough analysis of the binary codes that were actually executed in the electronic ballot boxes” [our emphasis]. According to him, this is a condition for the maintenance of “political and social harmony in Brazil.”

In the defense minister’s letter and in two instances in the report itself, the military made sure to declare that their “work was restricted to the inspection of the electronic voting system, not including other activities, such as, for example, the manifestation about eventual indications of electoral crimes.”

In the hands of the Bolsonaro and his fascistic supporters, these documents provide endless ammunition for their coup plots against the election results.

Since the victory of the PT candidate Lula 10 days ago, Bolsonaro has refrained from public appearances as much as possible. In his brief public statements, he has refused to acknowledge his rival’s victory and expressed his support for the fascist protesters challenging the “injustice of how the electoral process took place” and calling for a military coup.

On Tuesday, Valdemar da Costa Neto, the president of the Liberal Party (PL), Bolsonaro’s party, which has the largest number of seats in Congress, for the first time declared that the PL has yet to accept the results at the ballot box. He stated: “We will have to wait for the Army’s report tomorrow. We have several question that we have directed to the TSE, and we will wait for the answers. Tomorrow [the military] will reveal something, I have no doubt about that, otherwise they would have already settled the matter.”

Neither Costa Neto nor Bolsonaro has made any declarations since the report’s publication.

The overwhelming response of the Brazilian and international media to the military’s report and its obvious explosive implications for the current political situation was to present reality as its exact opposite.

Instead of exposing the military’s intervention as one of the gravest attacks, Minister Alexandre de Moraes on democracy in the history of Brazil’s current civilian regime, some of the main headlines declared: “Military report does not point to ballot box fraud and arrives at the same vote count as TSE” (Estado de São Paulo); “Defense report does not point to election fraud, and TSE is grateful” (Folha de São Paulo); “Brazil military finds no evidence of election fraud, dashing hopes of Bolsonaro supporters” (Guardian).

The same forced positive tone marked the official response by the TSE. A message from its president, Minister Alexandre de Moraes, said: “The Superior Electoral Court received with satisfaction the final report of the Ministry of Defense, which, like all other inspection entities, did not point to the existence of any fraud or inconsistency in the electronic ballot boxes and the 2022 electoral process.”

A sharp rebuke from the fascistic defense minister came the next morning, with a new official statement titled “Report of the Armed Forces did not exclude the possibility of fraud or inconsistency in the electronic ballot boxes.” With the expressed aim of “avoiding distortions of the content of the report sent yesterday to the TSE,” the minister’s statement only reiterated the attacks that were already sufficiently spelled out the day before.

Perhaps even more unbelievable was the response from the most direct target of the conspiracy fomented by the military: President-elect Lula. In a speech Thursday at the government transition headquarters, the PT leader, in addition to remaining silent on the threats contained in the military’s report, sought to bestow a blanket amnesty on the Armed Forces for their crimes against democracy committed alongside Bolsonaro.

Condemning Bolsonaro for “involving the Armed Forces” in “a commission to investigate electronic ballot boxes, something that belongs to civil society,” Lula declared in relation to the report:

“The result was humiliating, humiliating. I don’t know if the president is sick, but he has an obligation to go on television and apologize to Brazilian society and apologize to the Armed Forces, for having used the Armed Forces, which is a serious institution, which is a guarantor for the Brazilian people against possible external enemies, [and] was humiliated, presenting a report that says nothing, nothing, absolutely nothing about what he had so long charged.”

Lula’s insinuation that Bolsonaro dragged the military by force into intervening in Brazilian politics is absurd. This process, which only deepened under the current government, has been growing in Brazil since the years of PT administrations, including through the military operations promoted by Lula himself overseas, with Brazil leading the UN “pacification” operations in Haiti, and domestically, with the occupation of Rio de Janeiro’s favelas.

Under the Bolsonaro government but independently of him, the military has legitimized itself as the ultimate arbiter of politics in Brazil. The generals have occupied ministries, publicly threatened civilian powers that questioned them, granted themselves the right to pronounce over the electoral process and to dictate strategic plans that supersede the decisions of elected governments.

The return to political decision-making by the military—which ruled Brazil under a brutal dictatorship for more than two decades following a US-backed 1964 coup—reflects the growing crisis of a Brazilian bourgeoisie that is unable to manage intolerable levels of social inequality at home and to sustain its economic interests in an increasingly explosive global arena.

The fact that Lula and the PT are deliberately covering up the military-driven coup threats is an expression of their complete submission to the interests of rotting Brazilian capitalism. Lula’s silence on the military’s authoritarian attacks, his embrace of Bolsonaro’s allied parties, and his promises of “institutional normalcy” are being widely praised by the ruling class.

Whether this policy will hand Lula an effective transition of government by early January remains to be seen. But the history of the 20th century proves that such maneuvers are absolutely incapable of guaranteeing the social rights of the working class and of preventing the growth of fascism, which will use this period to better prepare its forces for a coup.

10 Nov 2022

UK GREAT Scholarships 2023/2024

Application Deadline: The deadline to apply for a UK GREAT Scholarship varies according to each institution. For details on individual institutions’ deadlines, please see the institution page.

About the UK GREAT Scholarships: GREAT Scholarships offers numerous scholarships from UK universities, across a variety of subjects for students from the countries below. Each scholarship is worth a minimum of £10,000 towards tuition fees for a one-year postgraduate course. 

Each scholarship is jointly funded by the UK government’s GREAT Britain Campaign and the British Council with participating UK higher education institutions. 

Type: Postgraduate

Eligibility:

Eligible Countries: Bangladesh, China, EgyptGhana, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, Nepal, Nigeria, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Vietnam & Thailand

To be Taken at (Country): UK

Number of Awards: Numerous

Value of UK GREAT Scholarships: Each scholarship is worth a minimum of £10,000 towards tuition fees for a one-year postgraduate course. 

How to Apply for UK GREAT Scholarships: Filter by your country to find a GREAT Scholarship at a UK university.

  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

VLIR-UOS Masters Scholarships (ICP) 2023/2024

Application Deadline: Application Deadlines depend on the candidate’s chosen programme (See ‘How to Apply’ link below); deadlines generally Between January and April 2023.

Eligible Countries

  • Africa: Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, DR Congo, Ethiopia, Guinea, Cameroon, Kenya, Madagascar, Mali, Morocco, Mozambique, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Niger
  • Asia: Cambodia, Philippines, Indonesia, Palestinian Territories, Vietnam
  • Latin America: Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti, Nicaragua, Peru

To be taken at (country): Belgium

Accepted Subject Areas: Only the following English-taught courses at Belgian Flemish universities or university colleges are eligible for scholarships:

One-year master programmes

  • Master of Human Settlements – Deadline for applications: 1 February 2023
  • Master of Development Evaluation and Management – Deadline for applications: 1 February 2023
  • Master of Governance and Development – Deadline for applications: 1 February 2023
  • Master of Globalization and Development – Deadline for applications: 1 February 2023
  • Master of Cultural Anthropology and Development Studies – Deadline for applications: 1 February 2023

Two-year programmes

  • Master of Science in Food Technology – Deadline for applications: 1 February 2023
  • Master of Science in Marine and Lacustrine Science and Management – Deadline for applications: 1 February 2023
  • Master of Aquaculture (IMAQUA) – Deadline for applications: 1 March 2023
  • Master of Epidemiology – Deadline for applications: 28th Feb 2023
  • Master of Agro-and Environmental Nematology – Deadline 1st Feb 2023!
  • Master of Rural Development – Deadline online application: 21 February 2023– deadline hard copies: 28 Feb 2023
  • Master of Statistics – Deadline for applications: 1 February 2023
  • Master of Water Resources Engineering – Deadline for applications: 1 February 2023
  • Master of Sustainable Development – Deadline for applications: 1 February 2023
  • Master of Transportation Sciences – Deadline for applications: 1 February 2023

About the Award: VLIR-UOS awards scholarships to students from developing countries to study for a master or training programme in Flanders, Belgium. VLIR-UOS funds and facilitates academic cooperation and exchange between higher education institutions in Flanders (Belgium) and developing countries, aiming to build capacity, knowledge and experience for sustainable development.

The master programmes focus on specific problems of developing countries. These are designed to enable graduates to share and apply acquired knowledge in the home institution and country. In the shorter training programmes the focus is on transferring skills rather than knowledge, thus creating opportunities for cooperation and networking.

Selection Criteria: The following criteria will be taken into account for the selection of candidates for a scholarship:

  • Motivation. The candidate unable to convincingly motivate his application, is unlikely to be selected for a scholarship.
  • Professional experience: Preference will be given to candidates who can demonstrate a higher possibility of implementing and/or transferring the newly gained knowledge upon return to the home country.
  • Gender. In case of two equally qualified candidates of different sexes, preference will be given to the female candidate.
  • Regional balance. The selection commission tries to ensure that 50% of a programme’s scholarships are granted to candidates from Sub-Saharan Africa, provided a sufficient number of qualifying candidates from this region.
  • Social background. In case of two equally qualified candidates, preference will be given to candidates who can demonstrate that they belong to a disadvantaged group or area within their country or an ethnic or social minority group, especially when these candidates can provide proof of leadership potential.
  • Previously awarded scholarships: Preference will be given to candidates who have never received a scholarship to study in a developed country (bachelor or master).

Eligibility: You can only apply for a scholarship if you meet the following requisites.

  1. Fungibility with other VLIR-UOS funding: A scholarship within the VLIR-UOS scholarship programme is not compatible with financial support within an IUC- or TEAM-project. Candidates working in a university where such projects are being organized, should submit a declaration of the project leader stating that the department where the candidate is employed is not involved in the project.
  2. Age: The maximum age for an ICP candidate is 35 years for an initial masters and 40 years for an advanced masters. The maximum age for an ITP candidate is 45 years. The candidate cannot succeed this age on January 1 of the intake year.
  3. Nationality and Country of Residence: A candidate should be a national and resident of one of the 31 countries of the VLIR-UOS country list for scholarships (not necessarily the same country) at the time of application.
  4. Professional background and experience: VLIR-UOS gives priority to candidates employed in academic institutions, research institutes, governments, social economy or NGO’s, or aim a career in one of these sectors. However, also candidates employed in the profit sector (ICP and ITP) or newly graduated candidates without any work experience (ICP) can be eligible for the scholarship. The ITP candidate should have relevant professional experience and a support letter confirming (re)integration in a professional context where the acquired knowledge and skills will be immediately applicable.
  5. Former VLIR-UOS scholarship applications and previously awarded scholarships: A candidate can only submit one VLIR-UOS scholarship application per year, irrespective of the scholarship type. Consequently, a candidate can only be selected for one VLIR-UOS scholarship per year.
  6. The ICP candidate has never received a scholarship from the Belgian government to attend a master programme or equivalent or was never enrolled in a Flemish higher education institution to attend a master programme or equivalent before January 1 of the intake year

Number of Awardees: VLIR-UOS will award up to 180 scholarships.

Value of Scholarship: The scholarship covers ALL related expenses (full cost).

Duration of Scholarship: The master programmes will last for one or two academic years.

How to Apply: 

  • To apply for a scholarship, you first need to apply for the Master programme.
  • To apply for the Masters programme, visit the website of the Master programme of your interest. Follow the guidelines for application for the programme as mentioned on its website.
  • In the programme application, you can mention whether you wish to apply for a scholarship. In case you do,  the programme coordinator forwards your application to VLIR-UOS.
  • Applications submitted by the candidates to VLIR-UOS directly will not be considered!

Visit Scholarship Webpage for more details

Japan’s Discomfort in the New Cold War

Vijay Prashad



Photograph Source: Petty Officer 2nd Class Markus Castaneda – Public Domain

In early December 2022, Japan’s Self-Defense Force joined the U.S. armed forces for Resolute Dragon 2022, which the U.S. Marines call the “largest bilateral training exercise of the year.” Major General Jay Bargeron of the U.S. 3rd Marine Division said at the start of the exercise that the United States is “ready to fight and win if called upon.”

Resolute Dragon 2022 followed the resumption in September of trilateral military drills by Japan, South Korea, and the United States off the Korean peninsula; these drills had been suspended as the former South Korean government attempted a policy of rapprochement with North Korea.

These military maneuvers take place in the context of heightened tension between the United States and China, with the most recent U.S. National Security Strategy identifying China as the “only competitor” of the United States in the world and therefore in need of being constrained by the United States and its allies (which, in the region, are Japan and South Korea).

This U.S. posture comes despite repeated denials by China—including by Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian on November 1, 2022—that it will “never seek hegemony or engage in expansionism.” These military exercises, therefore, place Japan center-stage in the New Cold War being prosecuted by the United States against China.

Article 9

The Constitution of Japan (1947) forbids the country from building up an aggressive military force. Two years after Article 9 was inserted into the Constitution at the urging of the U.S. Occupation, the Chinese Revolution succeeded and the United States began to reassess the disarmament of Japan.

Discussions about the revocation of Article 9 began at the start of the Korean War in 1950, with the U.S. government putting pressure on Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida to build up the army and militarize the National Police Reserve; in fact, the Ashida Amendment to Article 9 weakened Japan’s commitment to demilitarization and left open the door to full-scale rearmament.

Public opinion in Japan is against the formal removal of Article 9. Nonetheless, Japan has continued to build up its military capacity. In the 2021 budget, Japan added $7 billion (7.3%) to spend $54.1 billion on its military, “the highest annual increase since 1972,” notes the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

In September 2022, Japan’s Defense Minister Yasukazu Hamada said that his country would “radically strengthen the defense capabilities we need….To protect Japan, it’s important for us to have not only hardware such as aircrafts and ships, but also enough ammunition for them.” Japan has indicated that it would increase its military budget by 11% a year from now till 2024.

In December, Japan will release a new National Security Strategy, the first since 2014. Prime Minister Fumio Kishida told the Financial Times, “We will be fully prepared to respond to any possible scenario in east Asia to protect the lives and livelihoods of our people.” It appears that Japan is rushing into a conflict with China, its largest trading partner.