Popular Democracy in Cuba

Charles McKelvey

The socialist governments of the Third World plus China have developed popular democracy, with structures that are alternatives to those of representative democracy.  Laws and policies are decided by deputies of the people, and not by politicians dependent on the support of corporate and wealthy interests.  Let us look at the historical development of the alternative political process in the case of Cuba.

During the neocolonial Republic of 1902 to 1959, Cuba had the basic structures of representative democracy.  Military dictatorships periodically interrupted the democratic process, in response to political instability, which itself was a consequence of the incapacity of the Cuban system of representative democracy to ensure the sovereignty of the nation or the needs of the people.  It was a system designed to support the interests of international capital and a weak international bourgeoisie, with political power in the hands of a political class dependent on both.  In key historic moments (1924, 1944, & 1948), the people were able to elect candidates who promised reform, but once in office, they were not able to deliver on their promises.  Revolutionary leaders in Cuba could not possibly overlook the limitations of representative democracy.

The July 26 Movement led by Fidel Castro came to power on January 1, 1959, with overwhelming popular support.  At that historic moment, the principal concern of the revolutionary leadership was the challenge of delivering on promises made to the people, given the political and economic obstacles, both national and international, that they confronted.  Such promises included the redistribution of agricultural land, the raising of salaries of workers, an increase in the standard of living, the nationalization of foreign utilities companies that set exorbitant rates, confiscation of property fraudulently obtained through government corruption, and restructuring the economy away from its peripheral role in the world-economy.  In that challenging and confrontational situation, holding elections seemed a superfluous activity; no one doubted that the program put forth by the revolutionary leadership had the support of the people.

Rather than organizing elections, the revolutionary leadership took decisive steps in mobilizing the people, so that the people would be an effective arm in the attainment of revolutionary goals.  In 1959, in response to acts of sabotage and terrorism emanating from the Cuban counterrevolution in Miami, a civilian-militia was formed.  In 1960, Committees for the Defense of the Revolution were formed in all neighborhoods, for the purpose of vigilance over sabotage and terrorist activities.  At the same time, revolutionary leaders from the ranks took control of the Federation of Cuban Workers and the Federation of University Students, previously controlled by leaders tied to the neocolonial order, and they expanded their numbers. In 1961, small farmers were organized into the National Organization of Small Agriculturalists.  Thus, in responding to political necessities, the revolution took in practice the first steps in the formation of an alternative political process; it created mass organizations of workers, women, peasants, and students, which provided structures for active popular participation.

At the same time, a political process in which the revolutionary leadership and the people interacted in mass assemblies emerged.  The speeches of Fidel were pedagogical, with detailed descriptions of the challenges that the Revolution confronted, as well as formulations of revolutionary goals.  The mass assemblies also enabled the revolutionary leadership to assess the pulse of the people.  At the peasant mass meeting in Havana on July 26, 1959, the people demanded that Fidel return to the post of Prime Minister, from which he had resigned due to the anti-communist declarations of the President.  On September 2, 1960, the National General Assembly of the People of Cuba emitted the Declaration of Havana, which defined the concepts and rights that would guide the revolutionary process in the subsequent stage.  The National General Assembly of the People of Cuba was constituted by a mass meeting of one million persons, constituting perhaps 20% of the Cuban adult population of the time.

Fidel expressed the new concept of democracy, evolving in practice, on May 1, 1960.  “They made up a democracy for you, a rare and strange democracy in which you, who are the majority, count for nothing.”  He characterized it as a “false democracy where all the means of corruption and fraud are used, in order to distort the true will of the people.”  In contrast, true democracy protects the rights of peasants to land, of workers to a decent standing of living, of all citizens to schools and doctors.  Moreover, true democracy is “direct democracy,” which has existed in Cuba since January 1, 1959.  “Real democracy . . . has been expressed in this form; it has been expressed directly, in the intimate union and identification of the government and the people; in this direct agreement; in this making and struggling for the good of the great majority of the country, and in the interests of the great majority of the country.”

Everyone understood that the Revolution was being led by a person with an exceptional capacity to analyze national and international affairs, to discern politically intelligent solutions to problems, and to forge the necessary unity of the people.  And everyone understood that in the long term, this form of revolutionary leadership was not sustainable.  As early as 1961, Fidel was speaking of the importance of replacing leadership by one person with the collective leadership of a vanguard political party.  During that year, attempts were made to form a vanguard political party thought the unification of the revolutionary organizations, which were the July 26 Movement (established and led by Fidel), the March 13 Revolutionary Directory (initially a revolutionary student organization), and the Popular Socialist Party (the first Communist Party of Cuba).  After some problems, these efforts eventually culminated in the formation in 1965 of a new Communist Party of Cuba.

Thus, in the early 1960s, there was emerging in practice the basic structures of an alternative political process that involved popular participation in mass organizations and mass assemblies and the formation of a vanguard political party that has the duty of educating and leading the people.  The conception is that of a united leadership that possesses a commitment to defend the rights of the majority, and as a result of this commitment, is liberated from the distorted understandings that have roots in particular interests.  The leadership seeks to educate the people, freeing them as well from the ideological distortions that are disseminated throughout the world.  At the same time, it is the people who have political power, because the people are organized in various mass organizations.  The people find strength in their numbers and their organizational and ideological unity.

There is a symbiotic relation between the vanguard party and the people.  The vanguard educates and exhorts, and yet it at the same time is dependent on the people, who ultimately hold political power. And the people are dependent on the vanguard, for without it, they cannot have that informed understanding that is necessary for their emancipation.  The charismatic leader educates both the vanguard and the people, preparing them both for the day in which the leader is no longer physically present.  However, everyone understands that the leader always will be present in the form of his teachings and example.

The structures of this alternative political practice were institutionalized in the Cuban Constitution of 1976.  The Constitution concentrates political power in the hands of the elected deputies of the people.  It establishes a National Assembly that is the highest authority of the nation, with the power to enact laws and designate the high members of the executive and judicial branches of government.  The deputies of the National Assembly are elected by the delegates of the 169 municipal assemblies of the nation.  These municipal assemblies are elected through direct and secret voting in 12,515 small voting districts, in which voters choose from two or more candidates.

Because direct elections by the people of the delegates of the municipal assemblies occurs in small voting districts, electoral campaigns are not necessary. The candidates are known by the people, because of their work in mass organizations in the community.  Brief biographies are displayed in public places. There is no need for campaign financing, and thus the distorting influence of large contributors to political campaigns is eliminated.  The structure is designed to ensure that political power is in the hands in the people, and it is so named as “popular power.”  The assemblies that constitute popular power are the decision-making voice of the people, an institutionalized version of the mass assemblies of the early 1960s.

The mass organizations established in the early 1960s remain integral to the political process.  Among other functions, they play a central role in the second-degree elections for the National Assembly and the executive branch.  Candidacy commissions propose lists of candidates to the delegates of the municipal assemblies and the deputies of the National Assembly, when these assemblies carry out their electoral functions.  The candidacy commissions are formed by representatives of mass organizations of workers, farmers, women, students, and neighborhoods. The mass organization have a participate rate of 84% to 99% of their respective populations, and they have a similar process of direct elections at the base and indirect elections for positions at higher levels of authority.

The Constitution of 1976 abolished electoral political parties.  Candidates for the municipal assemblies are nominated by the people in a serious of nomination assemblies in neighborhoods in the numerous voting districts.   The Constitution defines the Communist Party of Cuba as the only party and as the vanguard political party of the nation, consistent with revolutionary intentions of the early 1960s.  The vanguard party, however, in guiding the people, cannot usurp the voice of the people. Accordingly, the Constitution prohibits the Party from participating in the electoral process.  The Party is obligated by the Constitution to be the highest leading force in the society, but to lead through education and by example. The Constitution establishes that the people, through the structures of popular power, will decide.

The Constitution of 1976, like the 1960 Declaration of Havana, affirms the right of Cuba to sovereignty as well as the social and economic rights of the people, including rights to employment, food, health, education, culture, and recreation.  The state has the obligation to play an active role in the protection of these rights.

For the past several months, the Party, the National Assembly, and the people have been developing a new constitution, taking into account the new social and economic model of 2012 and changes in Cuban society.  In accordance with their revolutionary socialist tradition of popular democracy, they are forging a remarkable constitutional assembly of the people.  As the process unfolds, it is clear that the new constitution preserves Cuban traditions of direct democracy and popular democracy.

The development of an alternative political process by the nations constructing socialism in the Third World plus China is a consequence of political necessity. If the nations of the Third World are to overcome the colonial legacy and become the subjects of their own social and economic development, they must take control of their territories and resources from foreign corporations and governments.  In order accomplish this, they must have a political structure that ensures that power is in the hands of the deputies and delegates of the people, and not in the hands of an accommodationist national elite aligned with international actors.  For this reason, the nations that are constructing socialism are precisely the ones that enjoy the greatest level of sovereignty.

We of the nations of the North increasingly are discovering that representative democracy does not respond to our needs.  We have the right to know that the socialist revolutions of the Third World plus China have responded to their colonial situation through the forging of alternative political structures that provide the foundation for a political debate that leads to consensus and political stability, and not to confusion and division.

Beyond Universal Education

Moin Qazi

The true teachers are those who help us think for ourselves

–Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan

The building blocks of a nation are the citizens of its tomorrow. The way these seeds will sprout will always depend on the way you choose to water them. India’s education sector is one of the largest sunrise sectors in the economic and social development of the country.  India’s education sector has expanded rapidly in the last decade but the quality of learning remains pathetic on account of unimaginative and misguided policies. The purpose of education has to be, to inspire and develop children to think creatively, reason systematically and release their potential to shape their own future.

The latest ASER 2018 survey-the most authentic barometer of India’s educational health-shows that its findings are not inspiring, and in some cases quite dismal. The fragile foundation of basic education augurs a dim horizon for India’s future human capital. The students are not able to learn the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic and do not meet even elementary mathematics standards.

While enrolment has improved sharply since 2006 for both boys and girls, not only at the primary but also in the 11-14 age group, literacy and numeracy skills remain dismally below par. The ASER   survey covered 5.46 lakh children in the age group 3-16 across 596 districts. What is alarming is the decline in reading and arithmetical abilities at the Class VIII level since 2012, with government schools faring worse than private ones: more than a quarter of all children at this level cannot read a Class II text, while over half of all children cannot do division (three digits by a single digit number). Seen along last year’s ASER survey on learning abilities of the 14-18 age group, those about to enter the workforce, it would seem that India’s ‘demographic dividend’ is turning into a sour joke.

These figures are a serious concern in a country where only 74 per cent of its 1.2 billion inhabitants are literate, making India home to the largest illiterate population in the world. We all know that a sound and productive education system needs to focus on science, math engineering and technology — the skills today’s employers are looking for to fill jobs right now and in the future.”Inefficient teaching methods, such as rote learning, which focuses on memorisation as opposed to critical reasoning, are still widespread at the primary and secondary school level.The rote teaching methodology has demonstrated shortcomings. Studies by the Programme for International Students Assessment, an OECD initiative, and Wipro found that students at the primary and secondary school level have fallen back in math, science and reading literacy in recent years.

The skewed priorities of the government in this vital sector manifest in low learning levels. The Sustainable Development Goals include a commitment to provide every child with access to free primary and secondary education by 2030. While we are on the right course, our obsession with universal coverage of education has compromised the quality of learning. It is time that India moves beyond a singular focus on enrollment numbers and grapples with the problem of poor quality.

The usually parroted reasons for the poor standard of education are teacher absenteeism, poor student attendance, bad infrastructure, inadequate teacher preparation programmes, and rote learning practices. The most common refrain is: “The ones who understand education are not empowered while the ones empowered have no idea about education”. While these issues are valid, they do not fully explain the learning crisis apparent in our classrooms.

More Indian children are in school today than ever before, but the quality of public schools has sunk to abysmally low levels, as government schools have become the reserve of children at the very bottom of India’s social ladder. The RTE Act has been quite successful in achieving three broad objectives: higher enrolment, lower dropout and completion of mandatory basic education.

The present-day education reformers believe that market solutions and technology can remedy the situation. They blame the proponents of status quo of failing to leverage the benefits that technology has brought to other sectors such as health, travel, financial services and communications. Many of them advocate disruptive innovations, primarily through online learning. There is a strong belief that real breakthroughs can come only through the transformative power of technology or the invisible hand of the market.

The bane of the modern examination system is its regressive testing regimen which we stubbornly refuse to reform. Exams are no longer a metric for the test of learning or intelligence. Instead, they have degenerated into an awfully pernicious ritual designed to produce compliant drones who can regurgitate facts faithfully. What we test is the acquisition of a narrow collection of facts, not whether children have the skills for a fruitful employment or the ingredients for a gainful adulthood. Children are being coaxed into learning merely to pass tests. Schools are not fostering love for learning. Moreover, they do not inculcate the all-round skills they need when they leave the portals of learning to the world of competition outside. Real education is more about wide reading, deep thinking and asking hard questions rather than simply reproducing crammed answers faithfully. Formal teaching needs to be supplemented by in-school pull-out programmes, after-school tutoring, and summer camps supervised by NGOs with emphasis on non-conventional innovative pedagogies.

Much of the malaise in the realm of public education has less to do with salaries and more to do with lack of accountability and corruption in recruitments and transfers of teachers. The government schools have not been able to attract good talent. The stark reality is that India is not getting even a modest return on its investment in the education sector.

Teacher salaries in government schools are relatively high in India, at three times per capita income compared to China, where it is about the same as per capita income. However, learning outcomes are better in private schools where average teacher salaries and costs per student are less. A break-up of government spending shows that only 0.8 percent goes towards capital expenditure, while 80 percent goes towards teachers’ salaries, leaving little to be spent on infrastructure creation.

Formal teaching needs to be supplemented by in-school pull-out programmes, after-school tutoring and summer camps supervised by NGOs with emphasis on non-conventional innovative pedagogies. Much of the malaise in the realm of public education has less to do with salaries and more to do with lack of accountability and corruption in recruitments and transfers of teachers. The stark reality is that India is not getting even a modest return on its investment in the education sector. Education should combine just the right amount of physical adventure and intellectual stimulation. The most effective approaches are those that foster bonds of care between teachers and their pupils. The process of teaching and learning is an intimate act that neither computers nor markets can replicate.

India must reorient its education policy which is very results oriented,   very system oriented, is very policy oriented; just not too child oriented. it risks squandering the  future  of millions of children, as well as the entire country’s economic  prospects Formal teaching needs to be supplemented by in-school pull-out programmes, after-school reading classes and summer camps by voluntary organisations using innovative pedagogies. There has to be a direct teacher-development pipeline and evaluating systems for monitoring and upgrading teaching skills. There is a dearth of ideas for reform to address fundamental flaws in the system.

India’s emphasis on rote learning and its rigid examination system do not encourage creative thinking. instead of just  focusing  on results learning should also foster  intellectual, spiritual and social growth more Indian children are in school today than ever before, but the quality of public schools has sunk to abysmally low levels, as government schools have become the reserve of children at the very bottom of India’s social ladder. According to the World Development Report 2018 “Learning to Realise Education’s Promise”, India ranks second from the bottom after Malawi in a list of 12 countries where some Grade 2 students were found to be unable to read a single word from a short text. India also tops the report’s list of seven countries in which some Grade 2 students could not calculate simple two-digit subtractions.

The fourth Industrial Revolution is going to be a major test for the education system focused on reciting facts and performing formulaic calculations—precisely the areas where humans cannot compete with intelligent machines. With all of our technological developments, human ingenuity and creativity remain unmatched. We should capitalise on it and give our young people the opportunity to use their innate advantages as effectively as possible.

Education needs more champions than health and environmental advocates because it is one rising tide that can lift all the boats. Since, education has more room for innovation than any other development sector, there is a unique opportunity for social entrepreneurs. We need to transform curriculum and teaching practices to focus less on rote learning or straightforward calculation and more on relevant skills, like communication, reasoning ability, problem-solving and reasoning ability, and critical and independent thinking. We are under an illusion that our children are   digital savvy but more often their knowledge is only screen-deep. If young people are to be empowered citizens, they will need to understand how technology affects every aspect of our life. Greater tech literacy will be essential to ensure that the human implications of the ongoing fourth Industrial Revolution are positive.

If India is to truly rise as a global economic power, the policymakers and education specialists must focus its efforts on developing its public schools into a world-class education system.  Catchy announcements like ‘blackboard to digital boards’ will have relevance only when we translate rhetoric into commitment and into genuine action. Goals without actionable strategies are just good intentions. The proof should come by first addressing the fundamental concerns of public education .Nelson Mandela famously said: “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.”Adequate resources, higher standards for teachers and the flushing out of corruption must all be part of a reform package that seeks to make Indian education the nation’s top priority.

“Youth Bulge” in the Arab World: an Asset or a Burden

Lirar Pulikkalakath

Introduction

The systematic analysis of human resource, especially its composition, representation, and productivity is an important aspect of the study of any country. The demographic dividend of a youth bulge can be transformed positively especially in economically weak countries by enhancing educational and employment opportunities. These countries can take advantage of their physical strength to intellectual potential. But without due implementation and proper establishment of necessary infrastructure, the youth population can become a source of unrest rather than a national resource.

Over the past couple of decades, the demographic transition from having high birth and death rates to low birth and death rates in the West Asian and North African region has resulted in the creation of a large number of young population constituting one-third of the total population of the Arab world. This demographic advantage needs to be capitalised rightly and in a positive direction to empower the youth population and to ensure a better future for the region. But unfortunately, the education system in the region has been failing to provide relevant skills for the youth and not ready to accommodate them in the political and administrative system. At this juncture, as most of the states in the Arab world have limited infrastructure facilities and lack productive human resources but with a bulging youth population, the future will be dependent on how this vacuum is filled and what strategies are adopted to address these issues.

Now the demographic transition in the region led to a political transition in the name of Arab Spring since the end of 2010. It was mainly due to the active participation of large number youth, who were frustrated due to the higher unemployment rate, corruption and poor representation in the decision making bodies. A dynamic and developed society can best stimulate, utilise, and reward their vibrant youth. As the Arab world is always chaotic due to its socio-political and economic profiles, the theme of the population study of this troubled region deserves much attention. Contextualising these things, this article is intended to analyse the role of population dynamics of youth in the fate and future of the region.

Youth in West Asia and North Africa

Most of the international organisations consider young people belong to the age group between 15 and 25, later extended the range up to 29 due to the prolongation of schooling (Paciello and Daniela 2014; United Nations 1993 & 2005; Council of Europe 2003). Historically, the age grading has not been part of the feature of Arab societies. “Youth” or “young people” is used by social scientists, international organizations, etc. to include variously those age ranges from 14-25, 15-25, 15-29, under 30 and sometimes even up to 35 or 40 (Joseph 2011:5; OECD 2015:20; UNESCWA 2009; Hafferkamp 2014:8; The Global Youth Wellbeing Index 2014; 6). According to the Population Reference Bureau (2007), the median age of most of the countries in West Asia comes under this age. When the highest median age is shown as 32 years for Qatar the lowest for Yemen is at 17 years. For Jordan and Syria, it is 21. When the median age of population at the world level is 29, it is even lower in most of the West Asian countries.

Interestingly, in Arabic, Shabab, a word used to denote youth, includes even those population group aged 30 or above (Hafferkamp 2014: 8). In a West Asian and North African (WANA) context, the upper limit for this category of the population is often extended upwards, spanning 25–34 (Stave and Solveig 2015: 30). Again the definition of ‘youth’ varies for countries in WANA. Among the countries having a youth policy, Bahrain defines youth as those who are in the age group between 15-30 years, whereas Yemen says this category of individuals belongs to age category 0-24 years. In Egypt, it is those between 6-36 years, while Palestine considers them as aged between 15-19 years (Paciello and Daniela 2014; Salehi-Isfahani and Navtej 2009). According to the Middle East Youth Initiative, population aged between 15 and 29 years are youth (UNDP Arab Human Development Report (AHDR) 2016: 22). This group can be described “as a ‘generation in waiting’ to become full adults, struggling with securing jobs, getting married and starting families” (Paciello and Daniela 2014; Dhillon and Yousef 2009).

In the Arab Region, a majority of the population is now under the age of 25 (Arab Human Development Report, 2016). The increasing number of youths in West Asia, according to the Population Bulletin (2007), is due to a dynamic fertility rate and the decline in mortality trend, especially after the 1980s. The significant fertility rate has resulted in a “youth bulge” in major West Asian countries which resulted in youth being one-third of the total population of the region. The growth of the youth population in West Asia is the second highest after sub-Saharan Africa. Youth in general and in the Arab world, in particular, got little or no attention till the last century. Two events at the beginning of the twenty-first century were crucial in bringing the Arab youth into the limelight. The first one was the 9/ 11 terrorist attack in 2011. The second one happened almost a decade later popularly known as ‘Arab spring’. If the former one happened outside the Arab world, the latter swept across the WANA region. These two events challenged many of the existing perceptions and hegemonic assumptions about ‘youth’ in the WANA region. In between these two events, the global financial crisis of 2008-09 also played an important role in shaping the issue of youth. Before these events, especially till the popular uprising in the region; academicians, international policymakers and western publics considered youth in the region merely as a social or demographic phenomenon, ‘youth bulge’. Since then, debates and discussions about this particular phenomenon is a regular one from global to local. Now those youths who were before identified only in terms of demographic numbers or statistics were suddenly given credit as individuals who can make changes or have the potential to change the society, politics and economy of a country, region and the world.

Arab Youth: an Asset to a Burden

According to M.C. Paciello and Daniela Pioppi (2014), the youth bulge is a potential opportunity in any society and state, a “demographic dividend” or “demographic gift”. The assumption here is that youth can become a great opportunity for the development of a country only if they get proper skills, education, employment and adequate human capital policies (Paciello and Daniela 2014). It is important to note that some of the frameworks of analysis regarding youth have constructed them as a “threat”, “challenge” or “problem” to domestic and regional political stability. This assumption is by emphasising the disappointing conditions of a youth bulge and unemployment among them in the South East Mediterranean (SEM) countries. This approach views that youth population is bringing with it specific economic and political challenges for the countries concerned regarding the creation of new jobs and supply of social services (Paciello and Daniela 2014; World Bank 2004 & 2008). Anyhow the importance of young population in contemporary international relations and political economy discourse is growing. As mentioned earlier this scenario is more or less filled with concerns and references about “youth bulge”, “youth extremism”, and “youth unemployment”. However, there is empathy also towards youth empowerment” and “youth dynamism” (Paciello and Daniela 2014). All these scenarios are pretty much evident in the case of the Arab world. Youth in the Arab world have shown their strength and determination when the revolution spread across West Asia and North Africa region within a short period; from Tunisia to Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria and other areas.

As a quote of Khalaf appeared in the Financial Times immediate after the Arab Spring swept across the WANA region:

He is the young Egyptian who occupied Tahrir Square, and awakened a sleepy population. She is the young Libyan defying the madness and brutality of Muammar Gaddafi. He is the empowered Bahraini and Yemeni youth raising his voice in a resolute call on governments to listen to their people instead of oppressing them. Each revolt has drawn in swaths of its own society, but it is the young Arab who is the driving force; the unassuming leader (Khalaf 2011)

A dynamic and developed society can best reward, stimulate and utilise their vibrant youth; from their physical strength to intellectual potential. But without due implementation and proper establishment of infrastructures, the same youth can be problematic and will become a burden rather a national resource. The deficiency of job opportunities in accordance with the increasing population will create unrest and economic chaos. Recent protests in Greece, France, Italy, Spain, and different parts of the Arab world were triggered to an extent due to the lack of opportunities for young people. Thus youth population represents a dynamic reservoir of any nation that could be a source of strength and can pose challenges to the state and society. While today’s young men and women are more educated than previous generations, but the quality of education is poor. Moreover, these youth face diminishing opportunities to secure good jobs, access credit and housing, achieve financial independence, and form successful families. The region will have to create more jobs soon to accommodate the youth.

Conclusion

The dynamics of the region regarding socio-economic development is very significant as it experiences a demographic boom side by side a flourishing oil boom. This historic opportunity needs to be capitalised rightly and in a positive direction to empower the youth population in West Asia and to ensure a better future for the region. “While the West perceives youth as a demographic asset, the Arab world finds in them a demographic burden,” says Dr. Rola Dashti of the Kuwait Economic Society (Mourad 2009:3). It is very clear that now most of the Arab countries are in trouble; both economically and politically. If the youth bulge creates things more complex, then the region cannot think of a secure and stable future.

Anyhow the demographic reconfiguration favouring youth caused unrest and challenged the established social, political and economic systems in the Arab region. Unemployment, along with the increasing urban concentration of population, often lead to rising extremist tendencies, which in turn lead to unrest and insecurity. The youth bulge, in other words, can be taken as an asset which could be the building bricks of a strong state, with vibrant socio-economic tendencies, by channelising their untapped potential in a positive and creative way. At this critical juncture, as most of the states in the West Asian region have limited infrastructure facilities and lack productive human resources but with a bulging youth population, the future will be dependent on how this vacuum is filled and what strategies are adopted to address these issues.

Today, countries in the WANA region holds their largest youth cohort in modern history. However, the youth in the region encounter various kinds of social, political and economic exclusion and marginalisation. Some of the important problems they face in the region are rising unemployment rates, a weak position in political participation and decision-making processes. The costs of neglecting them from the mainstream socio-economic activities and public sphere can lead to the depletion of human and social capital and can also lead to unrest in the region.

Does Our Civilization Has At Least Some Chance To Survive?

Andre Vltchek

Lately, I have been asked this question on several occasions. “Can our humanity really survive?” “Am I an optimist or a pessimist?”

My replies vary, as I don’t think there can ever be one single answer to this most urgent, the most important query.

Sometimes my answer gets influenced by location: where I am at that moment, or where I have been recently? In a Taliban-controlled village in Afghanistan, on a rooftop of a whorehouse in Okinawa while filming deadly US air force bases, or perhaps in an elegant café after visiting an opera performance with my mom, in Stuttgart or in Paris.

Whether I have been injured on a battlefield or in a slum, or have been applauded (most of the time, hypocritically) at some event where I was invited to speak? Have I been doing something ‘forbidden’, insane and dangerous, or merely processing my visual or written materials in Japan or in Bangkok?

Depending on the circumstances, I can sound negative or cautiously optimistic.

But the truth, the honest truth is: I am scared.

Not scared for my own life, or my health or even my well-being. My work and my struggle: nobody forced me into it; all that I do is my own choice. I want to do it and therefore I do it. And while I do it, as it is often not safe, I have to understand that my life may end, prematurely, or that something else, very unpleasant, could happen. I have to understand, and I do understand. Shit happens! Unfortunately, it happens often. But that’s not what makes me scared.

What truly frightens me is something else, something much more essential: this beautiful ‘project’, this incredible,gigantic experiment called humanity, could very soon end in ruins and up in smoke.

What scares me even more is that, perhaps, it is already ending although I sincerely hope that it is not.

I have no religion, and I have absolutely no idea whether there is some sort of afterlife or not. Afterlife, God: what I am absolutely certain of is that no one on this planet really knows any answers to these so-called big questions, and those who claim that they do, know even much less than me.

This world and this damn humanity of ours is all that I know, and it is all that I have and care about. And I love it, because I have no other choice but loving it, despite all of its brutality and foolishness, recklessness and short-sightedness. But this planet, which used to be so brilliantly beautiful and pleasing, to all of our human senses, is now frightened, humiliated and plundered. It is getting raped, savagely, in front of our own eyes. And we are just watching, ruminating like cattle, shitting, and amusing ourselves in increasingly brainless ways.

That’s what we are actually supposed to do, according to those bastards who are ‘in charge’.

Our humanity had been derailed from its natural aims, goals and dreams. Goals like egalitarianism, social justice, beauty and harmony, used to be on everyone’s lips, no matter where they were living; just so recently, just one century ago.

The brightest minds, bravely and determinedly, worked on finishing with all forms of inequality, exploitation, racism and colonialism. Crimes against humanity committed by Western imperialism, racism, slavery and capitalism were being exposed, defined, condemned and confronted.

Unfortunately, it was one century ago that we were just about reaching the peak of enlightenment, and as humanity we were much closer to harmony and peaceful co-existence, than we are now.

Our grand-grandparents had no doubts whatsoever, that reason and logic would soon be able to triumph, everywhere on earth, and that those who had been ruling so unjustly all over this world, would either “see the light” and voluntarily step down, or would be once and for all defeated.

Great revolutions erupted on all continents. Human lives were declared to be well above profit. Capitalism seemed to be finished. Imperialism and capitalism were discredited, spat at and stepped on with millions of feet. It was clearly just a matter of years, before all people of all races would unite, before there would be no more dictatorship of greedy and degenerate business people, of crooked religious demagogues, of perverse monarchs and their serfs.

In those days, humanity was full of optimism, of ground-breaking ideas, inventions, intellectual, as well as emotional courage and artistic creativity.

A new era was beginning. The epoch of serfdom and capitalism was ending.

But then, the dark revanchist forces of oppression, of greed, regrouped. They had money and therefore could pay to buy the best psychologists, propagandists, mass-murderers, scholars, and artists.

*

A hundred years later, look where we are! Look at us now.

There is nothing to celebrate, and plenty to puke about.

Gangsters and moral degenerates,who ruled during all previous centuries, are still in full control of the planet. As before, oppressed people form majority: they inhabit Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, Sub-Continent and Southeast Asia.

Actually, things have gone much further than before: the majority of people on our planet lost their ability to think logically. They have been brainwashed by the propagandist mass media, by mass produced movies and pop music, by bizarre ‘trends’ in fashion and by aggressive consumerism.

Education and media outlets have lost all their independence and become subservient to the interests of the regime.

Western ‘democracy’ (not much of a project to begin with), has kicked the bucket quietly and discretely, and its advocates again began taking direct dictates from big business, multi-billionaires and their multi-national corporations. The system has evolved from turbo-capitalism into turbo-kleptocracy.

I work all over the world, on all continents, and what terrifies me is how ‘complete’, or call it ‘bulletproof’ the system has become.

With advanced computerization, with the ability of the regime to monitor and analyze basically all corners of our planet, there seems to be no place on earth that can escape the advances and attacks of Western imperialism and neo-colonialism.

Just imagine: some country decides to resist and to work for the well-being of its own people, and immediately the Western propaganda, its NGO’s, academia, media outlets, and potentially its mercenaries and military, get to work, systematically smearing the rebellious government, and potentially ruining entire countries. This is how Argentina collapsed, and then Brazil. This is how Syria was first destabilized and later almost destroyed.

It appears that nothing can withstand the global dictatorship.

And the global dictatorship has no mercy; it lost all rationale.

Greed, the maximization of profits, knows no boundaries. Sacrificing human lives is now commonly perpetrated. Thousands of human lives, or a few millions, it does not seem to matter. In the Democratic Republic of Congo or in West Papua, who cares, as long as coltan, uranium, gold and oil are flowing.

I witnessed entire nations ‘sinking’, becoming uninhabitable, due to global-warming: Kiribati, Tuvalu, Marshall Islands. I see tremendous islands like Borneo (known as Kalimantan in Indonesia) being thoroughly and irreversibly ruined. And nobody gives a damn. Corrupted(by the West and their own servile governments) scientists in places such as Indonesia,are still arguing that global warning and deforestation, as well as the palm oil plantations, are actually not threatening the world and its survival.

Some fifty years ago, there would have been powerful books written on these subjects. Wonderful art films were made,songs written and sang by brave bards,and the masses in both the oppressed world, but also in the West itself, bought revolutionary novels by the millions of copies. Multitudes of people stood in line, to watch films that were depicting their life, their struggle and their suffering.

Now? The destroyed masses are conditioned to forget about their nightmares and instead watch brainless horror films, some Star Wars ‘epic’, ‘romantic comedies’ depicting sweet suffering or the rich and famous. After saving for months, poor families in the devastated world are dragging their children to Disney Worlds; to those factories of plastic, emotionless dreams, to those Burger Kings of fairy tales!

Mobile phones have replaced paper books, newspapers and magazines. For centuries, paper books were symbols of knowledge. No computer or telephone screen can ever replace the printed word. A scholar, a man or a woman of letters has always been surrounded by books, by notes, by documents.

All this is not happening by chance.Electronic offering is much easier to control, divert and choke, than materials that are printed on paper. Thede-intellectualization of the world is clearly being done by design, step by step, in an organized fashion. Forget about ‘renaissance men and women’ in the 21st Century: even educated Western anti-capitalist thinkers are now ‘specialized’. They ‘don’t read fiction’. They are collecting ‘facts’, producing non-fiction essays and books, as well as documentary films and videos, but fully neglecting the point that all successful revolutions were always based on emotions, creativity and art; inspiring the masses, making people laugh and cry, dream and hope.

The world has become full of ‘data’, of digits. ‘Facts’ are widely available, but they do not inspire or move anybody. They do not call people to action; to the barricades. Everything is standardized. Western propaganda has managed to regulate human desire, dictating how the ‘perfect’ female or male body should look and behave. Or what the ‘correct’ perception of ‘democracy’should be,or what is trendy and what should be considered boring and outdated.

The life of both the victims and victimizers appears to be ‘de-politicized’. But it is not! The acceptance of Western propaganda and collaboration with the regime is actually an extremely political act!

*

I am scared because it appears that a great majority of the people have accepted what the twisted regime has ordered them to accept.

They have accepted surveillance, trends, de-humanized ‘desires’, ‘political correctness’, global imperialist fascism, pop, grotesque capitalism and grey uniformity.

Like parrots, they repeat anti-Communist slogans, as well as propaganda barks against all the countries and governments that are still resisting this monstrous Western dictatorship brought to its most bizarre extreme.

I am scared, and at the same time, I am increasingly furious. If this is the future for humanity, do we, as human beings, really have right to exist; to survive as a species? Are we so submissive, so uninventive that we always end up begging for crumbs, praying to some invented superior forces, and prostrating ourselves in front of evil greedy monarchs and morally-corrupt individuals and systems?

Fortunately, not everyone is blind, and not everyone is on his or her knees. Not all of us have lost the ability to resist, to dream, and to fight for a world that appeared to be so possible just one century ago.

Those who are still alive and standing on their feet, know perfectly well: Revolution is possible and morally justifiable. Capitalism and imperialism are totally inhuman. A Socialist or Communist system is the only way forward: not in some ‘conservative’, dogmatic form, but in an ‘internationalist’,enlightened and tolerant way.(As clarified in my latest book Revolutionary Optimism, Western Nihilism. ).

It is the beginning of the year; 2019. Let us try to recap some basics:

Destroying entire parts of the world, and ransacking their natural resources for cold, selfish profit, is wrong.

Brainwashing countries, overthrowing their progressive governments, and derailing their natural development, is damn wrong, too.

Turning populations of the entire planet into idiots and zombies, making them consume violent and brainless movies, listen to crap music and eat junk food, dreaming about making love to shop window figurines and their human equivalent, is evil.

Using the media, education and entertainment for indoctrination purposes is barbaric.

And so is turning the entire planet into some primitive consumer market.

To fight such a system is glorious. And it is by definition ‘trendy’ and fun.

To use the terminology of the empire: collaboration and uniformity can never be ‘cool’. Listening and watching the same garbage cannot be ‘fashionable’. Banging into the same mobile phone screens can hardly be defined as ‘advanced’, and broad-minded.

Licking the boots of some old fart who owns banks or destructive corporations, is far from a modern, elegant and refined way of living.

Watching how our beloved planet is going up in flames, due to neo-imperialism and turbo-capitalism, while not doing anything to stop it, is nothing else other than stupid.

*

I began 2019 by writing the first chapter of my 1000-page novel “One Year of Life”. This novel began in 2019 and it will finish at the end of the same year. At the very end of it. Enough of non-fiction only!

As a novelist and playwright, I believe in human emotions. I have also witnessed enough uprisings and revolutions to finally realize that naked facts and data will never bring people to the barricades.

Time to un-dust the old banners, to bring back poetry, art, literature, films, theatre, and music. They are our best allies.

The West tries to silence emotions, ‘burn’ books and hit us all with ugly, meaningless noise and images, because it knows perfectly well that beauty is creative and inspiring.Beauty and creativity are also ‘dangerous’, in fact fatal to the regime’s dark and depressing designs.

I may be scared, but I am also cautiously hopeful. We can still win. Actually, it is our obligation to win. This Planet has to survive. If we win, it will. If we lose, it will go to hell.

It will be an extremely tough struggle that lies ahead of us. And no one will fight just in the name of facts and data, people are known to fight only in the name of a beautiful future.For us to win, all great muses are expected to march by the side of brave and determined revolutionaries!

New Zealand Labour government entrenches anti-worker measures

John Braddock

Throughout 2018, the working class in New Zealand, spearheaded by thousands of nurses, teachers, public servants and transport workers, joined the mass struggles against austerity and declining living standards taken up by workers internationally.

The movement is continuing in the New Year. Some 3,300 junior doctors at public hospitals struck for 48 hours this month and will hold another strike beginning January 29, in opposition to a freeze in real wages and demands for longer shifts.

Strikes by thousands of teachers over unsettled contract claims have been foreshadowed for when the new school year begins in February. Learning support workers employed by the Ministry of Education, managing services for children with extra learning needs, this week walked out for a month over a rejected pay claim.

The response of the Labor-NZ First-Green Party coalition government has been to present a phoney “progressive” façade, while implementing the austerity agenda dictated by big business.

Installed in office after the 2017 election, Labour and its right-wing populist partner, the NZ First Party, pledged to restore capitalism’s “human face” with policies based on “kindness.” One widely-promoted promise was to change the law to strengthen workers’ rights to organise and improve their conditions. As with vows to address the housing crisis and the under-funding of hospitals, this has proven completely hollow.

Labour’s amended Employment Relations Act (ERA), which became law in December, retains the draconian anti-working class measures from the 1999–2008 Labour government’s industrial laws. These continue to outlaw strikes, except during collective contract negotiations, or over health and safety issues.

When 30,000 nurses struck last year, they faced restrictive “good faith” bargaining provisions, which require ongoing negotiations between the union and employers, and strike-breaking requirements for large numbers of nurses to remain in hospital wards. After Labour declared there was “no more money” to grant substantial wage and staffing increases, the NZ Nurses Organisation shut down the movement and imposed a three-year settlement which fails to meet the increased cost of living.

The trade unions and pseudo-left groups have hailed the new industrial laws. Mike Treen, head of the Unite union and former leader of the now-defunct Socialist Action League, last year claimed that the changes would “significantly enhance workers’ power” by giving more power to the unions. However, these same organisations have suppressed any real struggle against austerity and pro-business deregulation for the past four decades.

In fact, under the ERA, the hated 90-day “trial” period for new hires has been ended only in firms with over 20 workers. Small businesses, which account for some 97 percent of workplaces, can still summarily dismiss workers during this period. Minor legal rights to tea and meal breaks are restored.

To bolster the unions’ role in policing the working class, the new law grants them improved access to workplaces. Union representatives can enter workplaces without consent in order to negotiate or enforce collective agreements. Workers will have protections against discrimination on the basis of their union membership, while union delegates gain guaranteed paid time for union activities.

After pressure from business and NZ First, the draft legislation was altered to enable employers to unilaterally opt out of multi-employer collective agreement (MECA) bargaining. Business NZ chief executive Kirk Hope said this change made the bill “more acceptable” to business.

Fifteen months into its term in office, far from improving the lot of working people, the government and the trade unions are centrally responsible for an intensifying assault on the social position of the working class.

A recent Council of Trade Unions (CTU) cost-of-living survey highlighted the crisis facing workers. While intended by the union bureaucrats to feign sympathy for their plight, the survey pointed to the underlying conditions that have driven the upsurge in workers’ struggles.

Seventy percent of the 1,195 survey respondents reported their incomes were not keeping up with rising costs, while over 55 percent said their workloads had worsened. One commented: “After… coming back to NZ it is ridiculous how expensive basic groceries are—not to mention fuel and power.” Another said: “I have been in my current job 10+ yrs. I have had to do 2 merit steps to be paid $22.60 per hour. This is the same pay I was on when I left Australia 12 years ago. My position can be stressful & holds a lot of responsibility. I feel undervalued & underpaid.”

Economist Bill Rosenberg cited figures revealing the declining share of workers’ income in the overall economy, a process that began under the 1984–90 Labour Party government, and deepened following the 2008 global financial crisis.

According to a new Oxfam report, in the first year of the Ardern Labour government, the poorest half of the population, 2.4 million people, “became collectively $1.3 billion poorer.” The country’s richest 5 percent now have more wealth than the bottom 90 percent, with the two richest individuals adding $1.1 billion to their fortunes in 2017–18.

Labour’s priority is to keep taxes low for corporations and the rich, and public spending restricted, while boosting funding for the military and police. Government spending, at 28 percent of gross domestic product, is lower than for almost all of the three terms in office of the previous National government.

Amid rising anger among workers over the unions’ role in enforcing the requirements of big business, pseudo-left commentators are seeking to subordinate workers to these pro-capitalist organisations.

On the Redline blog, Don Franks, formerly of the Maoist Workers Party, feebly criticised the “concessions” in the ERA legislation. He appealed to the CTU leadership for a change of tactics, declaring: “Together we can make 2019 a great year for working people. If we get back to some hardball union basics.”

This is a fraud. The plummeting social position of the working class, and ongoing strangulation of workers’ struggles requires nothing less than a complete political break from Labour and the establishment parties, and a rebellion against the union bureaucrats, who function as tools of management and the government. New organisations, rank-and-file workplace committees democratically controlled by workers themselves, must be built in a fight for a workers’ government and socialist policies.

Minister’s resignation highlights unravelling of Australia’s ruling Coalition

Mike Head

Two developments this week point to the intensifying rifts tearing apart the governing Liberal-National Coalition—one of the main parties of capitalist rule in Australia since World War II—as well as the growing popular disaffection with the entire political establishment, including Labor and the Greens.

The first event was the supposedly unexpected announcement last Sunday by senior cabinet minister Kelly O’Dwyer that she would quit parliament at the looming federal election, which must be held by May. She is a supporter of Malcolm Turnbull, who was ousted as the Coalition’s prime minister last August.

The second was a call last Monday by Tony Abbott, a previously-deposed Coalition prime minister, for disenchanted voters to support the opposition Labor Party rather than independents, because Labor was a politically responsible “party of government.”

O’Dwyer, the minister for jobs, industrial relations and women, cited “very personal reasons” of wanting to spend time with her children. But there was no mistaking the political implications of her move, which the media reported as a “shock.”

On one level, it was a desertion from an apparently sinking ship. Polling continues to indicate that the Coalition faces a severe defeat at the election. There was speculation that O’Dwyer could even lose her inner-Melbourne seat, previously regarded as a “blue ribbon” Liberal Party electorate.

In damage control mode, Prime Minister Scott Morrison stood beside O’Dwyer as she announced her decision. He insisted she had his “full support” in making a “great choice” for her family, and he wanted her to continue as minister until the election. Morrison evidently wanted to avoid another cabinet reshuffle, but that leaves the key post of industrial relations—that is dealing with the working class—in the hands of a lame duck.

Clearly, O’Dwyer’s action goes deeper. It undermines Morrison’s efforts to hold the government together while shifting the Coalition further to the right, in league with Abbott and Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton. Together, they triggered last August’s removal of Turnbull, the leader of the Liberal Party’s self-titled “socially progressive and economically conservative” wing.

Twice last year, O’Dwyer spoke out against the Abbott-Dutton wing, which is seeking to refashion the Coalition into a Trump-style right-wing populist formation. This faction is trying to divert the rising social discontent, produced by destruction of permanent jobs, falling living standards and decaying social services, in reactionary nationalist, anti-immigrant and “law and order” directions.

In early September, just after Turnbull’s dumping, O’Dwyer told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that members of the right faction had subjected Liberal Party parliamentarians to “threats, intimidation and bullying” in order to remove Turnbull.

Following the Liberal Party’s heavy defeat in November’s Victorian state election, O’Dwyer told a party room meeting that “crusades” by “ideological warriors” among her colleagues had hijacked the party and left it regarded by voters as “homophobic, anti-women, climate-change denyers.”

As soon as O’Dwyer announced her departure, Turnbull took to twitter to hail her as a “true liberal.” Her move sparked reports that other government MPs could make similar announcements, including two Turnbull ministers who refused to serve under Morrison—Julie Bishop who was foreign minister, and Craig Laundy, who was small business and workplace minister. Immigration Minister David Coleman, another Turnbull backer, was also named.

They would follow other Liberal Party MPs in not contesting the election. They include Julia Banks, who quit the party after Turnbull’s removal, Ann Sudalis, who was targeted for a pre-selection challenge by the right faction, and David Bushby, the chief government whip in the Senate, a right-wing faction member to whom the government last week handed a plum job as Consul-General in Chicago.

Unnamed Liberal Party “sources” told journalists that key ministers were likely to quit as well if the party suffered a seismic defeat at the election. Those mentioned were Defence Minister Christopher Pyne and Foreign Minister Marise Payne—two leading members of Turnbull’s “moderate” wing—and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann, who swung behind Turnbull’s replacement by Morrison.

The crisis engulfing the government only intensified yesterday, following Morrison’s decision to install prominent indigenous businessman Warren Mundine as the Liberal candidate for a regional New South Wales (NSW) seat, at the expense of the already nominated local candidate, Grant Schultz.

Schultz responded by resigning from the Liberal Party, publicly denouncing Morrison and announcing he would stand against Mundine as an “independent.”

The ABC reported today: “Angry Liberals are tearing up their party memberships on the New South Wales south coast over the decision.” Among those who have resigned are the presidents of two local branches. Gerringong branch president Philip Motby told the ABC: “Head office seem to think they know more than we do so they’re bringing their man in. That’s fine, [then] let them come in and man the polling booths and do the running around.”

Abbott’s remarks take on a particular significance in this context. He told 2GB radio: “If you want a credible parliament, if you want serious government don’t vote independent. It is better to vote for the Labor Party than to vote for an independent. Because for all Labor’s faults at least they are a party of government or potential government and that means there is a level of responsibility which the Labor Party has to take, which no independent or minor party does.”

This message echoes the reported comments of Rupert Murdoch in telling a fellow media mogul, Kerry Stokes, last year that “Turnbull has to go,” even if it meant a period of Labor government. Murdoch, a major figure in the US and global corporate elite, reportedly said he could make money under Labor and the trade unions.

Under conditions of a rapidly deteriorating economic situation internationally and in Australia—including a US-China trade war, slowing Chinese and global growth, falling share and property prices—the ruling class would rely on a Labor government to impose the burden of a crash onto the back of working class households.

Labor, backed by the trade unions, has served this function for more than a century, taking office in periods of crisis, such as war and economic breakdown, to inflict sacrifice on the population.

At the same time, Abbott’s plea to voters reflects fears in ruling circles that this bitter record is now fueling a deeper political disenchantment that so-called independents and minor parties can exploit, further destabilising the parliamentary order that has maintained capitalist rule since the late 19th century.

With voting support for the establishment parties plunging over the past quarter century, Australia’s political system has become increasingly unstable, with seven short-lived prime ministers since 2007.

Various far-right formations are jostling to outflank the Coalition in trying to channel the unrest in reactionary directions. Abbott specifically attacked iron ore billionaire Clive Palmer, who has vowed to plunge more than $50 million into an election campaign for his rebadged United Australia Party (formerly the Palmer United Party).

After being wiped out in the 2016 election, Palmer’s party has just one member of parliament, Senator Brian Burston, who defected last year from another right-wing party, Pauline Hanson’s anti-immigrant One Nation. Palmer is bombarding voters with television advertisements, roadside billboards and unsolicited text messages in the hope of filling the political vacuum created by the discrediting of the Coalition, Labor and the Greens.

Also vying for position are One Nation, Liberal Party defector Cory Bernardi’s Australian Conservatives, Bob Katter’s Australian Party and the recently registered Fraser Anning Conservative National Party. Anning, a previous member of both One Nation and Katter’s party, used his maiden speech in parliament last year to demand a “final solution” to stop immigration and a return to the racist “White Australia” policy.

Labor, while claiming to oppose the far-right groups, is fully committed to enforcing the dictates of the financial elite if it returns to office, creating fertile ground for these formations.

Above all, together with Labor, these outfits and assorted independents are trying to head off an eruption of strikes and other forms of working class opposition. Their greatest fear is a turn by workers and youth toward a socialist perspective, as the only alternative to capitalism’s escalating social inequality and lurch toward war.

Sri Lankan president praises Philippine-style “war on drugs”

Vijith Samarasinghe

In a speech to a state banquet at Malacanang Palace in Manilla last week Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena hailed President Rodrigo Duterte’s so-called war on drugs as an “example to the whole world.”

Sirisena’s praise for the campaign of arbitrary arrests and extrajudicial violence, including thousands of summary executions, against alleged drug dealers, is an indication of his own dictatorial agenda.

Sirisena and Duterte signed bilateral agreements on defence, agriculture, industries, tourism, education and culture during the state visit. Sri Lanka also agreed to facilitate the opening of a Philippines embassy in the Colombo.

The main purpose of Sirisena’s tour, however, appears to have been to strengthen relations with Duterte and his so-called anti-drug war. Significantly, Sirisena visited the Philippine National Police (PNP) headquarters in Quezon City and attended a closed-door meeting with key officials, including PNP Chief Director General Oscar Albayalde and Interior Secretary Eduardo Año.

Toasting Duterte at Malacanang Palace, Sirisena declared, “The war against crime and drugs carried out by you is an example to the whole world, and personally to me. The drug menace is rampant in my country and I feel that we should follow your footsteps to control this hazard.”

It is not the first time that the Sri Lankan president has endorsed Duterte’s “neutralisation [i.e., killing] of illegal drug personalities nationwide.” The “footsteps” that Sirisena wants to follow is a criminal escalation of police-state violence and preparation for dictatorship.

The “war on drugs” became official national policy in June 2016 when Duterte was installed as president. In 2017, the Philippines congress reinstated the death penalty for drug-related crimes and equipped the nominally civilian Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) with a 500-strong military Task Force to conduct operations along with PNP officers, vigilante groups and other informal armed formations nationwide.

According to official statistics, the official death toll in the war on drugs stood at around 5,000 last year. Human rights organisations, however, have pointed out that the real figure could be up to 20,000 and that most of those killed are the urban poor. The International Criminal Court is currently conducting a preliminary investigation into whether the extrajudicial killings constitute crimes against humanity.

The “war on drugs” policy replicates the methods used by the Davao Death Squad which Duterte established when he was Davao City mayor. It carried out extrajudicial killings of hundreds of street children, petty criminals and drug users.

Upon return to Sri Lanka, Sirisena defended his praise for the Philippines dictator and hit back at criticism by the media and human rights groups.

Addressing a ceremony to launch national drug prevention week at a school in the war-devastated northern town of Mullaithivu, Sirisena declared: “NGOs that talk about human rights only take the side of the drug racketeers… I ask the human rights organisations to remove their masks and protect our children.”

Sirisena said he would adopt a “novel approach to eradicate drugs” and not step away from his decision to introduce capital punishment for drug racketeers. He also launched a phone hotline, with the number 1984, for the public to provide information on narcotics or organised crime.

Sirisena, with the support of many government MPs, has long been calling for a national anti-drugs campaign. In July 2018, he called for an end to Sri Lanka’s 43-year moratorium on executions, and for hanging to be introduced as punishment for repeat drug offenders.

Cabinet endorsed this, with Sirisena’s official spokesperson, Rajitha Senaratne, declaring that the government would bring the fight against drugs onto the streets: “The Philippines has been successful in deploying the army and dealing with this problem [drugs]; we will try to replicate their success.” Nineteen drug offenders who were serving life sentences in Sri Lanka now face the death penalty.

The drug problem is not the primary concern of Sirisena and Duterte or the ruling elites in their respective countries. If this was the case, there would be far more effective measures to combat this social problem by improving living standards for millions of the oppressed masses, and providing funds for drugs education, psycho-social support and healthcare, and at a fraction of the cost of waging the murderous war on drugs.

The real concern of the Sri Lankan ruling class, and its political elite, is not drugs, but the most serious political crisis it has faced since the end of British colonial rule.

Last year the government was rocked by intensifying class battles by railway, ports, petroleum, education and health sector workers. This was followed in December by protests and a nine-day national strike action for higher wages by more than 100,000 estate workers. Sri Lanka’s astronomical and growing debt burden, along with austerity demands by the International Monetary Fund, will deepen the widespread anti-government opposition by workers and the oppressed masses.

Unsettled by this growing resistance, all factions of the Sri Lankan ruling class have been calling for more authoritarian forms of rule, and numerous comments published in the media for a “strong leader.”

Last October, Sirisena, in a constitutional coup, ousted Ranil Wickremesinghe as prime minister, replacing him with so-called “strong man” Mahinda Rajapakse, the former president. Rajapakse’s presidency, from 2005 to 2014, was characterised by war, ruthless repression and austerity.

Having failed in his attempts to install Rajapakse, Sirisena is now using the war against drugs as a pretext for a rapid turn towards dictatorial methods. During the recent political crisis, Sirisena, who is constitutionally the head of the armed forces and commander-in-chief, took control of the law and order ministry.

Duterte’s national “war on drugs” policy was launched in the face of sharp social tensions. Its escalation coincided with large strikes by workers in 2016–2017 and thousands of poor Manilla residents taking over more than 15,000 empty government housing units in March 2017.

As the WSWS explained, the “real purpose of the war on drugs was to establish a vast police-state apparatus that will be used to suppress social opposition from workers and the poor. It is no accident that the vast majority of the victims of the war on drugs come from the poorest layers of society.”

The Sri Lankan ruling elite launched its communal war against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in 1983 with the support of major powers including the US and neighbouring India. The war ended under Rajapakse with the death of tens of thousands of Tamils and the detention of around 300,000 people.

Sirisena, who constantly appeals to the Buddhist hierarchy and the military, repeatedly promotes his own role in the war. He has consistently opposed the arrest and detention of military officers accused of war crimes.

Sirisena’s attack on human rights groups, and anyone who criticises his anti-drugs campaign, indicates that he will turn, not just against those groups, but his political opponents.

Sirisena’s open praise for Duterte’s violent police-state methods is a clear warning to the Sri Lankan working class. This danger cannot be defeated by appeals to the ruling elites to protect “human rights” but only through the development of a revolutionary movement of the working class based on socialist internationalism to put an end to the profit system.