Confronting an “Assertive” China: Nearly All Roads Lead to Taiwan

Sandip Kumar Mishra

China’s disruptive behaviour through 2020 has increasingly led the international community to become more vocal about the difficulty of coexisting with a Beijing that is “assertive,” “irresponsible,’’ and “opaque.” This sentiment is not new, nor is it evenly distributed. However, China’s irresponsible handling of the COVID-19 outbreak has these sentiments more pronounced. Its imposition of a new security law in Hong Kong, border standoff with India, and provocations in the South and East China Seas, have accelerated regional discussions on counterbalancing options. These countries have begun to gear themselves to deal with China’s ‘grey-zone assault’ and ‘wolf-warrior diplomacy’.

One of the beneficiaries of Beijing’s misconduct and growing anti-China sentiment is Taiwan. In a July 2020 joint statement, the US and Australia talked about “Taiwan's important role in the Indo-Pacific region as well as their intent to maintain strong unofficial ties with Taiwan.” The statement also asserted that the two countries would support Taipei’s membership to any international organisation where statehood is not a prerequisite, and invite it as an observer to those that require statehood. In a veiled reference, both the US and Australia said that “recent events” had made their resolve to support Taiwan stronger.

It is important to remember that Taiwan has been unable to participate in World Health Organisation (WHO) meetings since 2017 because of Chinese objections. However, there are now growing demands from the US, Europe, and Japan to reverse this. Hokkaido, Japan’s largest prefecture, passed a resolution urging Tokyo’s support for Taipei’s engagement in in the World Health Assembly (WHA). Japanese Foreign Minister, Taro Kano, suggested a similar intent in a speech in May 2020. In November, a bipartisan caucus of the Japanese Diet passed a resolution making the same request of its government as Hokkaido prefecture. Australia has also expressed its support of Taiwan’s inclusion in the WHA. 102 members of the European Parliament and four German lawmakers wrote an open letter in favour of a WHA invitation to Taipei.

In India, too, strong positive sentiment in favour of Taiwan has surfaced over the past several months. Many have argued that India should play up the ‘Taiwan card’ in the midst of tensions with China. The border standoff has been the main propeller for a reconsideration of New Delhi’s approach to Taiwan. India feels that its policy of silence to manage relations with China has not paid off. Thus, there are now popular demands to forego India’s adherence to the ‘One China’ policy. Suggestions about a free trade agreement with Taiwan, such as the ones struck by Singapore and New Zealand, have been made. This becomes an important proposal especially in light of India’s decision to stay out of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, as one way for New Delhi to compensate for the self-imposed exclusion.

The US has signed the Taipei Act to expand the scope of relations with Taiwan, and to encourage other countries and international organisations to establish, and/or strengthen official and unofficial bilateral relations as well. The US has sold US$ 5 billion worth of arms to Taiwan in 2020. President-elect Joe Biden is expected to continue this policy of support. Biden and Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen reportedly share a good working equation; in fact, after winning the presidential election, Biden indicated his interest in deepening ties with Taipei.

Taiwan has also carefully and diligently been working to harness this current goodwill and solidify its diplomatic positioning globally. It has reached out to the US, Japan, India, Australia, and European countries to enunciate its position on China. Taiwanese Foreign Minister, Joseph Wu, has called on Australia to stand up for democracy and help Taiwan against Chinese threats. Wu has also appealed to like-minded countries including Canada to discourage China from a full-scale forced takeover of Taiwan. President Tsai Ing-wen recently spoke at a high-profile webinar organised by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute— the first such participation of its kind by Taiwan’s top leadership. Australian In November 2020, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison identified Taiwan by name (without any qualifiers) as a possible travel bubble candidate.

Rising anti-China sentiment in the region has created a huge diplomatic opportunity for Taiwan. However, it is important to remember that there are multiple structural constraints—including China’s economic inducements—that may hold many countries back from formalising relations with Taipei, or indeed, enhancing them to higher levels. The current environment may be encouraging for Taiwan, but still, a long distance has to be covered before any qualitative diplomatic change can be achieved.

China Has the World’s Largest Economy, Get Over It

Dean Baker

It is more than a bit annoying to hear reporters endlessly refer to China as the world’s second largest economy. It isn’t. It’s the world’s largest economy and has been since 2017. Here are the data from the International Monetary Fund.

Source: International Monetary Fund.

As the chart shows, China’s economy first passed the U.S. in 2017. It is projected to be more than 16 percent larger this year, and by 2025 is projected to be almost 40 percent larger by 2025.

Purchasing power parity (PPP) measures of GDP are based on applying a common  set of prices for all goods and services produced across countries. While it is difficult to measure accurately, most economists view PPP as being the better way to calculate GDP, since it reflects living standards and does not fluctuate with currency values. China does have four time the population of the United States, so it is still much poorer on a per capita basis.

The fact that China has a larger GDP than the United States is important for policy debates since many people seem to hold illusions are about the ability of the U.S. to influence China. While United States can take steps that will damage China’s economy, even the harshest measures will only have limited impact, and China will be able to take steps to overcome them through time. This is important background for debates on China policy.

Russia Is Cracking Down on Political Performance Art, Again. Why It Should Listen, Not Lash Out.

Damelya Aitkhozhina

Performances by artists and activists on political topics have been a sensitive spot for the Russian authorities for years. But as the authorities’ crackdown on civil society intensifies, so does the creative non-violent response exposing and drawing attention to it.

This in turn increases the pressure authorities exert on the artists and activists in efforts to crush free speech. The flurry of prosecutions in recent months has made this clear.

On November 28, two women dressed in costumes like those worn by Snegurochka (“Snowgirl”), a companion to Russia’s version of Santa Claus, were on a central square in Moscow. With them was a man dressed as a riot police officer. He stood with his back to a lamp post while the women tied him up with packaging tape and signs reading “Careful, Fragile.”

The women were Pussy Riot activists Rita Flores (aka Margarita Konovalova) and Mariya Alyokhina, and the “policeman” was the artist Farkhad Israffili-Gelman. With them was a photographer, Gleb Kuznetsov.

They posted photographs of the event and tweeted, “Since July 2019 paper cups or plastic bottles became weapons, but the worst weapon against the people is a police state.” The performance referred to the 2019 “Moscow case,” in which several people faced serious criminal assault charges for throwing empty plastic bottles or cups toward the police. In December that year, President Vladimir Putin said that if prosecutions were not pursued for throwing plastic cups at police, things would escalate to rioting. The fragility of riot policemen became a running joke among political activists.

By December 3 of this year, police had detained all four artists.

They detained Flores at a hospital where she was seeking treatment for a medical condition. Her lawyer told me that on the way there, a plainclothes police officer attempted to get into the ambulance, claiming to be her acquaintance. Before that they stood guard outside her apartment over the weekend.

Alyokhina stated that before she and Flores were detained, somebody shut off the electricity in their apartments. While the others were released pending court hearings, Flores was detained overnight, charged with repeatedly violating public assembly rules and sentenced to 20 days in detention for this entirely peaceful protest performance.

Alyokhina, Flores, and Israffili-Gelman were also detained on November 4 and 10, apparently preemptively, when they put on the costumes they eventually used for the performance. Both times, they were detained before they did anything, and the police gave them no explanation. Their lawyer told me that later they were charged with an administrative infraction for not wearing masks and gloves in a public space, as required by the city’s COVID-19 rules, and that they were being tracked by the police, as police would appear in places they visited shortly thereafter.

A History of Persecutions

Apparently, the police see these artists and activists as so dangerous that it justifies this attention over real law and order problems.

Perhaps this is because on October 7, Pussy Riot put rainbow flags on several key government buildings in Moscow. Alyokhina explained that this action was for President Putin’s birthday, to make that day “LGBTQ visibility day.” One of their lawyers said that in subsequent days, 11 activists were detained. Most were released with a charge sheet for violating public assembly rules. But on October 9, a court sentenced one of them, Alexandr Sofeyev, to the maximum 30 days in detention for repeated violation of these rules. Three others, including Alyokhina, were fined.

On the same day, a left-wing activist, Vladimir Shulenin, left a “birthday present” for Putin at the presidential administration building. It was a mock certificate of appreciation “for maintaining poverty and dictatorship,” along with a pair of flippers and glue, apparently in reference to the Russian slang expression “gluing flippers,” meaning dying or death. He left the items next to the building’s entrance.

Shulenin’s lawyer, Mansur Gilmanov said that  the police claimed that he did not act alone and therefore considered his action a mass gathering, which requires advance authorization. On November 27, a court fined him RUB 15,000 (approximately $200) for violating public assembly rules.

In early November, Pavel Krisevich carried out a performance on a square across the street from the Federal Security Service (FSB) building in Moscow. He was covered in fake blood and tied to a cross, while other activists set files of criminal cases around him on fire. Reportedly, the paper was covered by chemical compounds burning at 40 degrees Celsius and was safe for him and others. Krisevich told the media  that his performance represented political prisoners. Shortly thereafter he was arrested and court sentenced him to 15 days in detention for noncompliance with police orders.

That was not his first performance related to political cases. Among other performances he staged, during the summer he put up a poster with images of vulvas in support of Yuliya Tsvetkova, a Russian artist and activist who is being prosecuted for posting a series of body-positive drawings of naked women on social media.

On December 1, the university Krisevich had been attending expelled him, referring to his November performance and stating that his actions “did not correlate with the moral character” of graduates. He intends to appeal. Prior to that he was attacked in a Saint Petersburg train station. Two men approached him and demanded that he kneel and apologize to them. When he refused, they threw antiseptic green dye in his face, which has become a common feature in vigilante attacks on critics in recent years. Krisevich stated that they identified themselves as “Orthodox Christian jihadis.”

In Samara, Karim Yamadayev, creator of the amateur web-series “Judge Graeme,” from Tatarstan, is on trial for “insulting authorities’ and “justifying terrorism” before a military court. He has been in detention since January 2019, when he was searched, interrogated, and detained for a video posted on YouTube. In the video he played a judge at a mock trial of Putin, the head of the state oil company Rosneft, and a presidential spokesperson, on charges of corruption and embezzlement. The video strongly implies that each defendant is executed off camera. The creators had a disclaimer that the video was an art project.

The video is undoubtedly distasteful to many, but to bring a criminal prosecution — much less terrorism charges, with a potential sentence of seven years in prison — is an egregious violation of freedom of expression. On December 2, his trial was suspended because Yamadayev is suspected to have contracted the coronavirus while in detention. Yamadayev was previously detained twice on charges of violating rules on public assemblies when he created an installation with a grave of Putin and headstones symbolizing the death of opposition. He served over a month in detention for that offense.

Don’t Lash Out, Listen

In a rare demonstration of at least some common sense, in November an appeals court in Perm suspended the remaining prison time for Alexander Shabarchin. In August, a court had sentenced him to two years in prison and another activist to a suspended sentence for hooliganism after they put up a doll with Putin’s face and signs reading “Liar” and “War Criminal.”

It was an entirely peaceful act that posed no danger or harm to anyone. The court ruled that it amounted to public humiliation of Putin. And although neither of these young men remain behind bars, both have criminal records that may have a negative impact well on their future.

These graphic political performances are symptoms of pent-up public frustrations. It would be smarter for the authorities to listen to people’s critical voices, especially the distressed ones, even when they are expressed through controversial performance. Even if the authorities don’t want to listen, they have an obligation under international law to respect freedom of expression, and not lash out.

Imposed restrictions, protests and the future of Hong Kong

Amir Mohammad Sayem

The Hong Kong protests of 2019, also known as Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement, drew huge attention from many across the world. In fact, Hong Kong protests, which started in June (2019) against the proposed Extradition Bill to allow extradition of Hong Kongers to mainland China for trial, intermittently continued for more than a year and led to brutality of police force and thousands of arrests. Even if the bill could not be passed by reason of unprecedented protests, another controversial bill — the national security bill — was promulgated in 2020. This new law drove further protests in Hong Kong and, of course, strongly raised an old question anew: Will Hong Kong be completely controlled by China similar to mainland Chinese cities in the future?

In my opinion, increased control over Hong Kong is not unlikely all in all in the future, although full control may not be a reality. In fact, Hong Kong, which was ruled by Britain as a colony for more than 150 years with the 1842 Treaty of Nanking signed after the 1841 First Opium War and given back to China Under the “one country, two systems” arrangement in 1997, is undergoing some major changes — especially in political terms — since 2003 by reason of continued direct and indirect interventions of the mainland Chinese government that aims at exerting greater control over Hong Kong, even if it became a Special Administrative Region with the 1984 British-China Joint Declaration and continues to maintain governing and economic systems separate from those of mainland China.

As is rightly criticized, the Chinese government is gradually weakening rule of law, civil rights and freedom of media and eliminating every trace of liberal democratic values, which Hong Kong — reputed as Asia’s World City, one of the most advanced capitalist economies around the world and a multi-party political system — was enjoying before its being handed over to China by Britain. Some examples of restrictive moves can be the central government’s decision to implement nominee pre-screening before allowing Chief Executive elections, declaration of patriotism as a prerequisite for holding office in Hong Kong, disqualification of six elected pro-democracy legislators after the 2016 Legislative Council elections, and passing of a controversial bill criminalizing disrespect for China’s national anthem.

But the promulgation of the 2020 national security law is obviously a big jump in China’s efforts to achieve its goal of making Hong Kong a fully controlled city — at least after 2047 when the historic handover agreement will end — through coercion or trickery. Indeed, the recently promulgated security law that includes 66 articles criminalizes any acts of secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign powers with a maximum sentence of life in prison. Under the new law, street protests and advocacy of outspoken local voices are almost impossible in Hong Kong. Though the government insists that ordinary people will not be affected, this law, as a consequence, can significantly suppress democratic rights and facilitate enactment of further laws favoring China’s agenda.

Given that China is a big power — economically and militarily — and has loyal government in Hong Kong, it may be easier, at least somewhat, to implement its agenda, significant for making it more capable of realizing its ultimate goal of exerting greater influence in Asia and beyond. In fact, the Hong Kong’s parliament, the Legislative Council, is leaned to Beijing because it is only partially democratic — about half the seats are directly elected by voters. More importantly, the Chief Executive is primarily elected from a restrictive pool of candidates supportive by an Election Committee that is composed of 1,200 members from four major sectors. The central government has the opportunity to influence the nomination of primary candidates and election of the Chief Executive and, hence, can keep the Hong Kong government answerable to Beijing — not to electorate — and achieve China’s goals with imposing of laws restricting diverse rights of Hong Kongers in the future too.

But it cannot be as easy for the Chinese central government and the pro-Beijing Hong Kong government as is said to forcefully implement the China-isation agenda especially in political terms in Hong Kong. As it appears, Hong Kong people have shown a tendency of protesting restrictive moves of the government.  In fact, the government’s restrictive steps that led to increased protests in the past including protests in 2003, 2012, 2014 — known as the Umbrella Movement — and 2019 have already brought some successes and can motivate Hong Kongese to be more determined for the realization of their diverse rights with massive movements in the future increasing the possibility of making situations chaotic.

It is undeniable that people of Hong Kong, which has a limited democracy, enjoyed a high level of civil liberties for generations compared to those of mainland China — a country controlled by a single party — and that the Hong Kong government generally respects the human rights of the citizens, even if there are some limitations. Of course, China guaranteed the former British colony to continue to govern itself and simultaneously maintain many independent systems until 2047. Also, the Basic Law holds out the ultimate aim of universal suffrage in electing Hong Kong’s leader and legislature, though China reserved the right to interpret the law. It does not seem reasonable to force Hong Kongers to subdue to unjustly imposed restrictions of mainland China, though Hong Kong, which was taken a 99-year lease by Britain in 1898, is rendered as its inalienable territory.

Not less important is the fact that many countries that ideologically favor democracy and have economic interests in Hong Kong — one of the economic hubs where many multinational companies of different countries including the UK are located — will continue to put pressure upon Beijing and the Hong Kong government. The USA, the UK, Australia, Canada and some other countries are much critical to the controversial security law; by this time, the USA has imposed sanctions. Such transboundary acts can put barriers to the implementation of China-isation agenda and may unsurprisingly motivate Hong Kongers, including a segment of pan-democratic bloc, who call for greater autonomy to strongly call for independence, though such a position is still far from the mainstream segment.

As it seems, future course of the semi-autonomous Hong Kong largely depends on what steps China make in the days to come and how Hong Kongers react to. But it is desired that Hong Kongese enjoy economic, political and other rights in the future too. In my opinion, the Hong Kong government should listen to people’s voices instead of working for realizing China’s goals and, more importantly, mainland China should refrain from application of force, should not deprive Hong Kongers of their deserved rights and keep autonomous status of its indisputable territory. Roles of the United Nations and human rights organizations may also be effective in upholding diverse rights of Hong Kongers.

Women’s Woe: Masking Insidious Domestic Abuse under Covid-19 Crisis

Divya Sharma & Anita Banerjee

Engulfing the globe under its grim, the unprecedented Corona Virus (COVID-19) has surprisingly shown an upsurge in domestic violence cases worldwide. India being the second most populous country has witnessed around 2.5 times spurt in domestic abuse cases since the nationwide lockdown in March 2020, which is the most prevalent form of crime often termed as Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) that is a gender-based violence sabotaging women within the so-called safe shell of the house.

Having considered the horrifying surge in domestic violence and incidental emergency, the clarion call issued to all countries to prioritize women safety by the United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres on 6th April 2020,  has been grossly discounted, resulting in domestic abuse cases affecting the overall well-being of the women. It not only reveals the apathy of the Government in addressing the shadow pandemic but also unfolds weaker institutional mechanism for reporting domestic violence cases.

Despite having piecemeal legislations protecting the rights of women against discrimination, violence and atrocities in 21st century, India is declared “the most miserable country for women safety” in “The World’s Most Dangerous Countries for Women, 2018” Report by Thomson Reuters Foundation. World Health Organization (WHO) with the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and the South Africa Medical Research Council revealed that every third women (around 35 per cent) in India suffers sexual or physical violence in their lifetime. Added to this, around 27 per cent of women since the age of 15 years battles against harsh violence in India according to the Fourth National Family Health Survey (NFHS-2018) by Union Health Ministry.  For that matter, Uttar Pradesh with 59,445 cases in 2018 is declared the most unsafe state for women according to “Crimes of India-2018” Report released by National Crimes Records Bureau (NCRB) making domestic abuse the top gender- related crime in India. Most Populous State of U.P. is so understaffed (1:1000), exasperating the situation further where women are even more underrepresented. Additionally, the Global Gender Gap Index (2020) places India in 112th position among 153 countries, having   also dropped fourteen places from 2006, reflecting higher gender imbalances and ineffective policies in complying with the principles of rule of law which has led to impairment of women in the society.

The medical infrastructure in India has revealed that it is insufficient, if not non-existent, to meet the challenges posed by Covid-19 pandemic. While ordinary victims of physical or sexual violence were already exposed to a deficient societal evil, the pandemic unfortunately has degenerated their conditions with the likes of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), abortion, miscarriage, suicidal gestures, gynaecological problems, sexually transmitted infections, including HIV, to name a few, as reported by WHO’s Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research (SRH). This can further be supported by Gender Inequality Index Rank 2019 placing India in 95th position in terms of health, worsening the conditions of women.

We are at crossroads in this pandemic times, highlighting the shortcomings of the existing institutional framework pertaining to women safety laws. The plight of women in India has been overlooked during current COVID-19 crisis leading to catastrophic situation caging women at home with her tormentor spouse, where she remains at the mercy of a person who should be behind bars in unfortunate cases. It brings to the fore our policy failure and lack of coherent National Strategy to meet the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and Sustainable Development Goals (SDG3), without adequately addressing domestic abuse and access to affordable healthcare. It also speaks volumes about inefficacy of fixing priorities by the Government when the National Commission of Women does not even have Constitutional Status despite its duties falling under Fundamental Rights of women as a whole, perhaps carefully avoided to shield it from Writs directed at them, considering the rampant failure of laws to protect women from Domestic Violence. It is important to treat women in Domestic roles at par with the ‘essential services’ workers and the protection so extended must cover measures to mitigate the adverse effects of the pandemic and its responses. India, sadly, has abundant of laws relating to women’ safety, but has very weak mechanisms to enforce it, besides women centric laws has proved to be obsolete in the present crisis.

Interestingly, Sweden was ranked the best Country for women as per CEOWORLD, while India lags at 49. The French government has encouraged victims to discreetly seek help at pharmacies. The Italian government on the other hand has launched a new app, “YouPol” that will enable them to ask for help without making a phone call. Whereas most  Indian Women lack the access and awareness to technology, especially for destitute women, leaving no choice for her to spend on technological infrastructure, while prioritizing existential well- being of family as a homemaker. An illiterate woman in rural part of India cannot be expected to be as adept in seeking legal remedies as a literate Urban Indian Woman. Though the Government of India has sanctioned Rs 1,672 crores under ‘Nirbhaya Fund’ by the Ministry of Home Affairs for women safety, only 9 % or lesser have been utilised, abysmally showing lackadaisical approach of the states and union territories towards women security in the country. Government needs to pull up its socks.

However India is yet to devise pragmatic methods unique to Indian Women’s plight, to tackle domestic violence in this crisis, making it more cumbersome in a Patriarchy driven society. It is this patriarchy which manifests in coercive control over women, needs to be addressed at its root as the victims of domestic abuses are riddled with barriers unable to meet ends of justice, primarily because the system of justice has been unable to evoke confidence in such victims. The government, judiciary and the society need to work in tandem to uproot the demon before domestic violence turns into a pandemic. To live in a country “where the mind is without fear”, it is pertinent that women who constitute around 50% of total population should become “Nirbhaya” (Fearless) only then the “head will be held high” by our country in its entirety.

A mandate from Christmas 2020: Let love and justice meet

Ranjan Solomon

On Christmas Day 2019, at a Christmas Eve Mass, parishioners were offered a powerful, yet challenging message on how we as everyday Christians must understand and observe Christmas.  The priest narrated how the image of the manger is not just that of a humble abode. It is an inclusive and ecumenical space because Jesus came for all the people of the world.  “There were shepherds living in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night” (Luke2:8). “…after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem…” (Matthew 2:1). The apostle Matthew records that the birth of Jesus was accompanied by an extraordinary celestial event: a star that led the “wise men” to Jesus. This star “went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was” (Matthew 2:9). What was this star? And how did it lead the wise men to the Lord? We must also recall that the manger makes reference to cattle. Most representations of Jesus’ birth show donkeys, cows, and sheep watching over the Holy Family and a camel or two arriving with the Three Kings. Many scholars believe Mary rode to Bethlehem on a donkey, and, as a result, many artistic representations show Joseph leading Mary into town as she rides on the back of a donkey. Donkeys were a common mode of transportation for the poor in biblical times.

The birth of Christ, the Christmas story, is so inclusive because it embodies every aspect of God’s creation. What is more important is that the first to sight the bright star were the shepherds. In the first century shepherds in Palestine represented one of the lowest social strata in society. Religious tradition of Jesus’ day labeled them as unclean. They were marginalized, poor, and considered as the outer layer of society; while the wise men represented the well to do, the educated, and the scholars of their day.

The social and theological implications of the manger are unambiguous: God’s love for all people was expressed in and through the coming of Jesus Christ. This love welcomed both the shepherds and the wise men at the same level. True love does not differentiate between God’s children. In Christ, the evil of discrimination and bigotry is obliterated.

In a caste-class ridden society, and, for that matter, in the church too, this image of the manger trashes the claims of the high and mighty – the capitalists of our time and the rich who see the poor and underclass as being lower in their claims to a place in Jesus’ life. When we stand before God, not only do our social differences lose their importance, our caste-class and ethnic differences are also exterminated. God’s love is for all people regardless of whether they are or of lower social and financial status in society.  Not only do rich and poor, Jew and Gentile stand before God as equals, there are also no political boundaries. The migrant is received as a stranger in our presence. All are welcomed and accepted. In other words, when we stand before the holy, our racism and prejudice should melt away and we should become dependably human recognizing the other as a brother and a sister.

One of our most disturbing issues during this Christmas season is the situation of the workers and farmers, Dalits and Tribals. In Jesus’ ministry, he always took up cudgels for the discarded and shunned. They also included the sick, the sex workers, the sinners and sinned against, the child workers, the illiterate, the blind, the imprisoned, and everyone who is socially and otherwise bruised.

The Indian government and the Sangh Parivar in our country show no such tolerance and intent to include anyone except those who fall in their category of the highest caste and classes. The BJP plans to ‘Hinduize’ the country by patterns of ethnic cleansing and abandoning the multiform culture that India is. Instead, they would rather have just one type of people who show allegiance to their brand of ‘Hindutva’.

Our farmers, for example, are not from the upper castes (except for the Brahmins who own the largest portions of land). The BJP wants to force the small and marginal farmers and the landless away from their lands and traditional way of life. Instead, they want to pave the way for the benefit of the corporates whose only interest is not food for all but profit for them. The land legislations are essentially a land grab and based on sheer greed for the already rich. Many local and international human rights organizations have condemned India’s actions and policies against the farmers as oppressive and in violation of international law.

The Christmas message emphasizes the fact that our faith demands of us to champion today’s farmers, workers, Tribals, dalits, oppressed and abused women and children, LGBTQIAs, and to advocate for their rights. The appalling irony is that almost everything this government is doing is to violate the human dignity, equality, and respect for the human rights of the weakest. Our constitution dares us to follow the path of a secular, socialist, democratic Republic. The BJP government does the virtual opposite.

In the midst of life’s complex injustices, we must make Christmas the time to engage in the quest for renewal. For after all, there is something about the child in the manger that should rouse within us a commitment to a just and inclusive society. It is the challenge to the Church, especially to its Social Apostolate.

2020 has been one of horror for most Indians. Covid has taken away 146000 thousands lives, perhaps far more. We are ruled by a cruel and fascist regime that thinks nothing of throwing innocent people into jail, and allowing people to die in misery, watching in indifference when poor farmers end up in suicide. We are forced to muddle through fascistic and unmerited laws scripted and egged on by the rich and the powerful.

At this Christmas time, and as we head towards the end of another year, all of humankind must unite to transform this unjust and cruel society we live in, especially as it affects the poorest and most oppressed. Christians must live by three cornerstones- FAITH, HOPE, AND LOVE. That would allow us to co-exist with other humans in mutual love and respect and pave the way for justice and a renewed society. May Christmas 2020 and New Year 2021 inaugurate the pathways of a just society?

Domestic Violence in India: Has anything changed?

Shrey Banka

While the entire nation went into a lockdown on March 25, 2020 in a fight against the novel coronavirus, not many could have foreseen that the lockdown would lead to a “shadow pandemic”. As per a recent report by India’s National Commission for Women (NCW), 587 domestic violence complaints had been lodged during March 23 – April 16 period, a sharp 48% rise over the 396 complaints filed in the previous 25 day period. The situation even worsened with a total of 1,477 complaints registered between March 25 and May 31, the highest number of cases recorded during these months in past ten years.

Sadly, these numbers may not even represent the full extent of the problem since as per National Family Health Survey (NFHS) 2015-16, roughly 77% of women who experienced domestic violence didn’t ever mention it to anyone and even less than 1% of the women actually sought help from the police. Extrapolating these reporting trends paints a grim mind-numbing picture of the state of women who had been locked down with their abusers during this pandemic.

But the problem of domestic violence isn’t new in India. In a survey conducted by the Thomson Reuters Foundation in 2018, India was ranked as the world’s most dangerous country for women among the 193 United Nation member states. Women are not only facing abuse at their homes but also at educational institutes and workplace. The recent case of the murder of a female college student in Faridabad in broad daylight is a testimony to the deplorable state of women safety in the country. The issues that contribute to this abysmal state of women safety in our country are manifold.

The first and one of the most fundamental reasons for atrocities against women is the social stigma and the societal norms attached to domestic violence. The effect of society on domestic violence operates at two levels. One is that in many Indian households, the conditioning of female and male children is done such that they tend to accept male dominance as a given and the female grow up to become women who are unaware of what legally constitutes as exploitation and violence. There was a time when the women weren’t cognizant of the fact that physical violence by their husbands was a legal offence. While the awareness has improved since then, the NFHS study in 2105-2016 revealed that 52% women and 42% men among those surveyed still believed that a man was justified in beating her wife. The awareness about mental and sexual violence is even lower with sexual violence being the type of violence with the highest proportion of cases (80%) where the victim didn’t talk about the violence to anyone. The second level of societal influence in domestic violence cases is the stigma that is faced by a woman who files a complaint against her husband or his family. After filing a case or resorting to mediation, societal elements including the in-laws and the relatives point fingers at the victim as the one who took her “family” to the court. The fear of this kind of a hostile atmosphere and the associated adverse repercussions also deter women from raising their voice against their abusers. Lack of financial independence of many of the victims also becomes a significant cause of concern for the women when considering asking for help or seeking justice.

Secondly, even if the women somehow muster the courage to overcome all these deterrents and seek help, the inadequacy and lax nature of Indian law and administration make justice a distant dream for these women. India has a slew of laws and guidelines meant to protect women from violence and harassment. These include IPC Section 498A, The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, Section 125 of The Code Of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) among others. But the multitudes of laws have not been successful in ensuring that the victims get justice. One of the faults in these laws was recently corrected by the Supreme Court on November 7. Due to lack of uniformity about the provision of maintenance for women filing cases for divorce or domestic violence, and the guideline of the maintenance being payable only after the case is resolved, the accused in such cases had been exploiting loopholes in laws and trying to drag the cases for years so that they could adjust their official reported financial health over the years of the court case in order to pay lesser maintenance expenses. In some cases, they were able to completely get away with the payment due to the women petitioner losing her morale and needing financial assistance over the years of the court case. The recent judgment by Supreme Court in a case between a Mumbai-based couple addressed these uncertainties and loopholes in the law that obstruct justice to the women. The ruling lays out detailed guidelines about alimony and maintenance, stating that maintenance has to be paid right from the day of filing of the petition and the amount to be paid will be based on the financial position of the partners at the time of filing of the court. This ruling should help remove the incentive for the defendants to prolong the case and facilitate a quicker redressal.

Even the stringent laws that should ensure justice for women fail to do so because of the lack of proper implementation of the same. One of the key examples of this would be the failure of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, a law which is touted as a “milestone” by the Supreme Court of India. The act stipulates that the court proceedings in cases of domestic violence must be concluded within 60 days. If the implementation had indeed been as per the letter of the law, it would have been a milestone step towards curbing domestic violence in India. One can find an abundance of media reports that describe the plight of the women whose cases have been dragging for years and the victim hasn’t received a single rupee of maintenance during the proceedings. Another more recent example of implementation failure is the rise in reports of police officers refusing to lodge domestic violence complaints during the lockdown.

As a consequence of the factors mentioned above, a majority of the women facing domestic violence and harassment in our country still want to resolve the disputes by mutual understanding and mediation. Even in the worst scenarios, they still prefer filing for a divorce rather than initiating proceedings against the abuser for the violence she has faced. From the victim’s point of view, this at least prevents her from being dragged into a long drawn legal battle and allows her to start a new life for herself. Moreover, the lapses in the provision of justice to the victims actually bolster the confidence of the abusers and make them fearless about the legal consequences of their actions.

Even though we live in a country where many female goddesses are worshipped, our society, our legal administration and our judicial system have collectively failed the female citizens of our country. In order to improve the current situation, a change in societal mindset aided by foolproof laws and higher conviction rates is imperative.

How Jesus Christ should be ressurrected today on his birthday?

Harsh Thakor

As a crusader of liberation of man and not a performer of miracles

The real Jesus Christ and what is professed today by the Church or Christianity at large today is like Chalk and Cheese. Today we celebrate Christmas, but we forget to give the day true respect. The Christian community immortalizes Jesus Christ for performing miracles like turning wine into water or resurrecting from the grave .Historically after the collapse of the Roman Empire the oligarchy of the Church became more powerful and morally as repressive. patronizing opressor classes. Who can forget the great crusades, the Spanish inquisition or even the Church giving shelter to the Nazi generals in World War 2.

Today whatever the great teachings of Christianity in essence the Church is blessed or blesses capitalism. It supports the worldwide trend of Islamaphobia and endorses many imperialist projects.It also in in an organised way launches a vendetta against all scientific thought like Darwin’s theory of evolution or Steve Hawkins .The church today is simply a tool of the opressive ruling classes, endorsing all profit motive.

However we must not confuse the teachings and life of Jesus with the practices of later Christianity or the Church. Without doubt he was crusader for the liberation of humanity or even a revolutionary in his own right. Who can forget how he confronted the Jewish moneylenders by destroying the very temple and openly condemned their exploitation of the common man. Historically very few have dealt such a striking blow in the very belly of the opressors as Jesus. He had powerfully idealistic overtones when preaching ‘Love thy enemy’ but also had Communistic shades when advocating ‘Love thy neigbour’ which imbibes teaching of serving the people.He galvanised poor masses in the manner of a revolutionary .This very feature inspired advocates of liberation Theology. In recent times many church priests have supported the revolution in Phillipines or even in Latin American countries.

Historians need to delve into the root causes of how team of crusaders for liberation turned into a ruthless oligarchic or opressive bureaucracy.

Ofcourse we have to respect views like those of Bertrand Russel who in a most subtle manner launched a tirade against the hypocrisy of Christianty.However he praised Christ as a monumental figure as a crusader for serving humanity. Ironically however much they condemned organised religion even Marx and Engels foresaw some revolutionary or humanistic leanings of Jesus. On the other hand today we have Scientific atheists today like Richard Dawkins who oppose social revolution. Today I would visualize the same Jesus at the very root confronting Operation Green Hunt in India, professing secularism to defeat Hindutva fascism ,launching a crusade against Multinationals and other manifestations of globalization, supporting the movements of the workers and peasantry and the war designs of imperialist nations. Whatever the invention of miracles the Bible recounts many instance of Jesus championing the poor .Even if Marxists are atheists they should not condemn those who belie in Christ, but attempt to mobilize them into joining collective causes against opression.

Today we have to strike a balance with supporting the progressive elements in Christianity and the Church and attacking the unscientific aspects of religion .We can reproduce the writings of Darwin,Bertrand Russel or Steve Hawkins in golden letters but need not blindly attack Christianity. Instead we should glorify the positive aspect of the Christian struggle for liberation against Rome. Wholeheartedly we should expose events like the Spanish inquisition but glorify how in recent times the Church has come to the side of revolutionary movements. Father Stan Swamy is a living example. No way can Jesus be classed as a Communist as capitalism did not prevail in his era and very primitive feudalism. Still while rejecting concepts like Miracles the Bible could be an invaluable source of research for progressive historians.

Jesus being crucified on the cross, symbolizes a crusader laying his life to liberate humanity from tyranny and even his teaching ‘forgive them for they do not know what they are doing’ is an expression of his mission to change the very soul of man.Ofcourse there are ambiguous positions like ‘turning your cheek ‘to your neighbour or enemy which compromise revolutionary spirit .A positive aspect of Christ was his experience in revolutionizing the ‘inner self’ .Without a spiritual change a true revolution cannot be launched.The ‘Semon on the Mount’ is an ideal example when he tapped the soul at the very core. I have no doubt that today Jesus would have been a major crusader against imperialism and capitalism. In a subtle manner it was revolutionary Che Guevera who emulated many attributes if Jesus.

Today we have to ressurect spirit of Jesus in accordance with the neo-global imperialist fascist offensive striking the world and explore those elements in Christianity that re coherent with creating a genuine liberated society. It is pertinent that many great Marxist revolutionaries were originally Christian liberation theologians. Thus it is not the physical Jesus resurrecting but his spirit blazing  to liberate humanity.

Quoting chairman Joma Sison of National Democratic Front of Phillipines “I agree with the proposition that the tradition of Jesus Christ as social revolutionary is in dire need of resurrection against the Christian Right. There are certain acts and words of Jesus that side with the poor and powerless and that there are those that side with those in authority and condone the wealthy. But communists can have for allies Christians who are inspired by Jesus as a social revolutionary. Thus, the Christians for National Liberation (an association of Catholics and Protestants) is a major ally of the CPP within the National Democratic Front of the Philippines. Although Christianity was a tool of Spanish colonialism for ruling the Philippines, the martyrdom of the Filipino priests(Gomez, Burgos and Zamora) generated national consciousness against the colonizers. Many Filipino priests joined the Philippine revolution against Spanish colonialism and against their Spanish religious superiors. The principle of continuing the unfinished Philippine revolution towards national liberation, democracy and socialism guides the Christians for National Liberation. The adherents of this organization and movement find support from the Constitution of the Modern Church (Mater et Magistra), proclaimed by the Vatican in the 1960s, which promotes ecumenism that means dialogue and cooperation among Christians, other believers in God and nonbelievers (including atheists). CPP cultural cadres quote from the New Gospel of Christianity todo propagit aamong the Christian masses and metaphorical artistic works and performances which avail of the figure and story of Christ as social revolutionary. The meeting ground of the communists and the Christians is the second great commandment which states, “Love thy neighbor” which also means “Serve the people”.

Quoting comrdae Mercedes Sanchez “If Jesus really existed, he was undoubtedly a social reference for questioning the society of that time. Today, he would probably be in Delhi with the farmers, or in the northeast defending the citizenship of minorities, or in Kerala fighting against pseudo-communists who use the same tactics as the extreme right for their own benefit. Any religion only causes problems even if it is lived differently in each country.What really matters in his thoughts has been twisted by the church covered with an incredible hypocrisy and nowadays…many are confused about him. There are those who confuse Jesus and Christianity and reject him instead the institution.”

“Remember that Catholic celibacy was not established until the 12th century and it was out of lust as a pope upon being rejected decided that if he could not have sex with whom he desired, no one would. It was then, when the internal struggles for power increased and there were three popes at the same time fighting for power and control of the rich Catholic Church. That struggle lasted about forty years if I remember correctly. Since then and until the 20th century, things have not changed much. There have been schisms in Christianity creating divisions. Catholicism is the most traditional and conservative school. Its norms are brutal for today’s society but fortunately for the Church and the Catholic believers, in the 20th century there were those who, getting up the courage, decided that this had to change and started a new current called “liberation theology” whose members were rusticated by the Vatican but never stopped practicing as priests even though they had partners, children and social struggles ( Stan could very well be one of them). They participated in the social revolutions in Cuba, Honduras, El Salvador, Brazil, Nicaragua….people like Camilo Torres, Ellacuría, Helder Camera, Claudio Cardenal… and many others.””

Quoting blog Necessity and Freedom in article ‘Re-Proletarianisation of Jesus’

“t was this Jesus, so admired by Eugene Debs and the author Bouck White, who penned the first radical interpretation of Jesus in his Call of the Carpenter, that must be resuscitated. Both Debs and White considered the message of Jesus, which had cultivated a small but devoted following as striking fear into the hearts of the religious and political powers of Jesus’ day. According to Debs, this was the reason for Jesus’ execution.”

He denounced the profiteers, and it was for this that they nailed his quivering body to the cross and spiked it to the gates of Jerusalem, not because he told men to love one another. That was a harmless doctrine. But when he touched their profits and denounced them before their people he was then marked for crucifixion.”

“He denounced the profiteers, and it was for this that they nailed his quivering body to the cross and spiked it to the gates of Jerusalem, not because he told men to love one another. That was a harmless doctrine. But when he touched their profits and denounced them before their people he was then marked for crucifixion.”

“Historically we know that this interpretation is correct, due to the fact that crucifixion was a punishment for a political crime against the State, not religious heresy. Jesus was executed because he was leading a nascent peasant and artisan based revolution in a region of the Roman Empire that was under less stringent controls due to its lack of proximity to Rome. The tradition of the radical Jesus also posits that the destruction of the temple, and the tearing of the curtain, after Jesus’ death was not a supernatural event, but a riot launched by followers and sympathizers right in the seat of the regional religious and political power.”

“But what does this mean in our contemporary setting? Because religion is still with us, especially now that Christianity serves as a part of the dominant ideological state apparatus used to oppress the masses, we must soberly grapple with our own interpretations of Jesus. For communists I find this question to be negligibly important. However, I do believe it is important for us to challenge the prevailing narrative, so often used to justify the existing economic and political order, on its own terms, but with a revived counter-narrative based in a biblical tradition that is just as revolutionary as it is spiritual. Even in our own secular political tradition, which correctly eschews religious dogma, many revolutionaries which we admire were at least formally like Jesus. Both Lenin and Mao operated on the peripheries of empire, and based themselves amongst the poor and downtrodden, just as Jesus did.”

“Unlike today’s Christians, many of which often uphold the “justness” of our own society, the communists are the ones who advocate for the end of the exploitation of labor, for the radical transformation of social relations, and for a mass emancipatory movement to smash the old society and build a new one, as Jesus himself did. The radical Jesus, whether we believe in the supernatural elements of Christianity or not, is an integral part of our own revolutionary tradition, one that is in dire need of resurrection.”

EXAMPLES OF JESUS AS A CRUSADER AGAINST ENEMIES

And what did Jesus have to say about the exploitation of Labor, was he on the side of Capital and absentee landlordism as the modern purveyors of right-wing Christianity would have us believe?

Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten. Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days. Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth. Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter. Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you. – James 5:1-6, KJV

Happy New French Revolution!

Satya Sagar

As 2021 arrives I am not planning to wish anyone a ‘Happy New Year’ while everything wrong with the world remains deeply entrenched. And anyway, nothing really changes with the mere flip of a calendar page.

Instead my wish will be for a ‘Happy New French Revolution’. This time on a planetary scale, against the corporate monarchs, the political aristocracy and a paid, proselytising media wantonly leading the world to ecological, economic and social disaster.

There is no doubt 2020 has been the nastiest year anybody can remember in decades and I know many are eagerly looking forward to its departure. The passing year, was marked by the catastrophic Covid-19 pandemic, widespread economic collapse, rising racial, ethnic, religious hatred and virtually no action on climate change.

If at all, the only positive legacy of 2020 could be that it was like a mirror shoved in the face of humanity, forcing it to confront its own sorry self and if possible learn a few hard lessons.

The most obvious issue for the world to reflect upon is the abysmal response to the pandemic and the terrible state of health systems and healthcare in most parts of the globe, including the ‘developed’ nations.  As I write this, there are an average 2000 people dying every day in the United States due to Covid-19, the highest anywhere in the world, with Europe becoming the first region to cross 500,000 COVID-19 deaths, accounting for one-third of the global toll.

Ironically, these are typically the kind of numbers associated for very long with many developing countries, struggling with diseases related to malnutrition, tuberculosis, malaria, AIDS. Which brings us to one of the root causes of global health problems, the two-faced approach of the world to the health needs of poorer societies.

For instance, if Covid-19 had been a problem confined to a few pockets of Asia or Africa it is very doubtful anybody in power anywhere or in global media would have even noticed it, leave alone enforced national lockdowns.  Such discrimination is linked to the historically skewed distribution of global resources, itself a result of centuries of colonisation and other exploitative processes, both within and across nations.

Today, the world is passing through an era of what can only be called ‘corporate monarchy’- a system whereby those with inherited wealth or with monopoly control over various streams of income rule unchecked – having subdued entire political systems, all democratic institutions  and even reason and logic with their accumulated wealth.  Currently,  the world’s richest 1 percent, those with more than $1 million, own 44 percent of the world’s wealth and the top eight billionaires own as much combined wealth as the poorest half of the human race.

During the past year alone, when millions lost jobs and many more were left on the brink of starvation, the world’s billionaires added over USD 10 trillion to their already mind boggling wealth. It’s a pattern repeated not just globally but also within all countries and such easy accumulation of wealth should be declared nothing less than a crime against humanity itself.

The only problem though with the term ‘humanity’ used here is that we still live in a world where  a large section of the global population is not considered human at all by those in power. The planet is still too divided between ‘superior’ and ‘inferior’ races, castes, language and lifestyle groups and not every intelligent biped descending from homo habilis or homo erectus is accepted as a member of the species homo sapiens too.

And today, all these deep-seated prejudices are being promoted most vigorously by none other than the very beneficiaries of the unequal global order – to divert attention from the open loot of planetary resources they are indulging in. However, one has to acknowledge, that for many reasons, the currency of hate does circulate well even among the victims of the unjust world order,  which in turn enables those in power to perpetuate their control over ordinary citizens.

Among the reasons for this strange phenomenon of the oppressed supporting their own oppressors is the power of modern propaganda, but a deeper factor involved may lie in the way we have evolved over long periods of time. In the struggle for survival humans have become hardwired to use their technological and managerial abilities to domesticate and subordinate other species and Nature itself.  This has deeply ingrained the notion, even among the relatively weak or oppressed,  that preying upon those even weaker is fine as long as one can look down on them as some kind of ‘aliens’ or ‘animals’ or ‘microbes’.

What this really implies is that the solutions to exploitation of humans by other humans cannot be found by merely focusing on the internal dynamics or politics of human societies alone.  Addressing inequality and hierarchy will also need a serious  rethinking of the ‘master-slave’ relation that the dominant homo sapiens has established with the rest of Planet Earth.

If the SARS-COV2 virus had any blunt message to convey to the entire human species it was essentially that we are not really as invincible as we have foolishly believed for too long. And that our survival is dependent not only on well-being of the human collective but also that of every other living creature on Earth. (You can’t eat a pangolin and have your pension too!)

This gives us a clue as to how we can begin to deal with the ‘mother of all dangers’ confronting humanity – one larger than any viral pandemic –  that of climate change, which threatens to make the planet uninhabitable and wipe out much of the human population. Even while addressing the issue of inequitable sharing of resources,  the response to this threat calls for a completely new contract with everything around that sustains us.

A new magna carta or even a deeply spiritual approach based on respect for Mother Nature, whereby no one takes more than what they can give back and certainly does not get to hoard wealth in any form. Something, not very different from what many indigenous people around the world already practice, but are heavily penalised for by the rest of our species.

In that sense the new French Revolution the world urgently requires will have to go beyond the human centeredness of the old one and extend the slogan of ‘Liberty, Equality, Fraternity’ to include ‘Ecology’ also to the list.  2021 itself may be a bit too soon but hopefully it won’t be too long before guillotines also come out on the streets of the world’s major capitals to reclaim power from monopolists of every hue currently holding sway over our planet. (Perhaps even a solar powered ‘green guillotine’,  that will also ensure when finally the heads of royalty roll – they do so with zero emission of climate altering fumes)

I know all  this sounds a bit macabre, but as the craziest year in living memory departs and given the current state of the world, you can’t really blame me for wishing you all a Happy New French Revolution!

Engagement for environment

Farooque Chowdhury

All aware citizens know the state of Bangladesh environment. Bangladesh courts of law regularly rule in favor of environment. Bangladesh media cover the area every day. Bangladesh environment activists regularly stand for environment. The commoners take care of environment and nature within their capacity, which is chained by capitals.

And, some capitals regularly, everyday and all the time, exploit and expropriate Bangladesh environment and nature. The powerful actors encroach on public lands including river and canal banks, and forest, stealthily, and, at times, with advantageous collusion, overtly devour hills and hillocks, use river and ground water as coolant for machines and for production of commodities, pump out warm water and harmful chemical filled-effluents discharged from machines into public water bodies including rivers and canals, dump wastes on public lands and lands of unorganized citizens weak in terms of political power, spew smoke filled with fatal gases into air, extract, and at times, export sand, and carry on many such acts of encroachment – acts of exploitation and expropriation. This is a very general, broad and brief description of the exploitation and expropriation of nature and environment and ecology – the commons, the “elements”/areas/spaces owned by the Bangladesh people. A closer look, not presented in this article, will portray a much complex and cruel, barbaric picture – a process of capitalist economy.

These facts tell: The Bangladesh environment is a two-sided story: [1] resistance, reinvigoration and rejuvenation; and [2] exploitation and expropriation – encroach, deface, demolish, destroy, devour and pilfer – and the much-known drive – profit and accumulate. It is a story of juxtaposition of two opposite sides with opposing interests, seemingly competing with each other. But, actually, it’s not a competition between the two.

Rather, the second party – the exploiters, the expropriators – is in competition with self, between its components while the rest – the resisters, the regenerators and the like – is essentially opposed to the [1] acts harmful to environment, ecology and nature, and [2] competition between the components of the second party. The competition is, to put it simply, for accumulation by the capitals involved with exploitation and expropriation of human beings and environment and nature. Capitalist exploitation and expropriation are the capitals’ methods of reproduction, accumulation.

Capital can’t sit idly. To survive, it has to be in unceasing motion and expand. In the areas of environment, ecology and nature in an economy based on exploitative system, the capitals in motion exploit and expropriate labor and nature. Consequently, as outcome of the motion, the exploitation, etc. of environment, ecology and nature come out; and, in the exploitative system, the exploiters, a few in broader societies, gain while the exploited, multitudes, the people, suffer. The system not only fattens itself with unpaid labor of the working class; it also exploits/appropriates and expropriates nature, environment and ecology. Moreover, it also maintains and nourishes the conditions for continuing with its acts of exploitation/appropriation and expropriation as maintenance of the conditions is essential for its survival. With exploitation/appropriation and expropriation, the system produces commodities; and it’s part of reproduction process as “[w]hen viewed […] as a connected whole, and in the constant flux of its incessant renewal, every social process of production is at the same time a process of reproduction.” (Marx, Capital, vol. I, Progress Publishers, Moscow, erstwhile USSR, 1977)

And, “[c]apitalist production […] under its aspect of a continuous connected process, of a process of reproduction, produces not only commodities, not only surplus-value, but it also produces and reproduces the capitalist relation; on the one side the capitalist, on the other the wage-laborer.” (ibid.) In the case of the Bangladesh environment, owners of private capital that exploits and expropriates environment, the nature are at one pole, and the rest – the people, the sufferers due to the exploitation and expropriation – is at the opposite pole.

Whatever the exploiters, the expropriators exploit and expropriate from nature/ecology/environment, metamorphoses into their capital, which strengthens their power to exploit and dominate, and, in turn, the exploited, the people, the owners of the commons/nature/ecology/environment, turn into the deprived, the destitute, the poor, the wretched. Thus, the capitals involved turn into producers of deprivation, destitution, poverty, wretchedness. The appropriation of surplus value, as part of the process, goes on simultaneously, and the generated surplus value is reconverted into capital, which is reinvested – the accumulation of capital, as “employing surplus-value as capital, reconverting it into capital, is called accumulation of capital.” (ibid.)

The commodities whatever are produced by capitalist exploitation and expropriation of labor and nature enter market. This entire act/process encroaches on people’s life and people’s inalienable, fundamental and democratic rights. Market itself is incompatible with democracy. And, if it’s people’s democracy, not a “democracy” of a few powerful, market conclusively undermines people’s democratic rights, practices and space. Jacques Attali, neither a disciple of Lenin nor a follower of Mao, but the first head (1991-1993) of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, special advisor (from 1981 to 1991) to Francois Mitterrand, then president of France, and one of the leading intellectuals in the mainstream, sharply dissects market and democracy: “[T]hese [democracy and market economy] two sets of principles often contradict one another and are more likely to go head-to-head than hand in hand”. (“The crash of Western civilization: The limits of the market and democracy”, Foreign Policy, No. 107, summer, 1997) Attali adds: “[T]he market economy and democracy […] are more likely to undermine than support one another.” (ibid.) Moreover, he admits: There’s “inherent conflict between the market economy and democracy”. (ibid.) No doubt, he is talking about the bourgeois democracy. If this is the state of bourgeois democracy with the “graceful” touch of market, then, the state and scope of people to initiate measures related to environment/ecology, environmental/ecological rights, participation in political process to determine issues concerning environment/ecology/biodiversity, democratic space to save/regenerate environment/ecology and the capitals slaughtering  environment and nature is easily perceived. It’s a hostile reality with an antagonistic relation. “The social relation of capital […] is a contradictory one. These contradictions, though stemming from capitalism’s internal laws of motion, extend out to phenomena that are usually conceived as external to the system, threatening the integrity of the entire biosphere and everything within it as a result of capital’s relentless expansion.” (John Bellamy Foster, “Capitalism and Ecology: The Nature of the Contradiction”, Monthly Review, vol. 54, issue 4, September 2002) The Bangladesh environment is not free from this reality – the social relation of capital.

Capitals that exploit and expropriate labor and nature, and hurt environment include finance capital, and capital from international lenders.

In addition, there’s no reason to look at capitals’ anti-environment acts in different areas in an isolated, compartmentalized way – one capital isolated from another, one devastating act isolated from another, one area isolated from another. That, the isolated/compartmentalized approach, is an erroneous and novice way of looking at the process spanning society and economy, life of people, environment and ecology as, in the case of environment and ecology, all are connected to all. The first and second informal laws of ecology, which Barry Commoner and others refer, are: [1] everything is connected to everything else, and [2] everything must go somewhere. These two tell the interconnections in ecology. (Cited in John Bellamy Foster, The Vulnerable Planet, A short economic history of the environment, Monthly Review Press, New York, 1994) The interconnection turns stronger, deeper and wider while capitals continue interacting with and exploiting, actually decimating, nature. It enfolds food, health, habitat, legislation and its execution/non-execution, political power, allocation of funds, scientific activities/research, greater society, etc. Labor is obviously there.

With all these, the question of class power and class equation can’t go absent. A part of a capital is busy with food and its processing while another part of the same capital expands in the areas of health care or manufacturing or habitat, and another part is in the service sector or agriculture or chemicals processing, and thus goes the game. These all have implications for environment, ecology and nature, which mean implications on people’s life and rights; and, in short, on all these capitals exploit – labor and nature.

Therefore, a few lines of contradictions appear explicitly while a few remain implicit. The contradictions make further developments. Most of the environment-initiatives deny looking or fail to look at these contradictions and their sources. For some of these initiatives, this denying or failing is reneging interests of people/environment and ecology; and for some, it’s “idleness” – unwillingness to labor for searching [1] thoroughly and deeply, and [2] the source of the problem/phenomena. A caustic tongue may characterize this practice as ignorance instead of idleness.

But, in this century, writes Curtis White, the battle against the expropriation of the earth must unite with the fight against the expropriation of human beings, ultimately challenging the dialectic of expropriation and exploitation, and the entire “barbaric heart” of capital. (The Barbaric Heart, cited in John Bellamy Foster, “Marx, value and nature”, Monthly Review, vol. 70, issue 3, July-August, 2018) The engagement for environment in Bangladesh is no different: The fights against exploitation and expropriation of earth and human beings should unite with broader alliance as the two are basically a single issue – humanity.

Any absence of this unity is not lack of rationale for the unity, but lacking in [1] articulating the rationale; [2] initiating unity; and [3] giving up the required initiative to those who are unwilling to walk along the united path – engage for environment, engage against capitals killing our earth, slaughtering our environment, exploiting human beings and nature. Consequently, flamboyant environment “crusaders” rage, but miss one of the basic issues related to environment – capitals’ crushing character – and abstain from the essential task.