Tolerance And Framework Of Islamic Democracy

Gulam Asgar Mitha

Whereas knowledge breeds humility among great people,Ignorance breeds arrogance among little people---an opinion by this author

Thus far, the image of Islam has been one of extremism, intolerance and terrorism. That certainly is not what Islam means. It means peace. So what has happened that this religion has been so vehemently tarnished? Historically all great religions have gone through this phase, predominantly by the misrepresentations by the clergy who have exploited the illiterate and impoverished followers. In the past half century Muslim clerics too have misrepresented Islam starting with those who've been exposed to Wahhabi teachings and fundings through their madressas (religious schools) in Saudi Arabia. Thousands of such madressas then sprung up in Pakistan’s cities, towns and villages giving rise to the vulnerable students known as Taliban. Pakistani political leaders picked the cue and bowed to the will of the masses giving rise to “political Islam”.

In 1974, a violent campaign, led mainly by the Majlis-e-Ahrar-e-Islam and Jamaat-e-Islami, began against the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in Pakistan, on the pretext of a clash between Ahmadis and non-Ahmadis at the railway station of Rabwah (district of Chiniot, province of Punjab, Pakistan). This campaign resulted in several Ahmadi casualties and destruction of Ahmadiyya property, including the desecration of mosques and graves.

As a result of pressure from this agitation, legislation and constitutional changes were enacted to criminalize the religious practices of Ahmadis by preventing them from claiming they are Muslim. These changes primarily came about due to the pressure of the Saudi King at the time, King Faisal bin As-Saud, according to Dr Mubashar HassanNOTE, Prime Minister Bhutto's close confidant at the time. Pakistan's parliament adopted a law that declares Ahmadis non-Muslims.
On 26 April 1984, General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, then President of Pakistan, issued the anti-Ahmadiyya Ordinance XX,[22] which effectively prohibited Ahmadis from preaching or professing their beliefs.

Myself and a friend recently visited the Ahmaddi mosque in Calgary and were cordially greeted and given explanation of the Ahmadi Muslim faith. We also heard the mid-day afternoon (duhr) call to prayers(adhan). Many misconceptions that have been created as a result of political animosity were cleared with my own understanding of the faith, not only as a result of the visit but through my own research verification following the visit. This does not mean that I've adopted the faith (mine is none other than Islam). So what is Ahmadiyya belief and how is it different from Islam? Except for a very few deviations of no great significance, they're Muslims and no one has any rights to condemn the faith without knowledge.

One thing is certain that it is a peaceful movement significantly different than Wahhabism that is based on intolerance. Islam - through the Holy Quran and the teachings of all the prophets preaches tolerance and encourages the seeking of truth and knowledge. Ahmadi Muslims believe that there cannot be a conflict between the word of God and the work of God, and thus religion and science must work in harmony with each other. Ahmadis follow the five pillars of Islam (which includes Shahada or Faith i.e. Unity of God and Muhammad as the last Messenger of God) and the six articles of belief and as such they're Muslims. There are, however, a few deviations but such exist in every Islamic sect or in every religion. There is no basis that such deviations should be used as means of condemnation that Ahmadis or any other Islamic sects are non-Muslims.

Zafarullah Khan (besides Dr. Abdus Salam) has been among the most talented of Pakistanis- a nationalist. He hails from an Ahmadi family. It'd be prudent for Muslims, specially Pakistanis, to conduct an unbiased research to understand Ahmadiyya faith and discard their misunderstandings created by illiterate clergy and two of the most biased leaders of Pakistan who themselves least understood Islam and used it for their political aspirations. Both leaders (Zulfiqar Bhutto and Zia-ul-Haq) met their fates - one at the end of a rope and the other in mid-air.

As Pakistan's first Foreign Minister, Zafarullah Khan addressed the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan in the days leading up to the passing of the Objectives Resolution. The Objectives Resolution, which combined features of both Western and Islamic democracy, is one of the most important documents in the constitutional history of Pakistan. It was designed to provide equal rights for all citizens of Pakistan, regardless of their race, religion or background.

It is a matter of great sorrow that, mainly through mistaken notions of zeal, the Muslims have during the period of decline earned for themselves an unenviable reputation for intolerance. But that is not the fault of Islam. Islam has from the beginning proclaimed and inculcated the widest tolerance. For instance, so far as freedom of conscience is concerned the Quran says "There shall be no compulsion" of faith... — Muhammad Zafarullah Khan, Addressing the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, c. 1949

In 1954, Zafarullah Khan became a Judge at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, a position he held until 1961. He was the Vice-President of the International Court of Justice from 1958 to 1961. Between 1961 and 1964, he was Pakistan's Permanent Representative at the United Nations. From 1962 to 1964, he was also the President of the UN General Assembly. He later rejoined the ICJ as a judge from 1964 to 1973, serving as President from 1970 to 1973. He died in Lahore, Pakistan in 1985 at the age of 92.

Islamic democracy is a political ideology that seeks to apply Islamic principles to public policy within a democratic framework. Islamic political theory specifies three basic features of an Islamic democracy: leaders must be elected by the people, subject to sharia (religious legal system) and committed to practicing "shura", a special form of consultation (national assembly) practiced by Prophet Muhammad, which one can find in various hadiths, with their community. Countries which fulfil the three basic features include Iran, Pakistan and Malaysia. Note: Many western and Muslim jurists agree that countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Jordan are not part of Islamic or western democracy.

Asma Jehangir, Human Rights activist - AHMADIS HAVE IT THE WORST- on Rabwah Times, speaking at the Hudson Institute on May 18, 2016 and moderated by Hussain Haqqani, former Pakistani Ambassador to the US.
https://www.rabwah.net/ahmadis-have-it-the-worst-asma-jahangir/

NOTEVideo of Dr. Mubashar Hassan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfmdDlTCtPU on why Saudi Arabia pressured Bhutto to declare Ahmadis as non-Muslims

Building Trust In Afghanistan

Kathy Kelly

Nisar Works in the Centre Garden

Here in Kabul, I read a recent BBC op-ed by Ahmed Rashid, urging a “diplomatic offensive” to build or repair relationships with the varied groups representing armed extremism in Afghanistan. Rashid has insisted, for years, that severe mistrust makes it almost impossible for such groups to negotiate an end to Afghanistan’s nightmare of war.

Glancing upward at one of the six U.S. manufactured aerostat blimps performing constant surveillance over Kabul, I wonder if the expensively high-tech giant’s-eye view encourages a primitive notion that the best way to solve a problem here is to target a “bad guy” and then kill him. If the bad guys appear to be scurrying dots on the ground below, stomp them out.

Crushing only the right dots has proven very difficult for a U.S. drone warfare program documented to have killed many civilians. News sources speculate that the recent drone assassination of Taliban leader Akthar Mansour makes an end to this war far less likely. A commentator for the highly respected Afghan Analyst Network has written that “with the U.S. killing Akhtar Mansur, it is unlikely the Taleban will be set on anything but revenge for now, as can be understood from the movement’s political psychology… There is no reason to believe the fighting will de-escalate with the new leadership.”

Was that simple prediction available to the U.S.' giant's-eye view?

My young friends among the Afghan Peace Volunteers have shown me a vastly different approach toward problem solving. In a sense, they’ve been launching a diplomatic outreach, refining their approach through trial and error over the course of several years, taking careful steps toward building trust between different ethnic groups, and also relying on their own personal stories to help them understand the cares and concerns of others. Throughout their efforts they’ve tried to be guided by Gandhi’s advice about considering the poorest person’s needs before making a decision.

What has brought a non-violent future closer to Afghanistan – giant sized military and surveillance systems or the accomplishments of young volunteers working to develop inter-ethnic projects?

20 teams are working at the Borderfree Center organizing practical activities within communities coping with multiple economic woes, including food insecurity, unemployment, and inadequate income for meeting basic needs.

Young people travel to and from the Center along unpaved roads lined on both sides with sewage filled drainage ditches. Traffic is chaotic, and the air is so polluted that many wear protective face masks. Day laborers congregate at intersections waiting in desperation for the opportunity to perform hard labor for $2.00 a day or less.

Even those fortunate enough to receive an education will likely face extreme difficulty in finding a job. Unemployment is at an all-time high of 40% and many jobs are attained only through ‘connections.’

Throughout Kabul, refugees crowd into squalid, sprawling camps where people live without adequate protection from harsh weather. According to The U.N.’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, between Jan. 1 and April 30 this year, “117,976 people fled their homes due to conflict.” And, the U.N. says it has only received 16 percent of funds needed for humanitarian assistance in Afghanistan this year.

Nisar, one of the students at the Borderfree Center’s Street Kids School, understands destitution all too well. He has been earning an income for his family since he was a small child, working as a shoeshine boy on Kabul streets and also in a butcher shop. Now, at age 17, he will soon graduate from three years of classes with the Street Kids School. In the past year, he has been a steady volunteer, taking on responsibilities with the duvet project and the organic gardening team. Nisar says that when he first came to the Center, three years ago, he felt astonished to see people from different ethnic backgrounds sitting together. Nisar’s family comes from the Wardak province, and relatives of his are among those who recently fled the Taleban. He clearly understands the terrible risks that armed struggle could bring, even here in “Ka-bubble” as Kabul is sometimes called because of the relative calm that still prevails here. In spite of tensions, Nisar feels sure that when people learn to overcome their fears and start talking with one another, they can set aside hatreds taught to them at young ages.

U.S. planners, heads lost in the sky, seemingly pay little heed to developing ways of building trust. Resources are gobbled up by gigantic multinational “defense” companies dedicated to the task of further, trampling warfare, while withholding anything like the quantity of resources needed for the task of repairing the wreckage they themselves have caused.

U.S. think tanks cleverly promote cartoonized versions of foreign policy wherein the mighty giant strikes a fist and eliminates the “bad guy” whom we are told has caused our problems. But I believe U.S. people would be better off if we could see the often-suffering communities that show admirable qualities as they try to survive. We could learn from their efforts to build mutual trust and solidarity, and their courage to reject war. We could insist that the massively well-endowed US and NATO powers finally acknowledge that the best hopes for a lasting peace come when communities experience a measure of stability and prosperity. The giant powers could help alleviate the desperate need faced by people enduring hunger, disease and homelessness.

U.S. people should earnestly ask how the U.S. could help build trust here in Afghanistan, and, as a first step, begin transferring funds from the coffers of weapon companies to the UN accounts trying to meet humanitarian needs. The “giant” could be seen stooping, humbly, to help plant seeds, hoping for a humane harvest.

Is Humankind Suffering Of A Global Alzheimer Disease?

Ugo Bardi

The human brain is the most complex thing we know in the whole universe. It is also fragile, and prone to malfunctioning. Civilization is also a complex system, fragile and prone to malfunctioning. Perhaps some ailments of the human brain, such as the Alzheimer disease, have their equivalent at the civilization level. (image source)

My parents had been married for 58 years when my mother died. That was a terrible loss for my father, then 86 years old, and I was much worried about his health. But I was relieved when I saw that, after a few months, he seemed to have recovered from the shock. He remained active and he could manage his everyday life without special assistance. He could take the bus, alone, and walk alone in the neighborhood. He even made new friends and spent time with them.

However, something was wrong with my father. Terribly wrong.

I remember a conversation that my father had, at that time, with my son about some plants that were growing on a steep slope of the garden. He wanted to cut them down and my son, who is a geologist, was trying to explain to him that it wasn't a good idea; the roots of these plants were keeping the ground of the slope stable. But my father didn't agree and he insisted that he wanted to get rid of those plants. I watched that conversation, more and more distressed, while my father kept building up all sorts of arguments to counter my son's ones. Jumping from one subject to the other, he was able to move the conversation in a cycle; never really answering on any point, but always switching to something else. It went on, perhaps, for one hour and it ended with my father not having budged of an inch from his position, leaving me and my son looking at each other, baffled.

That conversation was the first evidence of the onset of the Alzheimer disease for my father. At that time, I didn't really understand that, mainly because I didn't want to. But the symptoms kept mounting until my father died at 92, his mind gone. Nevertheless, for a few years, he managed to hide very well the symptoms of his mental decline. He was both intelligent and brilliant and he had developed all sorts of strategies to avoid finding himself trapped in a situation that would show his problem. He would get out of troubles by a joke, a witty comment, a humorous quip, or simply by changing subject.

But my father could get away with his problem only with acquaintances. For the members of his family, his condition was evident. Maybe you know the metaphor of the "ghost in the machine;" it says that there is a little ghost in the brain or somewhere that controls the bigger machine that's the human body. That ghost wasn't inside my father anymore. He was gradually becoming something like an answering machine, a very sophisticated one, but a machine. He was like one of those computer programs that purport to simulate human intelligence. He would be able to speak to people, and even to answer to them in ways that seemed to be superficially correct. But, like an answering machine, he wasn't really listening, the ghost was gone.

This story of some years ago came back to my mind as I was reading an article by David Dunning, titled "The Psychological Quirk That Explains Why You Love Donald Trump" You may know Dunning in relation to the "Dunning-Kruger" effect, a feature of the human mind that makes people convinced that they are competent in some subject, and that makes them the more convinced, the less they know about that subject. Or course, the Dunning-Kruger effect is not the same thing as the Alzheimer disease, but in his article Dunning highlights the fact that there is a mental problem with many people engaged in the political debate. I think it is true. There is such a problem.

When I read or hear Donald Trump's statements, I can't avoid thinking about that ill-fated conversation when my father argued with my son about cutting those plants in the garden. It was the same kind of exchange: people who just appear to be debating, but aren't really understanding each other. In the political statements by Donald Trump, I see something of the way my father would react during the initial stages of the disease. The same unsupported statements shot at random, the same absolute certainty shown by someone who, really, had no idea about what he was speaking about.

That doesn't mean that I can say that Donald Trump has Alzheimer. He might, others seem to have noticed that there is something badly wrong in the way he behaves (h/t Clark Urbans for the link). But there is no way to diagnose Alzheimer with any certainty when it is in its early stages. However, the problem is not specifically with Donald Trump. No; this sensation of discussing with an Alzheimer patient comes often to me when following a political discussion in the media or in the comments of a blog or on social media. The debate doesn't seem to be among people who listen to each other. Rather, it seems to be among people who throw statements at each other as if they were tennis balls. Think of tennis players: they are not interested in the color of the ball they play with, only to throw the ball back to their opponents as fast as possible. So, in these debates, people don't seem to be interested in the meaning of what's being told to them, just to throw something back at their opponents as fast as possible.

Do you know the political tactics called the "Gish Gallop"? It consists in drowning an opponent in a torrent of arguments, one after the other, ignoring the counter-arguments. It can be used by perfectly sane people, but, at the same time, it is the ideal strategy to conceal one's mental disease. It describes very well the strategy that my father used for that purpose. So, those people whom we call trolls, are they just nasty, or are they sick? How many people in high-level position could be affected by the Alzheimer disease and yet be smart enough to hide the early symptoms? We already had a president, Ronald Reagan, who may have been in the early stage of Alzheimer during the last period of his presidency. That may not have caused big problems, but don't you have the sensation that the world is ruled by people affected by some form of dementia?

Could it be that we suffer from an Alzheimer-like civilization disease? That would explain why civilization never arrives at doing something useful about the terrible threats if faces, first of all, climate change. Maybe there really is no ghost in the machine we call civilization. It is a giant machine that stumbles around while arguing with itself in an endless squabble and getting nowhere.

My father, Giuliano Bardi (1922-2014) was an architect and a high school teacher. As an architect, he didn't have the chance to build many structures, but those that he built show the cleanliness of lines that was typical of the modernist school of architecture. He designed and had built the house where he lived until his death and where his family still lives today. I remember him for his keen spirit of observation that made him able to discover unsuspected details on anything. He was also a brilliant teacher, much loved by his students. So much that at his funeral many of them remembered him well enough that they came to say farewell to him for the last time.

India: Four States, Five Trends

D Suba Chandran

On 19 May 2016, results of legislative assembly elections of four Indian states – two from South India (Kerala and Tamil Nadu) and two from the East (West Bengal and Assam) – were announced. While there were no big surprises in the results and not much in common between them, they do project certain trends. Some of these trends reflect continuity with the past, while the others are new and need to be watched closely for their likely implications.

Challenges for the BJPFirst, the election results in these four states (and a Union Territory – Pondicherry, a former French Colony) do highlight the challenges for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to penetrate into all of India. Barring Assam, where the BJP overthrew the long-standing Congress rule led by former Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi, in the other three states, the Party’s performance has been marginal and insignificant. In Kerala, it was able to win only one of the total 140 seats; and in Tamil Nadu, it could win none of 232 seats (declared so far). In West Bengal, although it has secured more seats than in Kerala and Tamil Nadu, its tally of six seats out of 294, is insignificant.

Assam has been the only exception for the BJP. The unpopularity of the Congress rule (Gogoi had been the chief minister for the past three consecutive terms) and the BJP’s sustained campaign should have tilted the voting in its favour. In the other three states, the BJP has never been strong (or even present strongly) despite its strong campaign. However, in terms of vote share, the BJP has made an important beginning. Having its leaders talking in TV shows and occupying a media space is different from having a substantial vote share.

Decline of the Congress PartyThe second major trend that should extremely be worrying for those who are watching national politics is the further decline of the Congress. While the BJP never had a strong presence in these states, the Congress always had a substantial contribution to the state politics, either as a ruling party, or as its coalition, or a strong opposition. Barring Assam, its performance in all other four states has been pathetic in the recent elections. It managed to secure 26 of the total 120 seats in Assam; but its performance in Kerala, West Bengal and Tamil Nadu do not augur well either for the Congress’s future, or for national politics.

National Parties and the PeripheryThe third major trend is an extension of the above two – the failure of national parties to have its presence in the periphery, and the relevance of strong regional political parties. Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress (TMC) in West Bengal, along with Jayalalitha’s All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) and Karunanidhi’s Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) in Tamil Nadu, signify the power of regional political parties. While few nationalists project this as worrying factor, in a large multi-ethnic country such as India, strong regional political parties actually strengthen federalism by playing a crucial role in the national parliament.

At times (in fact, more often than otherwise) regional political parties are accused of sabotaging national interests in terms of pursuing New Delhi’s foreign policy vis-a-vis the neighbourhood. New Delhi has to take into account the interests of Tamil Nadu vis-à-vis Sri Lanka and West Bengal vis-à-vis Bangladesh. And this should be seen in a positive framework where the Centre accommodates and works with its periphery in framing foreign policy. Strong regional parties play a substantial role in strengthening federal fabric.

In a large federal country, it is important to have strong regional presence in the national parliament. All three (federation, regional parties and parliament) should have a symbiotic relationship for successful national governance.

Women LeadershipThe fourth trend in these elections is the continuation of women power. While other political parties were looking for alliances, Jayalalitha decided to fight on her own in Tamil Nadu. Mamata Banerjee led the campaign in West Bengal for the TMC. With Mayawati in Uttar Pradesh and Mehbooba Mufti in J&K, India can boast of strong women leadership at the state levels. Significantly, they are outside the Congress family and did not come from a political dynasty. Mehbooba Mufti is the only exception in this – her Jammu and Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was founded and led by her father, who was earlier with the Congress. And none of the four women leaders belong to the BJP. All of them are extremely strong-willed and independent.

Strong women leadership, especially at the regional levels portends well not only for the politics, but also for social equations. Predominantly a patriarchal society, South Asia needs strong women leadership, that too evolving on their own and not from a political dynasty owing their rise to their fathers or husbands. Mayawati, Mamata and Jayalalitha have evolved from the grassroots and should be seen as a part of social evolution and not through their family connections. Male leaders not only respect leaders like Mamata and Jayalalitha, but also fear them. Undoubtedly, there is an also an element of sycophancy. For example, Tamil leaders refer to Jayalalitha as Amma (mother) and visibly carry her photo on their pockets and fall on her feet to take blessings. Such trends though do not portend well for democratic politics, do indirectly play a role in women becoming confident in an otherwise male dominated society in South Asia.

They are not only independent and strong, but also avowedly secular, liberal and even business friendly. On the negative side, they are known for their autocratic and arrogant attitude; and their earlier terms have also been marked with corruption.

Decline of the Left

The fifth trend, which is an extremely worrisome one, is the continuing decline of the Left. Though the Left front has bounced back in Kerala, it has lost completely in West Bengal, which used to be its stronghold. Of the total 294 seats for West Bengal, they came third with only 33 seats and that too below the Congress’s 44. The decline is not only taking place at the party level; there is a leadership and ideological crisis within. The fact that they had aligned with the Congress in West Bengal (while fighting them in Kerala) would highlight the hypocrisy within.

While the Left in South Asia is on the decline all over, such a trend does not portend well, as the Right has been increasing its electoral power in the Assemblies and muscle power in the streets. Given the need for a strong secular state and social equality between the classes, a declining Left bereft of a strong ideology is a disaster in waiting. The Left in India has to blame itself for reaching this situation. Preaching about Marx and harping on anti-American and capitalist critiques will not sell any further.

Barbarism and the Smell of Cordite

Vijay Shankar

Aggregation of power is never more apparent than when there is dramatic increase in state controlled power-activism. Equally impactful is the growing disregard for moral principles when power (political, corporate or military) is exercised. The wars and repression in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, Yemen, Xinxiang and Tibet are continuous reminders of the nexus between state policy and savagery on the field despite the messianic goal of delivering freedom to the “downtrodden.”

Historically, whether it was the Kremlin’s control over its satellites, Japan’s atrocities in Manchuria, fascist Italy’s carnage in North Africa, China’s subjugation of Tibet or Pakistan’s genocide in the erstwhile East Pakistan; the pattern of state policy unleashing barbarism is familiar. What is not fully recognised is the manner in which technology serves to intensify violence exponentially, on all sides. Unfortunately, the advance of science and technology in the last century and indeed over the epochs has not gone with any comparable advance in human understanding of conflict and how best to mitigate the physical gore of warfare. Instead, the increase of knowledge has repeatedly intruded to generate new forms of atrocities on scales that are unprecedented.

At the state level, the idea of killing machines controlled from great distances executing their missions with chilling precision with neither the palpability of a human in combat nor an ethical code of restraint is most unsettling. Experience from the ‘drone war’ currently being waged in Syria, Afghanistan and Pakistan presages the advent of far more lethal systems employing advanced hypersonic remotely operated weapons at hair trigger notice, bringing to the fore all of our techno-moral anxieties. The recent testimony of Brandon Bryant, a former US pilot and ‘predator’ drone operator, at the UN and in the German Parliament leaves a slithering sense that screens and sensors have stolen from reality human feelings, replacing it with a one-sided dystopian view of conflict. The drone operator stated, “... And I watched him bleed out of his femoral artery. And [sic] he’s rolling on the ground, and I can—I imagined his last moments. I didn’t know what to feel. I just knew that I had ended something that I had no right to end.”

Bertrand Russell in his 1915 essay titled “The Ethics of War” suggested that the “fundamental facts in this, as in all ethical questions, are feelings.” However, contemporary mores of conflict gives first propriety to instant success with low or no casualty return. This places power in a position of primacy and in the process relegates ethics to abstraction. In its station is a self-ordained faultlessness of cause, making justification of killing a juridical issue played by the rules of the powerful. In the process, legitimising the extermination of as many as modern armaments makes possible, becomes a foregone conclusion. Whatever became of “the smell of cordite?” Is all now simulacra?

The real issue is the absence of an accepted and well complied rule book (notwithstanding the Geneva and Hague Conventions), opening the question as to why it is that right or wrong is determined solely on the power status of a nation, thereby absolving states of the consequences of their actions. Clearly extrapolating a law and order approach internal to a state in matters of international relations is not only in transgression of the idea of sovereignty but brings with it the natural abhorrence of a super cop. Unfortunately, national interests, corporate fortunes, political insincerity and primordial prejudices besides the ideal propel international relations. The reality is that leadership is wedded to antiquated beliefs to make policy, while instruments to implement are driven by technologies that have long outpaced these beliefs (in terms of their destructive potential and the ability to generate an illusion that the very same beliefs can be clinically realised). This would also appear to be the strategic crisis of these times.

To advocate democracy by war as is being done today in Afghanistan, West Asia and elsewhere through recent history, is only to repeat, on a vast scale and with far more tragic results, the error of those who have sought it hitherto by covert means, the terrorist’s bomb or through ideological indoctrination. Contemporary geopolitics exemplifies the predicament.

Pacifists have long suggested that there is no reason why settlement of all disputes by the UN cannot be undertaken. Their plea that this great trial of our times has worked itself out towards only one conclusion and that is global disaster and suggested that “when the passions of hate and self-assertion have given place to compassion with the universal misery, nations will perhaps realise that they have fought in blindness and delusion, and that the way of mercy is the way of happiness for all” (Bertrand Russell). Actually, very little stands in the way of such romanticism other than nationalism, religion and the pride of leadership who wish to remain uncontrolled by anything higher than sovereign will. In truth, these are all formidable human traits; they are also at the root of violent struggles that trend towards a one-sided faultlessness of cause. Brandon Bryant’s testimony was an articulation of the absence of ‘feelings’ that pushed morality out of the frame and ushered a dystopian vision of warfare.

Ethics in warfare is a complex and often intriguing subject. Killing, at the individual level, has long been taboo with most civilisations; and yet when the scale of proportions is expanded to the state level, there appears historically an attempt to define just cause, just conduct and in more recent times, a morality in post-war settlement. The Christian tradition that exerted to propagate such a perspective saw for both jus ad bellum and jus in bello an awkward and often partisan arbiter, the Catholic Church. Yet, what perhaps provides a more elegant and convincing standpoint are the dialogues between Lord Krishna and the warrior prince Arjuna in the Indian epic Mahabharata.

The discussions begin with the right to war and the criteria that make for a righteous one; the various gradations that postulated proportionality, just means and morality in the conduct of operations were central to the discourse while equality of combatants, their fair treatment and honour in war termination were of essence if victory were to be considered ethical. But then the problem has always been and remains: how, who or what will intercede on the side of the just? Particularly so when exceptional virtuosity is the right of the victor.

Not to labour the point, a quarter of a century ago on 20 December 1989, President George HW Bush launched Operation Just Cause, sending troops and combat aircrafts into Panama to execute a warrant of arrest against its leader Manuel Noriega (noisily condemned by the UN). A one-time CIA asset and close ally, he faced charges of drug trafficking. The country was invaded; its dictator incarcerated, brought to trial and sentenced in the US. The operation set a trend for power activism in the 1990s and the first two decades of the new millennium. The dictum seemed to be a quick, surgical and internationally unsanctioned ‘in’ followed by regime change and a clean exit. Obviously the surgical ‘in’ was a point of view, it invariably left in its wake non-combatant casualties numbering in the thousands.

Before falling into the trap of reducing international relations and it’s sometimes sequel of conflict to a “morality melodrama,” it has to be recognised that humankind in its endeavour to come to grips with trans-national violence has arrived at a stage when the (general) use of force has been legally proscribed. But there remain conditions. And it is within these conditions of self-defence, right of intervention, pre-emptive protection of interests and indeed, the use of comprehensive force that nations bring to bear the weight of unbridled nationalism. It is also under these conditions that veto-wielding Ayatollahs of the UN flourish. This then, is the rub, how can power be subsumed to a larger goal of collective accord? The short answer is that it cannot as long as the idea of nation states lies at the heart of the international system allowing states to internally promote centralisation of power and externally present a Janus-faced approach to moral principles.

Contemporary global order is unmistakably swayed by power, an expedient-slant to morality, and a distinct readiness to use barbaric force as long as the smell of cordite remained sequestered. This perhaps is the lamentable ‘bulletin’ of the day.

Chinese Military Modernisation: Takeaways from the Pentagon Report

Bhartendu Kumar Singh

Every year, the American Department of Defence (Pentagon) publishes a report on the military and security developments of China under the National Defence Authorisation Act (2000). The report is supposed to address the current and probable future course of military-technological development of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA), probable development of Chinese security and military strategy, and operational concepts supporting such developments. In a similarly annual ritual, the Chinese Defence Ministry issues a protest statement rubbishing the findings of the report.  2016 was no different when the Pentagon’s recent report came with some startling revelations, except the tone and tenor of the Chinese response was largely symbolic.

 

When the Pentagon started its annual report, Chinese military modernisation was largely shrouded in a veil of secrecy. Not much was known to the outside world and a large amount of literary work on Chinese military modernisation was based on guess work. Over the years, Pentagon reports have made Chinese military modernisation a contested discourse wherein the Chinese are confronted with irrefutable findings. For example, this year’s report has published detailed satellite pictures of Chinese construction and outpost activities in the disputed South China Sea (SCS). Also, the Chinese Military Regions (MRs) of Guangzhou and Nanjing are shown to have clear and precise locations of different arms of PLA, something that is not possible without intelligence inputs.

 

While studying Chinese military modernisation, Pentagon has shattered many myths surrounding the Chinese PLA. One myth that came from Beijing was about the invincibility of People’s War, making the PLA a powerful army. The Pentagon report established that the PLA was quite weak and its so-called People’s War strategy unworkable. It also engendered the global debate on Chinese defence expenditure and debunked the myth, again propagated by China, that it was spending too less on its defence. An exclusive chapter was dedicated, in annual reports, on China’s defence expenditure and the ubiquitous conclusion was that China was spending at least 2-3 times more than its official expenditure. The pressure from the report was so high that China was forced to bring more accounting reforms in its defence expenditure administration;  thereby making it relatively more transparent and bridging the gap with the Western estimates on its defence expenditure. Today, the debate on China’s defence expenditure is almost dead since there are little takers for Chinese whispers.

 

The Pentagon report has also pushed China to induce greater transparency about its military objectives, strategic culture and force restructuring. The biannual Chinese White Paper on Military Strategy is largely a response to US’ demands for better transparency in its defence policy. The May 2015 White Paper, for instance, reflects a new sense of openness by the Chinese leadership on military modernisation. It is quite candid about accelerating the modernisation of the PLA. It appears to be reasonably happy on the Taiwan front, and shows concerns about the US’ rebalancing strategy and military alliances in the Asia Pacific region. China’s immediate focus is on force development in critical security domains like the seas and oceans, commensurate with its national security interests. It is upgrading its combat readiness in the name of preparing for military operations other than war (MOOTW). It is this strategy that has been defining China’s low intensity coercive activities in the Asia Pacific region.

 

Along with the Pentagon report, other reports have also been hypothesising about China’s military build-up. According to the 2015 RAND report on the US-China military scorecard, though China is not close to catching up to the US military in terms of aggregate capabilities, it does not need to catch up to challenge the US on its immediate periphery. China has made relative gains in most operational areas, in some cases, with startling speed. For example, Taiwan is no more the core flash point endangering Asian security since the asymmetrical power gap across the Taiwan Straits has almost closed any space for the island territory to assert itself vis-à-vis the mainland.

 

The Pentagon report is not without gaps. It does not throw light on many crucial aspects such as the power push given to the PLA through Sino-Russian collaboration, the maturity of Chinese domestic military-industrial complex (MIC), China’s decreased dependence upon imported arms in its military modernisation and China’s force mobilisation in the Tibet area remains an enigma that are yet to be fully comprehended. Above all, it is focused on hot spots that impinge upon America’s security interests in the Asia Pacific region and does not throw light on China’s force mobilisation in the Tibet area that has ramifications for South Asian security.

 

Indians will have little use for the Pentagon report. The report is unlikely to cast statistical presentations on China’s military build-up in Chengdu MR, which covers a major portion along the Indian border. Therefore, there is an urgent need to study China’s military modernisation from the Indian perspective for peace and tranquility on the Sino-Indian border.

India-Taiwan Relations: What is the Way Forward?

Sumit Kumar Jha

The Modi government took many foreign policy initiatives to deepen India’s ties with the rest of the world soon after coming to power. One was to foster closer ties with the East Asian countries under its Act East policy. However in May 2016, after the completion of two years of the government, no serious efforts have been made to improve ties with Taiwan, which can play a vital role in India’s strategic and economic interests in East Asia. In the January 2016 elections, Tsai Ing-wen of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was elected as the President of Taiwan, and she has announced her intention to prioritise relations with India.

 

Overview of Bilateral Relations

Post-independence, the bilateral ties between India and Taiwan ceased to exist when in 1950 India accorded diplomatic recognition to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Further, during the Cold War, the prospect of having even informal ties between New Delhi and Taipei remained remote, as Taiwan joined the US-led block and India the non-aligned movement.

 

This changed in the 1990s when the Narsimha Rao Government reoriented India’s policy towards Taiwan in the face of India’s domestic and foreign policy challenges. Domestically, India had to deal with one of its worst economic crises. Externally, India needed to adapt to a new international order, where its time-tested friend, the Soviet Union, was no longer available to provide it financial and defence cover. Consequently, India and Taiwan set up unofficial relations in 1995 with the establishment of the India-Taipei Association (ITA) in Taipei. The two countries signed the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement and the Customs Cooperation Agreement in 2011. These initiatives have increased trade between the two countries from US$1.2 Billion in 2000 to US$5.9 billion in 2014. In August 2015, Taiwan-based Foxconn, one of the largest hardware manufacturers in the world, announced an investment of US$5 billion in India. The two countries are also cooperating in the field of science, technology and culture; Taiwan provides teachers for several Chinese courses in India. Despite India and Taiwan having common reasons to accelerate their bilateral ties, the size of the relationship remains small.

 

The Way Forward

Strategically, both the countries have security threats from China. India has a long-standing territorial dispute with China and in fact, in recent times, Beijing has increased its assertive posturing on Indian territory. On the other hand, experts have opined that Beijing can use military power to annex Taiwan if their “one-China policy” comes under threat, considering it a breakaway from mainland China. Additionally, New Delhi and Taipei share the common interest of preventing China from making South China Sea its exclusive zone. Through this, Taiwan can further consolidate its identity as an independent state and India can ensure freedom of navigation in the South China Sea through which 50 per cent of its trade takes place. India can further expand its oil and gas exploration activities in the region.

 

Taiwan has a better understanding of China’s strategic depth because of their close geo-strategic proximity and linguistic and cultural ties. A closer relationship with Taipei will help New Delhi understand Beijing’s strategic thinking. While the Modi government has given special attention to developing triangular and quadrilateral coalitions with the US, Japan and Australia as part of its regional security strategy, and the inclusion of Taiwan can prove to be crucial in this endeavour.

 

Delhi can advance its economic interests by working with Taipei. The latter possesses huge foreign reserves and is known for its expertise in the field of hardware manufacture, construction, mines exploration, electronics, and automobiles, among others. Thus, it can undoubtedly play a critical role in the success of the current government’s Make in India, Digital India, and Skill India initiatives. A case in point being a possible collaboration between India’s expertise in software and Taiwan’s in hardware. Additionally, by providing a market of its size to Taiwan, India would be able to address the deepening economic ties between China and Taiwan.

 

Soft diplomacy has been given primacy in the current government’s foreign policy. In this, religious tourism has great potential, considering Buddhism is the majority religion and India is its birth place.

 

While it is true that one major obstacle that hampers close ties between India and Taiwan is India’s acceptance of the “one China policy”, this, should not deter New Delhi from seeking close security and economic ties with Taipei in the same way as Beijing is expanding its involvement with Islamabad in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). India should take bold initiatives to reach out to Taiwan and it should also assert its right to decide what type of relations it wishes to have with Taiwan. It would be interesting to see how the DPP government and India sustain and expand their bilateral ties, with China in their backyard.

Governance & Strategic Communication: Keys to Stabilising J&K

Syed Ata Hasnain


With the durbar back in Srinagar, one of the first things the new government did was to convene a meeting of the Unified Command. That is most sensible because an early stock-taking of the situation and planning for contingencies for the summer is always necessary. Threats on the security front are multiple and need to be briefly outlined. However, before that, a question often asked by media persons relates to Afghanistan and whether the situation there has an effect on J&K.

The ripple effect of events in the Af-Pak invariably travels to the hotspots of the region, and J&K comes within that. Yet, when Afghanistan is quiet for some time, it gives the sponsors across the LoC the opportunity to actively involve themselves in affairs of J&K. Otherwise, internal security problems in Pakistan and events in Afghanistan allow the sponsors time enough only to keep the proverbial pot boiling in J&K.

The state government returned to Srinagar in the aftermath of the Handwara incident. Clearly, this was a manipulated event to test the new government but the follow up by the separatists fell through when the legitimacy of the allegations against the Army became doubtful. The separatists then attempted the ‘sainik colonies’ rumor as a fresh trigger. It was not passionately followed up either because of the tourist season now panning out and people in the streets wishing to be involved in their trade rather than in the protests. The government has been handling these issues quietly, just as it should. What is remarkably different is the maturity being shown by the political leaders in Jammu who are not reacting and responding to every provocation in the Valley.

The security situation is not yet worrisome but can get worse. There has definitely been a surge in infiltration. The contacts and gun battles reported in the last few days, and in fact ongoing even as of 27 May 2016, indicate the traditional areas being used for pushing in terrorists. The Army has been able to intercept quite a few. However, in the infiltration game, everyone understands that for every intercepted track, on an average two others successfully infiltrate. This means the strength in the hinterland is likely to increase, marginally, and some leaders would probably have been sent in to take charge of a few areas in North Kashmir. The Army has to ensure that it plugs the gaps in the counter-infiltration grid to prevent more leakages. It is likely that the anti-infiltration obstacle system (AIOS) has not been fully repaired as yet, although the low snow levels last winter did have a reduced damage effect on the AIOS than in previous years. In 2015, the grid was reinforced through some ad hoc measures. It always pays to use whatever resources available to stop the terrorists at the LoC itself.

So, while the tourist season keeps the separatists a little quieter and the Army is deeply involved in operations in the LoC belt the State Government has a window, a short one at that. It needs to shore up its demonstrated capability in administration and governance. That is the plank on which most governments get elected. It must focus on two or three key issues – such as distribution of flood compensation, for example – and ensure that it delivers. The Food and Supplies department must take it upon itself to ensure that there is no shortage of any commodity particularly milk, vegetables, petroleum products and cooking gas, in the coming winter. This should be taken up as a challenge.

J&K Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti has already demonstrated that she has not forgotten the things she was briefed about before she was sworn in. She chaired a meeting on LoC trade very early into her tenure and gave some crunch decisions.

The second area that should engage the government’s attention is activating the information domain, an area that has been lying dead for long. A common platform should be evolved between the constituents of the coalition on the areas they would wish to be addressed in the public outreach. A return to the Kashmir Premier League cricket tournament by the Ministry of Sports and Youth affairs is strongly recommended. This tournament, which was played for two years under the aegis of the Army, needs to be revived. It had created a positive environment in the entire Valley. On a flimsy ground, the finance mandarins of the Ministry of Defence had shot down its continuation.

The last short term advice for the political leadership is: reactivate the grassroots contacts. J&K has, for far too long, been without grass root political activity that captivates people and keeps them pegged to local issues.

Nearly 5,000 Macy workers set to go on strike

Mark Witkowski & Philip Guelpa

On Thursday, May 19 nearly 5,000 New York area Macy’s employees, including those at the historic Herald Square store in Manhattan, voted to go on strike on June 15, when the current contract extension under which they are working runs out. Their contract officially expired on May 1.

The main issues are health care, pay, and work schedules according to a statement released by Local 1-S of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU). The company is reportedly seeking to cut retirement benefits and to exclude certain job categories from coverage under the new contract.

One Macy’s sales employee who spoke with a WSWS reporter at the Herald Square store stated that the company is proposing to shift the cleaning of the store after hours to her department in order to reduce its cleaning staff.

For its part, a Macy’s spokesperson commented that, “Calls to strike by the union are an expected and standard part of the negotiation process." This cynical statement speaks to the choreographed collaboration between the trade unions and employers in seeking to impose concessions on workers.

On the day after the vote, RWDSU President Stuart Appelbaum stated, “The company cannot afford to undermine its workforce at a time when it faces greater competition from online retailers like Amazon.” This statement seeks to obscure the reality that, at a time when the economic crisis which erupted in 2008 continues to worsen around the world, corporations across the board, from auto to aerospace to telecommunications to retail, want to wrest concession after concession from their workers. The statement is also intended to present a false image to workers that the union is fighting for their interests.

The pattern of betrayals by the unions, including the RWDSU, is clear.

In June 2011, a strike at Macy’s in New York was averted at the last minute as the union agreed to a contract with scant wage increases which did not keep pace with the rapid rise in the cost of living in the already expensive metropolitan area. At the time, the agreement was hailed by the union president as a “solid contract.” The last time Macy’s workers in New York went on strike was in 1972.

Macy’s workers in San Francisco went on strike in 2004 but the union called off the strike after only one day. Several picketers were arrested for blocking the front door to the Macy’s in Union Square.

In recent years, retail businesses have been suffering substantial declines in revenue as workers’ purchasing power continues to contract. These companies are coming under tremendous pressure from Wall Street investors to savagely attack workers’ jobs, wages and benefits.

This trend is accelerating, with a number of companies either announcing large-scale store closings or going out of business altogether. This is resulting in mass layoffs and a drive to squeeze ever greater profits from the remaining employees under the threat that they could lose their jobs.

As is typical in the retail industry, the pay for Macy’s New York employees is abysmal, especially given the extraordinarily high cost of living in city. According to the website Glassdoor, the average hourly wages of a range of sales associate titles at Macy’s stores in the New York City area are approximately $9.00 per hour and benefits are limited. This is after the RWDSU’s 2011 “solid contract.”

Despite this, the business and corporate elites continue to reap lavish rewards. Last year, Macy’s chief executive, Terry Lundgren, received total compensation of $11.7 million, including $1.6 million in base salary and a range of perks.

Under these circumstances, it is a pernicious lie for union heads to claim that isolated struggles can defend, let alone advance workers’ interests. Workers can place absolutely no confidence in their union leadership, which will do everything in its power to impose another concessions-laden contract as quickly as possible, as is now being done by the CWA and IBEW in the Verizon strike.

There is a resurgence of the class struggle around the world, but at every turn unions and political leaders are attempting to suppress this development. Workers must break free from these organizations, form their own rank-and-file workplace committees and fight for a socialist program that unites workers internationally in a common struggle against the capitalist system.

Financial parasitism and the global housing crisis

Gabriel Black

Rent and housing costs in most major cities have skyrocketed since the financial crisis, cutting deeply into workers’ standard of living and prompting concerns about a new global housing bubble. Driving the soaring cost of rent is a global financial system that is being pumped full of cheap credit by all the major central governments at the expense of workers around the world.

Prices in some areas boggle the mind. San Francisco’s average asking price for a one-bedroom apartment went from $1,258 per month in January 2010 to $4,126 in February 2016. In London, the average home price has doubled since 2009, from about £300,000 ($437,600 USD) to £600,000 ($875,100).

Hong Kong’s housing market, which largely avoided the US real estate crash, more than tripled in its average sale between 2004 and today. The city is now considered the least affordable place in the world, with the median Hong Kong home price worth 19 times the city’s average skilled white-collar worker’s annual salary.

Housing and rental markets are so high that the Swiss bank UBS estimates that the majority of the world’s urban real estate markets are now “significantly overvalued.”

What is most striking about the colossal increase in prices, however, is how divorced it is from the incomes of the vast majority of the global population, which are moving in the opposite direction.

Historically, rent prices have tended to move with income and inflation. For example, in the United States the median home price adjusted for inflation remained largely flat between 1970 and 1998, fluctuating slightly above and below $160,000. This was a period in which workers’ incomes were also flat. After 1998, however, the housing market skyrocketed, with the median home price rising from about $160,000 in 1998 to $275,000 in 2006, the peak of the finance-driven boom. This jump was driven by all manner of financial speculation, including rampant criminal behavior, which had been let loose by the lowering of interest rates by the US Federal Reserve.

The housing market today is going through a new version of the 2006 housing crisis. However, unlike 2006, this process is global. Nearly every major capitalist government in the world is pursuing a policy of near-zero interest rates, encouraging rampant speculation in both the stock market and the real estate market.

This trend can be seen clearly in the United States. Between 2001 and 2014, the average real rental price rose 7 percent nationwide according to Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period, median household income dropped by 9 percent.

In Los Angeles, the second largest city in the US, 40 percent of families either make poverty wages or are unemployed. As families and individuals increasingly struggle to make ends meet, rent has increased sharply in LA. In January 2010, an average one bedroom apartment went for $1,224 a month. Six years later, the cost was $1,935. And the worst is not over. A 2016 forecast by USC Casden Multifamily predicts that in the next few years rent will “soar.” It is no wonder that homeless in the city grew by 16 percent in just two years between 2013 and 2015.

Another way of capturing the growing divide between wages and rent for hundreds of millions of workers around the world is the Median Multiple, the ratio between median household income and average home price. According to the Demographia International Housing Affordability 2016 Survey, a Median Multiple of three and under is considered affordable (e.g., a family making $50,000 a year buying a house at $150,000 or less). A multiple exceeding five is considered “severely unaffordable.”

In 2015 Demographia surveyed 367 cities inside the UK, US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland and Japan. According to the group, the 10 most unaffordable cities were: Hong Kong with a Median Multiple of 19.0; Sydney (12.2); Vancouver (10.8); Melbourne, (9.7); Auckland (9.7); San Jose (9.7); San Francisco (9.4); London (8.5); Los Angeles (8.1) and San Diego (8.1). All of these cities have experienced a doubling or even tripling of their Median Multiple since 1998.

The surge in prices and collapse in income has led to more renters on the renting market, since buying has become out of reach. In the United States, between 2005 and 2015, there were 9 million new renting households. This is the largest gain on record for a 10-year period according to Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies. In 2015, 37 percent of all US households rented, the highest level since the mid-1960s, and up from 31 percent in 2005.

Workers are now becoming trapped in this situation, as they spend more of their income paying for rent and are less and less likely to be able to buy a house. In 2001 in the US, 41 percent of renters spent 30 percent of their income or more on rent. This rose to 49 percent in 2014. In the same year, 26 percent of the renting population spent more than half of their income on rent. In the UK, a fifth of all young adults now stay in their parents’ home until they are at least 26. In 2015, 31.5 percent of US young people aged 18 to 34 lived at home, up from 27 percent in 2005.

While workers suffer under crushing rent burdens, landlords and investors are raking in millions if not billions. This year, a total of 184 billionaires made their wealth through real estate. This was up by 22 individuals from the year before, even as the overall number of billionaires went down from 1,826 to 1,810 individuals.

Those who make money off of rents do not add anything to the productive system. While a certain amount of money can go to maintenance and upkeep, vast and increasing sums of money made by real estate are from the pure monopoly status of owning land.

The wealth of these billionaires principally comes from the unsavory fact that in order to keep the global economy afloat, the central banks around the world have pumped the major banks full with cheap credit.

As UBS Global notes in its 2015 Global Real Estate Bubble Index, “Loose monetary policy has prevented a normalization of housing markets and encouraged local bubble risks to grow.” They write that much of the “overvaluation” in the global housing stock comes from a “dependence on low interest rates.”

“Price-to-rent (PR) multiples are greatest in Zurich, Vancouver, Hong Kong, Geneva and Singapore. The extremely high PR multiplies indicate an undue dependence of housing prices on low interest rates. Paris, London and Sydney follow suit and form a trio of cities with PR multiples around 30. House prices in these cities are vulnerable to a sharp correction should interest rates rise.”

In other words, the deluge of cheap credit provided by the world’s central governments to their major banks has unleashed an orgy of speculation. The world’s richest are getting even richer by doing nothing as their real estate investments shoot through the roof. Meanwhile the vast majority of the world’s population must pay increasingly obscene amounts just to have a place to live.

As Lenin noted in his work Imperialism, in capitalism’s state of decay there is an “extraordinary growth of a class, or rather, of a stratum of rentiers, i.e., people who live by ‘clipping coupons’, who take no part in any enterprise whatever, whose profession is idleness.”

This describes exactly the parasitic layer of real estate moguls, whose money comes not from producing anything of value to the world economy, but by sucking away money from the system in the form of rent. There is no one who benefits from high rents except the small layer of people who control the vast majority of the world’s property.

Myanmar mine landslide leaves 14 dead, 200 missing

John Braddock

A landslide at a jade mine in northern Myanmar (formerly Burma) last week killed at least 14 people, with hundreds more buried by the collapsed hillside. The landslide in Kachin state on the night of May 23 came after several days of heavy rainfall. One week after the tragedy there has been no official confirmation of the final numbers of dead and injured. As many as 200 workers remain missing.

According to the Myanmar Times, the disaster occurred around 8:15 p.m. at a site owned by Yadanar Star Company. The company had ceased operations for the day due to the bad weather, but hundreds of so-called hand pickers, who scour the excavation site for leftover jade deposits, moved in to work over the tailings. One witness said there was a creek flowing down the middle of the workings, displacing soil from the hill.

Administrators, police, a funeral service team, aid workers and the fire brigade worked with company backhoes to clear the slide until the search was called off due to heavy rain and the continuing threat of landslides.

U Kyaw Myint, a local resident, said: “We collected the dead and the injured from the top part of the slide. We could not retrieve bodies from the bottom of the slide. If we tried to remove them, the land from above would collapse again.” Hundreds of hand pickers were still working on the tailings the following day, despite continuing downpours.

In an attempt to divert attention away from the responsibility of Myanmar’s government, Hmawe Gyi, a member of the ruling National League for Democracy (NLD) party, criticised the company for hampering the recovery operation. “Jade mine companies should use machinery and cooperate with authorities to search for the missing people,” he said. “Now, people don’t know if their family members are dead or not.”

The remote region has little phone coverage and poor roads. The absence of these, underdevelopment and miserable and dangerous working conditions are not due to a lack of money. Jade is an expensive and sought-after gemstone. Hpakant, which lies 651 kilometres (404 miles) north of Myanmar’s capital Naypyidaw, is the site of the world’s biggest mine and produces some of the highest-quality jade. Much of it is exported or smuggled to China.

Global Witness reported last October that jade valued at a staggering $US31 billion (£20 billion) was extracted from the mines in 2014. This sum, theGuardian noted, equated to nearly half the country’s gross domestic product and over 46 times current spending on health. The total jade output for the past decade was estimated at $120 billion.

According to Irrawaddy, over 620 mining companies operate in the Hpakant and Lone Kin regions. An estimated 300,000 workers toil under conditions of terrible exploitation and extreme poverty. Enormous undocumented profits are seized by a small and corrupt elite, mostly hidden license holders linked to the Myanmar military.

All the main mining companies identified by Global Witness are either directly owned by army officers, or operated by those with close ties to them. Spokesman Mike Davis told the BBC: “These families are making extraordinary sums of money, often in the tens and hundreds of millions of dollars.” Companies connected to the family of retired general Than Shwe, the former military ruler, allegedly made more than $220 million in jade sales in 2013 and 2014.

Between 1992 and 2011, Than Shwe presided over a military dictatorship that brutally suppressed demonstrations and strikes, and imprisoned opponents. From 2009 the military junta opened up pro-market reforms by privatising assets and allowing the establishment of private banks. But it ensured that the state assets largely ended up in the hands of the military or its associates.

In the past year, dozens of mine workers have been maimed or killed picking through waste dumps. The worst disaster occurred last November when 113 miners were killed and 100 left missing when a 60-metre mountain of earth and waste collapsed, burying the makeshift huts where the miners slept. The activities of 12 companies were briefly suspended after the incident.

Another landslide hit the Hpakant area on December 25, leaving as many as 50 people missing. The exact death toll in this incident, as in many others, has remained undetermined. On January 25, mines run by the Yadana Yaung Chi, Yadana Adipati and Myitsone Ayeyar companies suffered two landslides, while 100 prospectors were looking for jade, killing at least 30. The deputy minister of mines, Than Tun Aung, responded with threats to prosecute the “illegal” miners, “large and small.”

On May 5, a slag heap at a mine run by Yadanar San Shwe Company and Triple One Company collapsed. Sai Nyunt Lwin of the Hpakant hospital said 13 bodies were brought in from Seng Tawng mining village. Aung Ram, who lost eight family members in the accident, said: “This happens all the time and now it has come to my relatives. We cannot do anything except to pray for their souls and we don’t even know who to blame.”

Civil rights groups routinely criticise the mining companies for the social and environmental impacts of the unregulated industry. Locals have led protests against the companies in recent months to try to pressure them to improve the safety of excavation areas. Early this month, civil society organisations in Kachin state demanded that the government form a commission to inspect mines that have violated industry regulations.

New safety measures have been promised, but the NLD and its leader Aung San Suu Kyi, which won last November’s election, are not about to cut across the interests of the military and its business empires. In the name of “national reconciliation,” a power-sharing arrangement has been agreed, ensuring that the military’s position and privileges are protected.

While the NLD may stimulate business opportunities for entrepreneurs previously sidelined by the army, both factions of the ruling elite intend to accelerate the opening up of Myanmar to foreign capital, and bring the country’s foreign policy into line with Washington’s so-called pivot to Asia, directed against China. This means savage economic restructuring, cuts to public spending, privatisation of state assets and continuing deaths and exploitation in mining and other industries, as the NLD seeks to turn the country into a new cheap labour platform.