Pakistan lurches to dictatorial rule as authorities launch vendetta against Imran Khan and supporters of his Islamic populist PTI

Zayar

The long simmering political crisis in Pakistan is now boiling over. Terrified that the campaign of ex-Prime Minister Imran Khan for immediate new elections could inadvertently precipitate an explosion of mass working class anger against brutal IMF-dictated austerity, soaring food prices and mass joblessness, the government and military are resorting to dictatorial forms of rule.

Last week’s government-ordered, Army Ranger-executed arrest of Khan on corruption charges precipitated mass protests by supporters of his Islamic populist Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), or Movement for Justice, including widespread attacks on government and military installations.

Pakistan's former Prime Minister Imran Khan speaks during a news conference at his home, in Lahore, Pakistan, Thursday, May 18, 2023. [AP Photo/ K.M. Chaudary]

The response of the government and military was savage repression. Internet and social media services were suspended for more than four days, depriving millions of people of their right to information. Army troops were deployed in the national capital, Islamabad, and all four provinces of Pakistan. Thousands were arrested and remain under detention. At least nine people were killed.

Clashes between security forces and Khan’s supporters continued for four days. They only ended last Friday, after the Supreme Court intervened and declared the PTI head’s arrest in the multi-billion rupee Al-Qadir Trust corruption case to have been illegal, and court orders were issued preventing Khan’s re-arrest either on the original charge or others until May 17.

One week on, the situation remains highly volatile, with the cleavages within the Pakistani political elite and the institutions of the capitalist state only deepening.

The military and government have launched a vendetta against PTI leaders and supporters. Khan has claimed 7,000 PTI leaders and activists have been arrested. Media outlets are citing lower numbers, but agree that the total is in the thousands.

At the conclusion of a special Corps Commanders Conference, presided over by Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Asim Munir, it was announced on Monday that protesters alleged to have been involved in the attacks on the military will be tried in military courts. Presided over by military personnel, such courts are closed to the public and media and their rulings cannot be appealed, even to Pakistan’s Supreme Court.

The military’s press office, the Inter-Services Public Relations bureau (ISPR), issued a statement after the corps commanders’ meeting that stated, “The forum resolved that those involved in these heinous crimes against military installations, personnel and equipment would be brought to justice through trial under the relevant laws of Pakistan, including the Pakistan Army Act and Official Secrets Act.”

This blatantly dictatorial measure and the ISPR statement underscore the degree to which the military top brass—which has long been the country’s most powerful political actor and has substantial economic interests—was rattled by the protesters’ attacks. The ISPR statement suggested India, Pakistan’s strategic enemy, had a hand in last week’s events and that they threatened the unity of the armed forces. Commanders at Monday’s meeting, declared the ISPR, “expressed concern over externally sponsored and internally facilitated orchestrated propaganda warfare unleashed against the army leadership. These efforts are meant to create fissures between the armed forces and the people of Pakistan, as well as within the rank and file of the armed forces.”

The coalition government—which goes under the label of the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) and is led by the two parties that prior to Khan’s election in 2018 had long dominated Pakistani electoral politics, the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) and the Pakistan People’s Party—were quick to endorse dragging anti-government protesters before military courts and the invocation of the Pakistan Army Act and the Official Secrets Act.

A National Security Committee meeting on Tuesday, chaired by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and attended by top military leaders, endorsed the use of military courts, which under the 1952 Pakistan Army Act can be used to try civilians accused of “waging war” on the armed forces, attacking military installations or inciting mutiny. The meeting also vowed to arrest, within the next 72, hours all those involved in the attacks, their ‘facilitators” and “instigators.”

On Wednesday, the government gave Khan and the PTI leadership 24 hours to hand over thirty “terrorists” whom it claimed were hiding out in Khan’s expansive Lahore residence, Zamran Park. That deadline has now passed.

Police have surrounded Khan’s residence and late Thursday evening a senior official in Punjab’s interim government said police intended to conduct a search of Khan’s residence Friday.

Meanwhile, the bitter dispute between the government and the Supreme Court, particularly the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP), Umar Ata Bandial, has intensified. The PDM accuses the CJP of being biased in favour of Khan and giving him “special treatment.” It was Bandial who organized the three-member Supreme Court bench that ruled Khan’s seizure by Army Rangers amidst another court proceeding illegal, overturning a lower court ruling that had upheld the arrest.

On Monday, the National Assembly passed a motion authoring the establishment of a five-member committee to prepare and file cases against Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial in the Supreme Judicial Council for his “misconduct” and “deviating” from his oath of office. Also Monday, the PDM held a sit-in outside the apex court located in Islamabad’s high-security “red zone” to demand the CJP’s resignation. Addressing the PDM supporters, Maryam Nawaz, the prime minister’s niece and the daughter of three-time Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, said, “The decisions of the judiciary are responsible for the destruction of the country.” Subsequently she clarified that she was not accusing all judges, but those on the Supreme Court who were “facilitating” Imran Khan.

The May 15 sit-in coincided with court proceedings regarding a petition moved by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), seeking to revisit another CJP-authored ruling setting the previous day, Sunday, May 14, as the date for Punjab Assembly elections. The national and interim Punjab government ignored that decision, which arose from a case launched by PTI supporters.

With the military’s publicly expressed support, the government is insisting that elections for the two provinces, Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, from which the PTI relinquished control over the government earlier this year as part of its campaign for immediate national elections, should be delayed until October so that they can held in conjunction with the polls for the National Assembly and the other provincial assemblies.

Pakistan’s political crisis is inextricably intertwined with and rooted in the acute economic and geopolitical crisis that is roiling the world’s fifth most populous country.

The PDM government—which came to power 13 months ago, after Khan and his PTI were ousted through a non-confidence motion, orchestrated by the military—has seen its popular support collapse as it implements IMF-demanded austerity measures.

Last year the IMF did allow Islamabad to draw from an emergency bailout loan first negotiated by the Khan-led government. But as of yet, the PDM government has been unable to access an additional $1.1 billion tranche despite months of negotiations and additional austerity and privatization measures, even as Pakistan teeters on the brink of default.

US imperialism, which controls the IMF, has been using the negotiations to press for geopolitical concessions, whether it be providing weaponry to Ukraine, new bases for military operations in Afghanistan, or weakening the longstanding Pakistan-China economic and military-security partnership.

Khan is a right-wing Islamic populist whose ascent to power was aided by the machinations of the military. Its earlier support for Khan is now an open secret, and even the army establishment does not deny this fact. In political circles, it is known as the “Imran Khan project.”

However, the military top brass and much of the ruling class lost confidence in Khan after he equivocated last year, in the face of a popular outcry, on the imposition of IMF-dictated energy subsidy cuts. They also believe he needlessly antagonized Washington by publicly hailing the Taliban victory in Afghanistan and trying to improve relations with Moscow at the beginning of the Ukraine war.

Since being ousted from office Khan has been able to rally public support, principally from sections of the middle class ravaged by the economic crisis, by demagogically recasting himself as an opponent of IMF austerity and by criticizing Washington’s bullying of Pakistan and the army’s outsized role in the political life.

Following last week’s events, Khan accused current Army chief General Asim Munir of orchestrating his arrest and trying to eliminate him from political life.

In remarks Wednesday, Khan shifted gears. He tried to place blame for the rift between himself and the military top brass on his political rivals in the PDM. “The PDM leaders and (former Prime Minister) Nawaz Sharif, who is absconding in London, are least concerned whether the country’s constitution is desecrated, state institutions are destroyed or even Pakistan Army earns a bad name,” said the former prime minister. The PTI leader boasted that he has always defended the military, including on the international stage. “When I reprimand the army, it is like I am criticising my kids,” he claimed.   

Sections of the PTI leadership, many of whom served in the government of the US-backed dictator General Pervez Musharraf, are now distancing themselves from Khan. They fear that by so publicly attacking the military—the bulwark of the rule of the crisis-ridden Pakistani bourgeoisie and the linchpin of its reactionary alliance with Washington—Khan has overplayed his hand.

The working class has not mobilized and participated in the recent anti-government, anti-military protests. Class conscious workers are aware that all ruling-class parties are anti-democratic, pro-imperialist, and tied to finance capital. These parties have implemented and continue to implement harsh austerity measures dictated by the IMF, have supported imperialist wars in Afghanistan, have fomented Islamic fundamentalism as a tool of Pakistan’s reactionary geopolitics and as a means to split and intimidate the working class, and have conducted brutal military operations within Pakistan.

While lending no political support to Khan or his PTI, working people must condemn the vicious state repression being unleashed against the anti-government protests and protesters, including the use of military courts. These dictatorial measures will be used to safeguard the crisis-ridden and corrupt capitalist system in the face of working class struggle.

The Biden administration has said next to nothing about the political crisis in Pakistan. But other US figures, such as the notorious one-time US ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq and the UN, Zalmay Khalilzad, have been conspicuously meddling in Pakistani politics. In recent tweets, Khalilzad has publicly backed Khan, stating, “I reiterate my call for the resignation of the current army chief and for setting a date for elections to put things on track.”

In the USA, PTI members have been lobbying Congress regarding the political situation in Pakistan. Late last month, US Ambassador to Pakistan Donald Blome paid a visit to Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Senior Vice-President Fawad Chaudhry at his residence, as revealed in a tweet shared by Fawad's wife, Hiba Chaudhry.

The masses’ resentment and anger towards the government are fueled by decades of mounting economic insecurity and social inequality, now aggravated by soaring food and energy prices, and the continuous devaluation of Pakistan’s currency. The government’s inadequate response to last summer’s unprecedented flooding, the halt and closure of many import-oriented industries due to the shortage of dollars, and the imminent shutdown of the pharmaceutical industry, which heavily relies on imports, are causing unemployment and hunger to spread like a pandemic. Additionally, the emergence of new variants of COVID-19 and attacks by fundamentalist terrorists are heightening social tensions.

The coming period will become still more explosive as the crisis in the Pakistani state becomes increasingly interconnected with geopolitical crises, such as the US-NATO proxy war in Ukraine against Russia. Tensions are escalating in the Eurasian region, as the US, supported by India, recklessly targets China, particularly in relation to the situation in Taiwan.

US wars since 2001 have killed 4.5 million people

Patrick Martin

In a devastating report issued Monday, the Cost of War Project at Brown University estimates that at least 4.5 million people have died as a result of the wars launched by the United States since the 9/11 attacks in 2001.

The research project, which has regularly published estimates on the number of people who are direct casualties of these wars—using fairly conservative estimates—turned its attention in the current report to indirect deaths, those caused by the disruption of agriculture, health care, transportation and the economy as a whole, linked to the wars.

An internally displaced Afghan child looks for plastic and other items which can be used as a replacement for firewood, at a garbage dump in Kabul, Afghanistan, December 15, 2019. [AP Photo/Altaf Qadri]

The staggering total of 4.5 million deaths includes Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria and portions of Pakistan affected by the spillover of the war in Afghanistan. Deaths among US soldiers and contractors, including later deaths due to cancers, suicides and other consequences of the wars, are not the focus.

The estimated death toll from recent US wars gives the lie to the claims that the United States has intervened in the war in Ukraine to defend freedom, democracy and human rights. American imperialism is the most violent and bloodstained force on the planet, and the danger is that, if the proxy war against Russia becomes a more generalized conflict, even involving nuclear weapons, the number of dead would quickly surpass even the horrific toll of the past 22 years.

The report is written in neutral and academic language and “does not attribute direct responsibility to any single combatant,” according to the author, Stephanie Savell, co-chair of the Cost of War Project. The estimates and accompanying anecdotal accounts are nonetheless damning evidence of the responsibility of Washington, under both Democratic and Republican administrations, for the greatest crimes of the 21st century.

Given the impossibility of obtaining accurate demographic figures in the countries studied, several of them still war zones, it was necessary to “generate a rough estimate by applying an average ratio of four indirect for every one direct death.” This is based on a 2008 study by the Geneva Declaration Secretariat, which found, in a review of all wars from the early 1990s on, that the ratio of indirect to direct deaths ranged from three to 15.

Based on previous studies by the Cost of War Project which estimated total direct deaths from these wars at some 900,000 (a conservative number given that there have been published estimates by The Lancet of 600,000 killed by the Iraq war alone), multiplying that by four gives an indirect total of 3.6 million. Adding the two together gives the final estimate for all deaths, 4.5 million.

Whatever the margin of error for such an estimate, the rough figure is itself appalling. It is an indictment of the colossal human toll of the “wars of the 21st century,” as President George W. Bush blithely called them when he launched the first two, in Afghanistan and Iraq. Barack Obama continued those two wars and added three more, in Libya, Syria and Yemen, the latter two using proxy forces. Donald Trump and Joe Biden continued all five, in one form or another.

In a modern-day Nuremberg Trial, all four presidents would be in the dock, charged with conducting illegal wars of aggression and responsibility for mass death and suffering.

The sixth of these wars, in Somalia, was actually launched by Bush’s father with the initial US intervention in 1992; every US administration since has engaged in air strikes, raids by special operations forces and drone missile strikes, as well as blockades of food and other humanitarian aid to one region or another, or for the whole country. There have also been invasions of the country by US proxy forces from Ethiopia and Kenya.

The Cost of War Project suggests four interrelated primary causes of the mass death amidst and in the wake of these wars: 

• Economic collapse, loss of livelihood, and food insecurity;
• Destruction of public services and health infrastructure;
• Environmental contamination; and
• Reverberating trauma and violence.

Perhaps the most devastated country is Afghanistan, which experienced 20 years of US occupation and war, following 10 years of guerrilla warfare after the invasion by the Soviet Union, then seven years of civil war until the Taliban seized power, and five years of Taliban rule before the US invasion.

The death rate in Afghanistan for all sections of the population is higher now than at any other time during this dreadful history. According to the report:

Afghanistan’s economy has collapsed and over half the population now lives in extreme poverty, on less than $1.90 per day. The situation is dire: 95% of Afghans are not getting enough to eat, and in women-headed households that number is 100%. An estimated 18.9 million people—nearly half the country’s population—were acutely food insecure in 2022. Of these, 3.9 million children are acutely malnourished or “wasting,” insufficiently intaking essential nutrients, with serious physiological consequences. One million Afghan children are at risk of death.

For all practical purposes, there is no health care system in the country outside of a few major cities. The report notes: “After the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, all foreign funding for healthcare abruptly stopped, and a month later, more than 80% of Afghanistan’s healthcare facilities were reported to be dysfunctional.”

The worst situation is for those newly brought into the world. The study continues, “In Afghanistan, approximately one in ten newborn babies died between January and March 2022, over 13,000 in just three months.”

As anthropologist Anila Daulatzai, after a visit to Kabul, told the study, “In a place like Afghanistan, the pressing question is whether any death can today be considered unrelated to war.”

In most of the countries studied, the destruction of agriculture and health care was not an unplanned byproduct of war, but an essential goal of it. In Syria, according to the report:

Various parties, including the governments of Syria, Russia, and the U.S., and militant groups such as the Islamic State and the al-Nusra Front, have bombed hospitals and health facilities.

In Yemen, the US-backed Saudi military bombed farms, food storage facilities, groceries, even fishing boats, in a deliberate effort to starve the population. In Iraq, US bombing targeted health care facilities as well as factories producing medicines.

Iraq had one of the most advanced health care systems in the Middle East. But in the five years after the US invasion, from 2003 on, half the nation’s doctors left the country, 18,000 in all. With the rise of ISIS and exacerbation of civil war conditions in 2014, another 5,400 doctors left the country. Only a skeleton force remains.

The Cost of War study was able to compile current reports on child malnutrition, based on the reports of aid workers as well as governments. It estimates that “currently 7.6 million children are suffering from wasting, or acute malnutrition, in these countries.” Half of these are in Afghanistan, many of the rest in Yemen.

In Yemen, the Saudi regime, using bombs and warplanes supplied by the imperialist powers, mainly the United States, and provided targeting information by US and British military officers, has conducted an estimated 24,000 air strikes on a country of 33 million. Of these strikes, the study reported, 7,000 targeted nonmilitary facilities, 8,000 military facilities and 9,000 hit targets that could not be determined.

In Libya, it was the US that spearheaded the bombing of the country, both in the US-NATO war in 2011, which led to the ouster and gruesome murder of longtime ruler Muammar Gaddafi, and subsequently, as the country collapsed into a protracted civil war, with Islamic militants, some backed by the US, some at odds with it, playing major roles.

According to a Pentagon report, in the city of Sirte, Gaddafi’s birthplace then controlled by ISIS, the US conducted 500 air strikes from August to December 2016, 300 by drones and 200 by manned aircraft. As Cost of War points out, this was “a bombardment more intense than in comparable periods of U.S. air campaigns in Syria and Iraq.”

There are countless other consequences of these wars: unexploded ordnance in massive quantities, environmental degradation, widespread PTSD and other mental health issues, the destruction of sewage systems and other infrastructure vital for public health. On the last issue, the report notes: “the primary drivers of death amongst Iraqi children under five are lower respiratory tract infections, diarrhea, and measles.”

One of the most important consequences of these wars is the displacement of tens of millions of people. The study estimates that 38 million people have been displaced by the post-9/11 wars, the majority of them children (53 percent).

More than half of Syria’s pre-war population has been displaced: 5.6 million refugees in other countries, 6.5 million internally displaced persons (IDPs, in the jargon of the UN and humanitarian aid groups). There were 4 million IDPs in Afghanistan in 2022, 60 percent of them children. There were 3.6 million IDPs in Yemen in 2019, but few refugees because of the difficulty of escaping across the seas or through Saudi Arabia.

New Zealand budget deepens austerity

Tom Peters

New Zealand’s Labour Party-Greens government announced its annual budget yesterday, with Finance Minister Grant Robertson describing it as a “wellbeing budget” that strikes “a balance between supporting our people now with the pressure of cost of living and investing in future jobs and economic security.”

New Zealand Finance Minister Grant Robertson outside parliament on May 18, 2023. [Photo: Grant Robertson Facebook]

This message was echoed by the media. Stuff’s political editor Luke Malpass declared that the budget contained “some cost of living relief” that would “give money or benefit directly to people and make their lives cheaper and easier.” According to New Zealand Herald columnist Liam Dann, “It’s not austere, it’s not that fiscally conservative… They’ve decided to be a Labour government and spend some money and not slash and burn.” The Guardian’s headline said the budget “focuses on young families suffering in cost of living crisis.”

These claims are basically a fraud. In reality, Labour has presented another austerity budget that will continue to starve public services such as health and education, while diverting ever greater sums to the military and intelligence agencies to prepare the country to join US imperialist wars against Russia and China.

The media spin reflects acute nervousness in the political and media establishment about the collapse in support for Labour and fears of political instability. Both Labour and the main opposition National Party are polling around 35 percent and it remains unclear which will be able to form a government after the October 14 election.

In the past year, the combined effects of inflation and higher interest rates have driven household living costs up 7.7 percent, while wages increased just 4.3 percent in the year to March. Food prices have soared by 12.5 percent, the biggest increase in more than three decades.

The budget will only exacerbate the social crisis facing working people. Core government expenditure has fallen from 34.6 percent of gross domestic product to 32.5 percent in the past year, and is projected to drop to 31.5 percent over the next four years.

Like other governments around the world, the Labour government responded to the pandemic by engineering the biggest transfer of wealth to the rich in New Zealand’s history. Tens of billions of dollars in subsidies, tax breaks and bailouts have been handed to big business, while the banks have benefited from ultra-low official interest rates and quantitative easing measures that have fueled speculation in the housing market.

One in five children live in households earning below the poverty line of 50 percent of the median income. Meanwhile, a recent report from the Inland Revenue Department showed that the super-rich have amassed unprecedented levels of wealth: in 2021 the wealthiest 311 New Zealanders owned $85 billion in assets, and paid an effective tax rate half that of the average worker.

In the lead-up to the budget, Prime Minister Chris Hipkins ruled out any significant tax increase on this layer. The budget will increase the tax on income from trusts from 33 to 39 percent, but this will only raise approximately $350 million a year.

The government and its supporters have touted the budget’s removal of a $5 fee charged on all medical prescriptions. These charges were initially introduced by David Lange’s Labour government in 1985 as part of its right-wing assault on public services. Their removal is a drop in the bucket that will be cancelled out by rising costs in every other area of life.

The same can be said of the handful of other “cost of living” measures. Finance Minister Robertson boasted that 354,000 people on welfare payments have received a 7.2 percent income boost, which is below the increase in food and other living costs.

An extension of early childhood education subsidies for two-year-olds (in addition to those aged three to five) is primarily aimed at addressing the tight labour market by encouraging new parents to return to work faster.

Free public transport has been announced for children under 13, and half-price public transport for people under 25. But this will be funded by ending half-price public transport for the entire population—a temporary measure put in place during the past two years.

One of the few significant increases is in military spending, which will go up by more than 15 percent over the next four years, on top of record capital investment in recent years. The government is desperate to stop people leaving the armed forces, and is upgrading equipment and strengthening its alliances with US and Australian imperialism.

In vital public services, by contrast, there are significant cuts. Total health spending will increase in 2023‒24 by $1.3 billion, about 5.4 percent, well below inflation and not enough to meet the demands of the growing and ageing population. Labour has completely dismantled the COVID-19 public health response and adopted a policy of mass infection, allowing dozens of people to die every week and contributing to a major crisis in already-understaffed hospitals.

Robertson announced funding for an additional 500 new nurses in the next year—about a tenth of the estimated shortage of 4,000-5,000. Meanwhile, as many as 1,600 administrative workers could lose their jobs in a restructure of the healthcare system.

In the education sector, the government is maintaining an effective pay freeze. Tens of thousands of teachers have recently held nationwide strikes after rejecting below-inflation pay offers. They face a struggle against both the government and the union bureaucracies, which insist that teachers must sacrifice given the “current economic climate.”

Subsidies for tertiary education have been increased by just 5.3 percent—a substantial cut in real terms. Universities across the country are already sacking hundreds of staff and slashing wages.

Large parts of the country remain in a state of devastation after flooding in January and February. While the government has estimated that the total cost of rebuilding will be as much as $14.5 billion, the budget has allocated just $1 billion for the next year, mainly for road and other infrastructure repairs. Meanwhile, thousands of homes, businesses and farms have been destroyed or damaged by silt and face years of battles with insurance companies and the state.

Just days before the budget was announced, the country’s housing crisis was underscored by an horrific fire at the Loafers Lodge boarding house in Wellington, which killed at least six people. The building, which had no sprinkler system and malfunctioning lifts and doors, collected tens of thousands of dollars a week from renting 92 rooms.

Before giving his formal budget speech to parliament, Robertson, who is also the MP for Wellington Central where the fire occurred, stated: “I’m sure I can speak on behalf of the House in saying our aroha (love) and thoughts are with all of those who have been affected.”

The government, however, bears responsibility for the soaring rents and house prices, which have forced thousands of families into rundown and overcrowded accommodation. More than 100,000 people are homeless or severely housing deprived. The waiting list for public housing has increased nearly fivefold since 2017, from about 5,000 to more than 24,000 applicants. The budget provides funding for just 3,000 more public houses by 2025.

Labour’s de facto coalition partner the Greens and the Maori Party, which represents indigenous capitalists, both voted in favour of Budget 2023—notwithstanding their mild criticisms of the government for failing to tax wealth and address poverty.

Meanwhile, the opposition National Party attacked the budget from the right, with finance spokesperson Nicola Willis calling it a “blowout” and demanding deeper spending cuts and tax cuts. She told Radio NZ, however, that she was “really pleased to see increased spending for defence; we are living in a more dangerous world.”

The budget makes clear that all parties in parliament are united in their determination to ramp up military spending in preparation for war, while intensifying the assault on the working class. This is setting the stage for a resurgence of class struggles, whatever the outcome of the next election.

Sri Lankan public health system in crisis as doctors warn of rising dengue fever infections

Pani Wijesiriwardena

Sri Lankan man covers his face as a municipal worker fumigates insecticide to curb mosquito breeding to try to control dengue fever in Colombo, Sri Lanka, Thursday, June 28, 2012. [AP Photo/Gemunu Amarasinghe]

Sri Lanka’s workers and oppressed masses, struggling to cope with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and brutal austerity measures being imposed by the Wickremesinghe government, are now being hit by a rapidly spreading dengue outbreak.

Health Services deputy director general Dr. G. Wijesuriya told the media last week that dengue fever infections have tripled over the last two years. He warned that the island faced a major increase of the deadly disease in the coming weeks with heavy rains. According to the Sri Lanka Medical Association (SLMA), 15 persons have died from dengue in the first four months of the year.

Wijesuriya pointed out that intensive care units in several hospitals are already overcrowded with dengue patients. 45 dengue-infected children are currently being treated at the Lady Ridgeway Children’s Hospital (LRH), Sri Lankan’s main children’s hospital. Wijesuriya, who is also the LRH director, said: “The majority of these children are in the 5 to 14 year age group and some are suffering from hemorrhagic [cases], a severe form of dengue.”

Speaking with the Daily Mirror, Dr Ananda Wijewickrama, senior consultant physician at Sri Lanka’s Infectious Diseases Hospital (IDH), warned: “At the moment, we are experiencing a [dengue] epidemic. The worry is that it is likely to get worse.… Normally, the number of patients tends to increase in June and July but Sri Lanka has already recorded over 34,000 cases. In that context, the worst is yet to come.”

Dengue, which is particularly deadly for kids, is spread through mosquitoes. It was first reported in 1965. Since 1989, it has become a semi-permanent epidemic.

Dengue fever symptoms. [Photo: Mikael Häggström ]

National Dengue Control Unit director Dr Nalin Ariyaratne revealed that 33,722 dengue infections have been reported in Sri Lanka from January 1 to May 14. “The Association for the Prevention of Dengue has identified 59 Medical Officer of Health (MOH) divisions as highly contagious areas with 50 percent of the patients identified in the Western Province,” he said.

Twenty-one percent of the Western Province dengue patients are from Gampaha district, with 18 percent and 7 percent respectively from the Colombo and Kalutara districts. The Health Ministry said that although second and third variants of dengue are mainly dominant, the original strain is still spreading, even after 14 years.

It is the highest number of dengue infections since 2017. In that year, 440 died out of 186,101 of those infected. Every hospital in the Colombo area, including the National Hospital and the IDH, were overwhelmed with dengue patients. Limited hospital beds meant that some patients died without having received any treatment. This sort of situation is developing once again.

COVID-19 continues to spread, with many new infections and deaths reported. According to the Epidemiology Unit of the Health Ministry, 150 infections have been recorded and 16 deaths in the last 20 days.

Like their counterparts internationally, the Sri Lankan government has placed profits ahead of lives and abandoned rudimentary safety procedures. According to the country’s highly undercounted official statistics, 672,304 people have been infected and 16,856 have died from COVID-19 in Sri Lanka.

At the same time, malaria, previously eliminated in Sri Lanka, has re-emerged. Institute of National Health science director Thamara Kalubowila recently told the media that the country recorded its first malaria death in April this year, the first in 14 years. There had been 14 malaria infection cases in the first four months of 2023.

On May 9, President Wickremesinghe sent a letter to all the country’s district secretaries instructing them to take “all measures” necessary to prevent the spread of dengue. Wickremesinghe’s real concern is that increasing dengue infections will intensify the already rising popular opposition to his government and its social austerity attacks on the working masses.

Notwithstanding Wickremesinghe’s call for the population to take “all measures” to prevent dengue, no concrete program has been announced and no money allocated for any such measures.

But under the president’s so-called instructions, thousands of police officers and soldiers, along with health officials, are going house to house in “MOH divisions at risk of dengue,” identifying mosquito breeding places. Residents are being ordered to prevent these breeding places from developing while being threatened with legal action under dengue prevention laws if they fail to do so.

During the 2017 dengue outbreak, then President Maithripala Sirisena and his prime minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, took legal action against thousands of people accused of violating the dengue prevention laws.

The purpose of these operations is to help the government to wash its hands of any responsibility for stopping the disease and placing responsibility onto the population. Likewise, the deployment of police and military personnel, under the pretext of dengue prevention, is part of the increasing militarisation of political rule.

The real attitude of the Wickremesinghe government is revealed in its allocation for public health in the 2023 budget. While spending 539 billion rupees for its military-police repressive apparatus, it has allocated a meagre 322 billion rupees for health.

Successive Sri Lankan governments, including the current Wickremesinghe regime, have allocated less than 2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) to public health. Health, education and other basic social programs were gutted in order to pay for Colombo’s 26-year communalist war against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). These social attacks have intensified under IMF dictates since the 2008 global economic crash.

Sri Lanka’s public health system is on the brink of collapse with the government hospital network severely understaffed and lacking essential equipment and pharmaceuticals.

According to 2017 figures, the most recent available, there were only 1,720 public health inspectors (PHIs) in Sri Lanka—i.e., only one PHI for every 13,000 people. A PHI told the World Socialist Web Site that in some parts of the island, the proportion was 1 for every 30,000 people. The minimum World Health Organisation (WHO) standard is 1 to 10,000.

The training of professionals in the public health sector and awareness programs for people has been cut. Other measures, like spraying anti-mosquito larvae and smoking which was conducted by MOH offices and local government bodies, have been almost entirely ended.

The PHI who spoke to the WSWS explained: “If you want to control diseases like dengue, you have to implement advanced programs for solid waste management. Parallel programs are needed to provide the people with scientific knowledge on these diseases and their control. And for workers like us to do our duties with satisfaction, we should have decent wages and be freed from oppressively large workloads.”

Will Artificial Intelligence Determine the End of Humanity?

Nilantha Ilangamuwa

“I don’t see that human intelligence is something that people can never understand.”

~ John McCarthy (Father of Artificial Intelligence), March 1989

With the gradual and inevitable integration of artificial intelligence, human civilization is undergoing unprecedented changes. The question of whether we are witnessing the final phase of genuine humanity has become a focal point for many people. How can impoverished countries, the silent victims of technological tools wielded by dominant nations to fulfill their own needs and expand their power, confront this crisis? Human civilization, along with everything it encompasses, currently faces three major challenges, the response to which will determine its future survival.

The first and foremost challenge is the environmental crisis, a problem we are well aware of and comprehend its adverse consequences. Though discussions on various levels are taking place worldwide, there is a lack of meaningful national, regional, and global engagement. Environmentalists have been reduced to mere critics, while those in positions of power to enforce environmental laws and regulations often prioritize their narrow interests. Most individuals fail to envision taking positive steps and instead indulge in a blame game.

The second challenge lies in the potential consequences of nuclear weapons at a continental scale. This is not an issue to be taken lightly. If nuclear weapons, possessed by any nation, were to fall into the hands of hostile forces operating within or outside that nation, the resulting devastation would be catastrophic. Recent events such as the Cuban Missile Crisis and Israel’s intrusion into an Iranian-maintained nuclear power plant have underscored the dangers associated with this situation. Moreover, the behavior of extremist terrorist organizations within the region of South Asia, home to nuclear-armed rivals Pakistan and India, further exemplifies the gravity of the matter.

Despite the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons being in force since 1970, its core objectives have yet to be fully realized. Presently, nine countries officially acknowledge possessing nuclear weapons, maintaining around 12,700 of them, with 9,400 deployed at active military bases. While this marks a significant reduction compared to the 70,000 nuclear weapons held during the Cold War, the risk of gradual proliferation persists as state conflicts grow increasingly complex. Publicly available data suggests that a single nuclear weapon detonation in New York City could cause the immediate deaths of approximately 583,160 people. This signifies the immense destructive potential of nuclear weapons, capable of annihilating the world’s population of over eight billion within a very short span. Unfortunately, none of the nuclear-weapon states have signed the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which the United Nations adopted in 2021. This demonstrates that while responsible parties understand the challenge, the solutions are delayed due to power struggles among them.

The third challenge pertains to the irreversible development of artificial intelligence—an enigma that we partly understand yet dangerously assumes we comprehend fully. While many emphasize the benefits of AI’s advancement, there is reluctance to address the biases and prejudices gradually emerging within human civilization. AI’s primary products include social media networks that still remain under personal control and the everyday use of Google or other companies’ navigation systems. Additionally, instead of fingerprint scans or supervisor oversight, many introduced alternatives rely on artificial intelligence. ActivTrak informs managers if employees are spending excessive time on social media, Hubstaff captures snapshots of employees’ computer screens every five minutes, software like Teramind or Time Doctor monitors every online action, and InterGuard provides employers with minute-by-minute analysis of data, including browsing history. Numerous such software solutions have been introduced by various companies and individuals. While these advancements have yielded positive outcomes, they remain within the realm of human control, highlighting their potential benefits.

However, the year 2023 will be a significant turning point in artificial intelligence, demonstrating that machines can operate independently, solving problems posed by other machines. A relentless and mindless force, machines are seizing control over human thoughts, desires, and even entire civilizations. The role of biological individuals is gradually and irreversibly being overtaken by machines. This resembles Caesar crossing the Rubicon—a point of no return. The issue lies not in specific products like Google Bard, ChatGPT, Microsoft BinChat, Jasper, Chatsonic, or YouChat, but in the overarching technological phenomenon they represent. Uncontrolled artificial intelligence is becoming the ruler, with unimaginable consequences. It is upending human civilization as we know it and dissolving man-made structures. In short, it marks the beginning of the end of humanity as we currently understand it.

The day is approaching when a highly efficient robot armed with vast amounts of data will replace your child’s teacher. We are witnessing moments when robots compose songs and novels with greater intricacy than artists and writers themselves. Legal contracts are being drafted more accurately and effortlessly by robots compared to human lawyers. Our fundamental identities, once defined by our mother tongue (identical language), are diminishing. Artificial intelligence is assuming control over everything that surrounds us. Instead of the utopia we once dreamed of, where technology would bring the world closer together, we are facing a dystopia rooted in mechanical contentment.

In a world where the power struggle between nations prevents the establishment of common agreements for nuclear weapon management, thereby endangering the world, and where discussions on environmental destruction often result in empty rhetoric, can we overcome the challenges presented by artificial intelligence? The consequences go beyond job losses and a widening wealth gap; society is being pushed towards unforeseen social upheavals, and the very limits of human existence are being challenged. The effectiveness of new laws, regulations, and the notion of granting rights to robots instead of humans remains uncertain. Back in 1882, Friedrich Nietzsche, a German philosopher, spoke of the death of God. In 2023, artificial intelligence is determining the death of Homo sapiens sapiens —both in terms of our biological existence and the confines of our intelligence. So, is this not the end of humanity?”

Tens of thousands of excess deaths recorded in 2022 in England and Wales

Margot Miller

Tens of thousands of excess deaths were recorded in the UK last year, 32,441 people in England and Wales between May to December 2022 according to the Organisation for National Statistics.

This figure excludes those with COVID listed on the death certificate. The excess deaths were calculated as those above a five-year average from 2016-19 and 2021, excluding 2020 when the number of deaths spiked due to COVID fatalities.

Accident and Emergency unit in Poole Hospital, Dorset [Photo: WSWS]

Overall, there have been over 220,000 lives lost to COVID in Britain as a result of the government’s deliberate policy of mass infection. The toll was disproportionately heavy among older people, made worse by such murderous policies as the government’s emptying hospital geriatric wards into care homes without proper testing or isolation procedures.

As Professor David Coleman, Emeritus Professor of Demography at Oxford University, told the Mirror, this deepens the mystery of persistent excess deaths. With a large number of elderly people killed by the virus, “the remaining population should be healthier, there should be a period afterwards where deaths are lower than usual but that hasn’t happened.”

Even when taking into consideration a growing elderly population between 2016 to 2022, there are still a significant number of excess deaths. The Age-Related Standardised Mortality Rate (ARSMR) for December 22 was 5.8 percent above the five-year average.

Full scientific explanations of these facts are still being worked out. National mortality and excess death statistics are the product of a large number of complex factors affecting a huge and varied population. The evidence suggests, however, that this is not a temporary phenomenon, but the result of a general worsening of the health of the population, such that the UK now has the largest number of people out of work due to ill health on record—more than 2.5 million, or one in 14 working-age adults.

A major factor is doubtless the crisis in the health service, exposed and exacerbated by the pandemic. The National Health Service (NHS) has suffered deep funding cuts and privatisation, left with outdated buildings and equipment and record staff shortages. COVID-19 and the government’s policy of mass infection intensified staffing problems, leading to the deaths of many health workers and pushing thousands to leave the health profession due to either burnout or ill-health associated with COVID.

Before the pandemic, there were 4.43 million patients on the NHS waiting list. The figure for March 2023 is 7.33 million. This means that over 11 percent of the entire UK population of 66 million is waiting for treatment. Of these, 3.3 million have waited over 18 weeks and 360,000 for over a year.

The number of people seen by a specialist consultant within two weeks of an urgent referral by a General Practitioner (GP) was 83.9 percent for March 2023—the government target of 93 percent has not been met since May 2020. For many, getting a GP appointment in the first place is a nightmare, with too many patients to each doctor. Sometimes GPs are unable to make referrals for hospital care because slots are unavailable, which means the care falls back on the GP, increasing pressure on overstretched primary care.

Delays can mean chronic conditions become acute, putting lives in danger and further pressure on the NHS. Only 54 percent of cancer patients received treatment within two months, according to statistics from this January, as GP referrals increased 12 percent versus January 2022. By June last year, the number of patients waiting more than the maximum 18 weeks for cardiac treatment had trebled since February 2020 to nearly 100,000. According to Diabetes UK, there has been a 13 percent increase in diabetes associated deaths compared to pre-pandemic figures.

In December-January last winter, potentially thousands of excess deaths were attributed to worst-ever wait times for ambulances and in Accident and Emergency departments.

Right-wing commentators are doing their best to attribute this crisis to the lockdowns implemented in the first two years of the pandemic. This is totally bogus. The main blow dealt to the NHS was by the repeated rampant spread of COVID-19 promoted by the “let it rip” policy, overflowing hospitals with desperately ill people.

Lockdowns were reluctantly implemented by the government under duress, fearing social anger at the consequences of its policies. As far as they impeded access to healthcare and other services, this was due to their totally improvised, unplanned-for character, with no provision made for managing COVID upon reopening, let alone looking after the broader health of the population.

Writing in the Guardian against the “weaponization” of excess death statistics to attack lockdowns last September, Chair of Global Public Health at the University of Edinburgh Professor Devi Sridhar, pointed to “a mix of the new burden of Covid-19 and an overloaded health service.” She noted, “Covid is making us sicker and more vulnerable to other diseases (research suggests it may contribute to delayed heart attacks, strokes, and dementia).”

This is the great unmentionable in most of the media because it refutes the ruling elite’s narrative that the pandemic is over, in order that nothing get in the way of profit-making and pursuing war against Russia.

Prompted by the Democratic Party administration in the US, which has permitted its COVID-19 public health emergency to expire, the World Health Organisation declared that COVID is no longer a public health emergency of international concern. This despite a further million dying from the virus globally the past three months, and the emergence of new variants. The Conservative government, with full backing from Labour and trade unions, lifted its remaining COVID restrictions in England in February 2022 under a “living with COVID” plan.

As the World Socialist Web Site noted in relation to the Biden government’s move, COVID -19 is to “remain permanently embedded in society, continuing to infect, disable and kill masses of people for the foreseeable future.”

It is likely that most of the world’s population have been infected at least once, and there is a mountain of growing evidence as to the long-term sequelae of infection. According to the Lancet, “Almost 90 percent of COVID-19 survivors have developed sequelae, including not only general symptoms such as fatigue but also severe neurological, cardiac, renal or respiratory manifestations.”

The COVID-19 pandemic is the most advanced expression of a broader reversal of public health standards driven by the pursuit of profit over human needs. According to the Public Health Foundation, the grant dedicated to preventive medicine has been cut by 26 percent in real terms per person since 2015/16.

Worsening social inequality and poverty are also major contributors to poor health in the population, including obesity and mental health problems. Coleman noted that “some people have been forecasting separately from Covid that death rates would continue to get worse because the country is so unhealthy.”

Sridhar listed as other probable causes of the UK’s excess deaths “an extremely hot summer,” linked to climate change, and “the cost of living crisis and concerns about fuel poverty.” Both of which point to capitalism’s complete failure to secure a healthy environment for the population.

Significant signs of slowdown in Chinese economy

Nick Beams

When China scrapped its zero-COVID policy at the end of last year under pressure from the major powers and global corporations, they anticipated its economy would sharply rebound providing an impetus to global growth. The latest Chinese economic data reveal that is not taking place.

A worker assembles electronic devices at an Alco Electronics factory in Houjie Town, Dongguan City, in the Guangdong province of China. [AP Photo/Ng Han Guan]

Figures released earlier this week showed that both industrial output and consumer spending were well short of expectations.

Industrial production increased by 5.6 percent, but this was far below the forecast of a 10.6 percent rise. Coming off a low base because of the decline in spending due to anti-COVID measures, consumer spending was up by 18.4 percent year on year, but also below forecasts.

One of the most significant figures was the rise in youth unemployment. For those aged between 16 and 24 it hit a new record of 20.4 percent, surpassing the previous record of 19.9 percent last summer.

The overall jobless level fell to 5.2 percent but the rise in youth unemployment indicates that jobs cannot be found for an increasing number of young people graduating from universities and colleges.

The rise in youth unemployment—and what this indicates for the future—is clearly of concern for the government of Xi Jinping because it bases its political legitimacy on the assertion that it will continue to ensure economic growth and rising living standards.

At a briefing on the latest data, National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) spokesperson Fu Linghui said: “More efforts need to be made to stabilise and expand employment for young people.”

The NBS has pointed to both global and domestic conditions as weighing on the economy. It said, “the global environment is still complex and grim, and domestic demand still looks insufficient” and that the economy’s “internal drive for rebound is still not strong.”

Figures on inflation underscore this assessment. In contrast to the situation in many other parts of the world, China’s consumer prices rose by only 0.1 percent in the year to April, the lowest increase since February 2021. Producer prices have also fallen for seven consecutive months, giving rise to concerns that a deflationary environment could be setting in.

According to a report in the South China Morning Post (SCMP), deflation worries have “deepened as seven provinces and major cities, including Shanghai, Henan, Liaoning and Shanxi, reported year-on-year contractions in consumer prices last month.”

The property market and real estate development, which have been key drivers of the Chinese economy for more than a decade, are also an area of concern. Property investment was down 6.2 percent for the year so far, worse than the expectation of a 5.7 percent fall.

The longer-term trend is also down. According to calculations by Bloomberg, while property sales rose by 13.2 percent year-on-year to April, investment in the sector contracted by 16.2 percent for the year and construction of new homes continued to fall.

Trade figures are pointing in the same direction and highlight the impact of the worsening global economic outlook. The International Monetary Fund has forecast that apart from the contraction in 2008‒2009 and the recession induced by the onset of COVID in 2020, this year will see the lowest global growth this century.

Chinese exports rose by 8.5 percent last month. While this was higher than expectations, it was well down on the 14.8 percent increase in March.

The worsening situation was more clearly reflected in the falls in imports, which to a great extent comprise components and raw materials for future Chinese production. They shrank by 7.9 percent, worse than expected, the result of a slowing global economy.

The demand for smartphones, integrated circuits, and computers, assembled from imported components, has been falling for months, an expression of weakening global demand.

Iris Pang, chief economist for Greater China and the financial firm ING commented to the SCMP: “It seems increasingly clear that the global economic slowdown is weighing on China’s exports. Falling imports—an input for future exports—suggest a further deterioration of exports in the coming months is highly likely.”

She predicted that in response the government would step to support manufacturing employment through stimulus measures.

The April official manufacturing purchasing managers’ index—an indicator of future activity—fell to 49.2. after remaining above the 50-point mark separating expansion and contraction for the first months of the year.

Comments by financial analysts all pointed to a significant slowdown in the Chinese economy.

According to Bruce Pang, chief economist for Greater China at Jones Lang Lasalle, the weaker-than-expected data showed “how difficult it is to keep the growth engine running after restarting it.” While there would be a growth of activity in the second quarter “on the back of a lower base”—the comparison with last year—it would be lower than the first quarter of this year “as the recovery is losing steam.”

Xiangrong Yu, chief China economist at Cito, wrote in a note: “China’s activity indicators missed expectations by a wide mark even with a favourable base” and with China now out of the “sweet spot” of reopening, the hope of further repair in sentiment “could be diminishing in the absence of decisive government actions.”

Julian Evans-Pritchard of Capital Economics suggested the reopening recovery still had some way to go but it was “likely to fizzle out in the second half of the year” because of unwinding fiscally, lower credit growth, the weakening housing market, and the impact of global demand on Chinese exports.

Facing the Reality of a Multi-Polar World

Derek Royden

Image Source: User:Quintucket – CC0

The past few months have brought with them some diplomatic triumphs on the world stage, not one of them attributable to the United States or its NATO allies. The most impressive was the Chinese initiative to bring Saudi Arabia and its regional enemy Iran together to iron out their differences.

While neither country is a champion of human rights, and sectarian divisions have long been used to drive tensions by both, easing the discord between them could lead to a more stable Middle East over the longer term. It also seems like the detente might finally bring the proxy slaughter in Yemen, the poorest country in the region, to an end, a good enough reason on its own to applaud China’s efforts.

A proposed future agreement with Riyadh to trade oil between the two in Yuan instead of American dollars could also spell trouble for U.S. global economic dominance, which hinges on the petro dollar.

As if to show that it’s positioning itself to move out of the Western sphere of influence, Saudi Arabia also struck a deal with the Russian Federation to end the regional isolation imposed on Syria’s government during its civil war. Despite objections on the part of Kuwait and Qatar, this will bring the country back into regional forums like the Arab League.

An argument can be made that Saudi’s diplomatic opening to these American rivals is in part blowback on the part of the country’s leadership for the widespread condemnation caused by the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018, presumably at the order of Saudi Arabia’s de facto leader, Crown Prince Muhammad Bin-Salman.

Still, quiet diplomacy clearly played a role in China’s coup and surprised the world.

At the same time China is making diplomatic inroads with a key American ally, another BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa–the rising powers in the world) nation, Brazil, is reviving the idea that non-aligned states, especially in the Global South, can work together to better their positions relative to wealthier countries and fight common threats like climate change.

President Lula de Silva has not only infuriated the United States by opening up dialogue with neighboring Venezuela, which his predecessor had ended, but also by following long established precedent in Brazil and refusing to send arms to the Ukraine. He has further angered Washington by attempting to bring that country and Russia to the negotiating table with a proposed ‘G20 for peace’ to end the war there.

It should be possible to both denounce Russia’s war of aggression and seek a way out of it through dialogue, but it sometimes feels like the West’s armchair generals want a battle down to the last Ukrainian. Whether these voices like it or not, there is little support for this war in the Global South, not least because many poor countries rely on exports of grain and fertilizer from both to feed their citizens.

A big part of the failure of American foreign policy in this young century is the fact that so much of it is in the hands of political appointees rather than career diplomats that usually have a more nuanced understanding of different countries and regions. All too often in the U.S. and neighboring Canada, important diplomatic posts are assigned to donors and political operatives as a reward for their work on campaigns.

Another major problem is that as a result of a military that spends more than the next 10 countries combined, the United States has learned to rely on its big stick and rarely offers carrots to those governments it’s designated as enemies. Constructive dialogue is difficult conducted while looking into the barrel of a gun.

Their failures at diplomacy put the United States and its closest allies at risk of becoming isolated in an increasingly multi-polar world. Rather than accepting the growing soft power of other nations like China and Brazil and trying to productively engage with them to deal with issues from conflict to climate change, far too many Western political leaders are refusing to face this new reality.

The U.S. never wants war on its own soil, but seems perpetually eager to generate massive profits for its overwhelmingly powerful armaments industry by supplying weapons to the world in conflict. The rest of the world may at last be rejecting that war footing, if the signs from these new initiatives are an indication.