14 Aug 2021

Canada enters fourth COVID-19 wave, as governments gut remaining public health measures

Roger Jordan & Dylan Lubao


Canada is entering a deadly fourth wave of COVID-19, with new infections on the rise across the country. This trend, which has seen the number of active cases more than double to over 13,000 in the past two weeks, will only accelerate in coming weeks due to the drive of Canada’s ruling elite to reopen all businesses and schools so corporate profit-making can be maximized.

Protest against UCP government's plan to eliminate all anti-COVID 19 measures. (Twitter)

“The latest national surveillance data indicate that a fourth wave is underway in Canada and that cases are plotting along a strong resurgence trajectory,” warned Canada’s chief public health officer, Theresa Tam, at a Thursday press conference. Tam explained that an average of 1,500 new infections are now being reported daily, with the 20 to 39 age group most severely impacted.

Tam added that the increase in case numbers is already leading to a rise in serious illness and hospitalizations. “On average, 511 people with COVID-19 are being treated in the hospitals each day, an increase of 12 percent compared to last week,” she said.

Around 40 percent of the Canadian population, including all children 11 and younger, are yet to be fully vaccinated. This leaves millions exposed to the threat of infection from the Delta variant, which is many times more transmissible than the original virus. Evidence is also emerging that those who are fully vaccinated still face a significant risk of so-called breakthrough infections. The Delta variant has also been observed to cause more serious symptoms among those it infects, with figures suggesting that 1 percent of all children infected by the variant end up in hospital and 10 to 33 percent suffer from long-term effects.

Warning of the threat the Delta variant poses to the still large unvaccinated population, Dr. Isaac Bogoch, an infectious diseases physician and member of Ontario’s vaccine task force, commented, “If a large proportion of those individuals get sick in a short period of time, our health care system is going to get stretched and we’ll be in trouble.”

This worst-case scenario is made all the more likely because governments at all levels, from Justin Trudeau’s federal Liberal government to the hard-right provincial governments in Alberta and Ontario, and the union-backed New Democratic Party government in British Columbia, are pursuing a homicidal policy of prioritizing big business profits over saving human lives. As the fourth wave gathers strength, they are recklessly abandoning even the limited public health measures that proved inadequate to stop the pandemic’s previous three waves, which claimed over 26,600 lives.

In Ontario and Quebec, the country’s most populous provinces, the Progressive Conservative and Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) governments are moving to fully reopen schools to in-person learning, while scrapping most of the limited social distancing measures that failed to prevent schools from becoming major sources of transmission last fall and in the spring. While mask-mandates remain, the Ontario and Quebec governments have greenlighted the resumption of all non-essential economic activity, including retail, entertainment and sporting events.

British Columbia, governed by the nominally left-wing NDP, along with Manitoba and Saskatchewan—which suffered devastating second and third waves of the pandemic—have hastened to remove all mask mandates and scrapped most capacity limits on indoor and outdoor gatherings. In the Atlantic provinces and the northern territories, parallel processes are underway.

Alberta’s right-wing populist United Conservative Party (UCP) government has led the way in gutting COVID-19 restrictions. As of this coming Monday, August 16, it intended to end virtually all contact tracing and even abolish the self-isolation requirement for people who tested positive for COVID-19. Two weeks later, on August 31, the UCP government planned to scrap virtually all COVID-19 testing, with testing limited to those exhibiting severe symptoms. Instead, a wastewater surveillance system was to alert public health authorities to generalized COVID-19 hotspots, a method of tracking the virus’ spread that the World Health Organization cautions should be used only as “complement” to a full test and trace system. Finally, the government intended to eliminate all mask mandates by the end of August.

The unveiling of this criminal policy in late July triggered public outrage and protest rallies across Alberta. Significantly, the latter were organized by doctors and other medical professionals independently of the trade unions, which in the province’s major industries, from energy, mining and construction to meatpacking, have enforced the government’s policy of working full tilt through the pandemic. The public outcry led the Edmonton Public and Edmonton Catholic school boards to write the government this week demanding authorization to require anyone infected by COVID-19 to self-isolate and everyone to wear masks in schools.

Faced with this public backlash and a sharp rise in infections produced by last month’s abandonment of limits on the size of gatherings, the UCP government convened an emergency cabinet meeting Thursday evening and yesterday announced a temporary delay to its plans to dismantle all remaining public health measures. The requirement that people who test positive for COVID-19 or display symptoms must self-isolate will now remain in place until September 27. Contact tracing will also continue for the next six weeks. However, schools will open with no mask mandate in September. Making clear that the government plans to stick to its course, the province’s chief medical officer of health, Deena Hinshaw, declared, “We are not going backwards. We are pausing to monitor and assess before taking a next step forward.”

Prior to Friday’s “pause” announcement, Hinshaw published an op-ed in several major newspapers in an attempt to blunt the fierce criticism of the government’s course. She said she “apologized.” Only this apology was not for recommending a health policy that would overwhelm hospital ICUs and put children on ventilators, but for the “confusion, fear or anger” the government’s critics felt. Hinshaw tried to justify the government’s profit before lives policy by claiming that the fight against COVID-19 was draining scant public resources from other health crises, like the opioid epidemic. “COVID-19 is a wicked problem,” she intoned, “But it is not the only wicked problem.”

Hinshaw’s lament about the damage caused by taking life-saving measures to fight COVID-19 is a self-serving lie of monstrous proportions—made all the more egregious in that the UCP government she serves is currently in the process of slashing thousands of health care jobs. The truth is the public health system in Alberta, as across the country, has been starved and gutted for decades by governments of all political stripes, even as the profits of the corporations and the wealth of the super-rich have soared. There is one spigot of cash for the big banks and corporations, which gushes continuously, and one for health care and other social services, which has been wrenched ever more tightly shut.

The UCP’s temporary retreat in no way represents a turn away from its reckless pandemic policy of placing corporate profits ahead of human lives. In reality, this is a policy endorsed by the entire political establishment. In Ontario, the Doug Ford-led Progressive Conservative government plans to throw schools open in September although it is fully cognizant this will promote the rapid spread of the Delta variant among unvaccinated children. Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health Kieran Moore callously asserted last week that he expects between 10 and 15 percent of students at any one time to have COVID-19. “We have to normalize COVID-19 for our schools,” he declared.

Prior to Friday’s announcement, federal Health Minister Patty Hajdu made a show of criticizing the Alberta government’s proposed measures, while studiously avoiding using any of the powers at Ottawa’s disposal to actually overturn them. Hajdu sent a letter to her provincial counterpart, Tyler Shandro, in which she termed them an “unnecessary and risky gamble.” She noted that recent modeling of the pandemic in Alberta forecasts the runaway spread of the Delta variant and asked that the UCP government furnish the scientific rationale behind its course of action.

This is cynical posturing. The federal Liberal government in which Hajdu serves has been no less ruthless in prioritizing the profits of big business over safeguarding human lives than their UCP counterparts in Alberta. The Justin Trudeau Liberal government’s pandemic response was defined by the more than $600 billion in emergency bailout funds it funnelled into the financial markets and coffers of Canada’s big banks and corporations in March–April 2020, so as to protect their profits and investor wealth. It then unleashed, with the full support of the trade unions and the New Democrats, a murderous back-to-work/back-to-school campaign that played the pivotal role in fuelling the pandemic’s second and third waves.

Masking their full agreement with the herd immunity policies pursued across by Canada behind a charade of upholding the provinces’ constitutional responsibility for administering health care, the federal Liberal government continues to insist that all lockdown measures to fight the spread of COVID-19 be “short-term” and implemented at the “local” level. In this, they have been provided critical support by the federal NDP, which has guaranteed the minority Liberal government its parliamentary majority throughout the pandemic.

Fiji opposition MPs arrested over criticism of land Bill

John Braddock


Nine Fijian opposition politicians, including two former prime ministers, were recently arrested for voicing concerns about a contentious land bill, as the government of Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama moves to further intimidate political critics.

Fiji Primer Minister Frank Bainimarama [Credit: UNclimatechange, Flickr]

Six members of parliament and three other high-profile politicians were taken into custody by police on July 26–27 following comments they had made regarding the bill before it was debated in parliament. According to police, the arrests were part of a “proactive” approach to thwart possible civil instability.

The nine were Viliame Gavoka, leader of the opposition Social Democratic Liberal party (SODELPA); opposition whip Lynda Tabuya; MPs Adi Litia Qionibaravi and Ro Filipe Tuisawau; Biman Prasad, leader of the National Federation party; NFP president, Pio Tikoduadua; former prime ministers Sitiveni Rabuka and Mahendra Chaudhry; and Unity Fiji leader, Savenaca Narube.

The MPs were held for almost 48 hours without charge then released after questioning. Acting Police Commissioner Rusiate Tudravu posted a statement on the Police Force’s Facebook page baldly denying any intimidation, and declaring that “not everyone who is brought in for questioning will be charged.” So far, no charges have been confirmed.

The crackdown, carried out under the authoritarian regime’s Public Order Act, came in the midst of an escalating health and social crisis arising from the deadly COVID-19 outbreak. There have been 38,742 cases during the surge that started in April and 345 deaths. Fiji has an average daily test positivity rate of 32 percent, the highest in the world per capita.

Bainimarama opposes a full national lockdown, insisting that such a move would “cripple” the economy and impact jobs. Alongside its pro-business strategy, the government is pursuing a mandatory vaccination campaign. Workers have been told they must be fully vaccinated by November or face losing their jobs. Only those who are vaccinated can obtain the paltry government income support.

The country’s health system is close to collapse. Half of those who have died from COVID-19 did so at home, due largely to overcrowded medical facilities. The Fiji Red Cross Society’s Neomai Kafoa said this week that blood stocks are so low they had 85 volunteers on phones urging friends and family to donate blood. “The need for blood is dire, if I can say, right across the country,” she warned.

The working class is bearing the brunt of the worsening crisis. The tourism industry has collapsed resulting in the loss of 100,000 jobs. Half the country’s 880,000 population is experiencing extreme financial hardship. Even before the pandemic, the minimum wage was just $FJ2.32 ($US1.12) per hour. With many families struggling to get enough food, charities and NGOs have been distributing thousands of food packs.

People who criticise government handling of the crisis, including some of the arrested MPs, have been lambasted by the administration. The NFP’s Prasad, who has been detained four times by police, said the government was using the arrests as a “distraction” in dealing with the COVID situation, as “people are dying, not able to put food on the table or get medical care.”

The legislation, Bill No.17 (2021), which passed through parliament last week, amends the iTaukei Land Trust Act 1940 that governs the administration of native land. The Bill removes the requirement of obtaining the consent of the iTaukei Land Trust Board (TLTB), which was set up to protect indigenous landowners’ rights, for any mortgage, charge, pledge or caveat on a lease under the act, or for any such lease to be dealt with by a court.

This would mean that if the TLTB granted a native land lease to someone, the lessee could use that land for different purposes without having to seek the board’s permission. The government maintains the changes are purely “administrative” and designed to improve business efficiency by eliminating delays in getting consent for mortgages.

According to the opponents, however, the bill introduces a significant reduction in the power of the TLTB, an erosion of the guardianship role of TLTB and significantly reduces the power of landowners to have their rights and interests protected by the board once their land has been leased.

Bainimarama told parliament the opposition were “super-spreaders of lies,” seeking to mislead and incite indigenous people. Over 30,000 signed an on-line petition against the bill, raising the prospect of protests. Police erected several security checkpoints around the country and warned they would “come down hard on any person or group that tries to cause instability and civil unrest.”

The dispute is part of ongoing deep-seated conflicts within the Fijian ruling elite. Bainimarama, who seized power in a 2006 coup, has oriented to sections of the Fijian capitalist class and pro-business members of the chiefly elite. His military junta has adopted various measures aimed at eliminating barriers to investment and private profit.

The ethnic Fijian nationalist wing, however, which seeks to maintain political and economic privileges for the traditional chiefs, is bitterly opposed to aspects of Bainimarama’s rule, particularly over issues of land ownership. Approximately 87 percent of land in Fiji is customary land, owned collectively within the tribe or family through kinship ties. It is often controlled by a narrow elite represented by the powerful Great Council of Chiefs, who jealously guard privileges from the land ownership system.

Steven Ratuva, a University of Canterbury sociologist, told Radio NZ a “critical question” is whether the bill was intended to benefit the landowners or “to serve the interests of foreign investors and other local entrepreneurs who have been part of the government’s lobbying and patronage system.” In Vanuatu, he said, the removal of regulatory process of sub-leasing and mortgaging by lessees saw 90 percent of land on the main island of Efate alienated, through extensive sub-leasing and selling by foreign investors with little income for the landowners.

The Bainimarama government, which continues to rest firmly on the military, has a history of viciously suppressing political and social opposition. Arrests of opposition MPs are a common occurrence. The sedition provisions in the Crimes Act and the Public Order Act have been used to target journalists, activists and government critics. Assemblies, protests and strikes are routinely banned.

Anti-democratic measures are being intensified under the cover of the pandemic. In March, Bainimarama withdrew a Police Bill, which would have vastly increased the search and seizure powers of the police. The backdown followed an outpouring of criticism. Civil liberties groups, NGOs, opposition parties, sections of the media and the Fiji Law Society all condemned the bill, describing it as another step towards the transformation of Fiji into a police state.

Regional governments meanwhile, including the Pacific Islands Forum which met last week, have been silent on the recent arrests. New Zealand’s Labour-led government only registered “concern,” through an anodyne Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement. Head of the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre, Shamima Ali told Radio NZ: “I have never seen such a docile international community as I have seen this time around.”

The silence is not surprising. Under pressure from Washington, leaders in Canberra and Wellington have made it a priority to restore relations following Bainimarama’s 2006 coup, in order to fend off China’s growing influence. They endorsed Fiji’s 2014 bogus election, won by Bainimarama’s FijiFirst Party, declaring the country had restored “democracy.”

This has paved the way for the restoration of full diplomatic, economic and, above all, military relations. Doing business with the Fijian government now means maintaining a hypocritical silence over the regime’s ongoing abuses.

North Korean floods compound precarious situation in impoverished country

Ben McGrath


Flooding in North Korea caused by torrential rain during the first two weeks of August has forced thousands to evacuate along the country’s east coast, leaving homes and farmland devastated. The destruction is being compounded by North Korea’s isolation resulting from US-led sanctions and the closing of borders since January 2020 in an attempt to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un speaks during a Workers’ Party meeting in Pyongyang, North Korea [Credit: Korean Central News Agency/Korea News Service via AP. File]

Following more rain this past week, the state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported on Thursday that Premier Kim Tŏk Hun traveled to South Hamgyŏng Province in the eastern part of the country to meet with emergency responders. Kim stated that he was going to the flood-stricken region to “learn about the living conditions of the flood victims” and to organize flood relief.

Much of the damage was caused by collapsing river levees, resulting in the widespread inundation of farmland. The flooding this month has forced around 5,000 people to evacuate and left more than 1,100 homes damaged. In some cases, water rose as high as the roof tops and caused damage to about 17 kilometers of roads and bridges, according to the state media.

As much as 300 millimeters of rain fell on parts of North Hamgyŏng Province on Wednesday. “Downpours have already hit these regions, so we need to prepare thorough countermeasures,” said state broadcaster KRT. This included plans “to prevent damage from landslides caused by floods,” indicating the danger that continues to exist. During the first week of August, North Hamgyŏng Province received upwards of 500 millimeters of rain in a three-day span while South Hamgyŏng Province also experienced above-average daily rainfall.

Other parts of the country have also been hard-hit. The western city of Sinuiju, which sits along the Yalu River separating North Korea from China, was reportedly flooded and was without power earlier in August. A resident of Dandong, China, across the river from Sinuiju, told Radio Free Asia (RFA) on August 3, “This morning I got in touch with an acquaintance in Sinuiju over text message. He said that the entire city is flooding and that electricity supply to the whole city has been cut off since the afternoon.”

North Korea residents living near China are sometimes able to use cellphones that connect to Chinese networks to communicate with those on the other side of the border. The source told RFA, a propaganda outlet for the US government, that Sinuiju residents were preparing to evacuate to the nearby mountains. Another source stated that due to rains on August 2, “every part of the city is flooded and the roads are cut off.”

In addition to the devastating rains, the entire Korean Peninsula has also been hit by a weeks-long heatwave. Temperatures this summer have reached as high as 36.5 degrees Celsius (97.7 Fahrenheit) during the day in parts of the North, causing damage to rice and corn crops. The heat wave has been attributed to climate change, as has the increased rains and floods during the region’s summer monsoon season over the past several years.

Weeks prior to the onset of the downpours, North Korean authorities attempted to improve and strengthen existing infrastructure including dikes and levees ahead of the monsoon season. However, the impoverished country lacks necessary resources to carry out a full overhaul of its crumbling infrastructure in large part due to the crippling sanctions imposed on Pyongyang by the United States unilaterally and through the United Nations.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken reportedly discussed aid to North Korea during a phone call with South Korean Foreign Secretary Jeong Ui-yong on August 6, but details were not made public. However, any offer of assistance from Washington would be entirely cynical. The purpose of the crippling sanctions on the North is to weaken and starve the population, either forcing the Pyongyang regime to bow to US demands or preparing the ground for a devastating war of aggression, similar to the invasion of Iraq.

These sanctions have compounded North Korea’s already precarious position. Its entire agricultural sector is highly susceptible to weather conditions, with a bad harvest any given year risking food shortages and starvation for the country’s working class and farmers. Pyongyang relies heavily on China for food and fertilizer to stave off famine despite UN Security Council sanctions banning large-scale economic assistance.

Over the past year, Beijing has provided large amounts of fertilizer and foodstuffs as the North is also still reeling from poor weather the previous year as well as the COVID-19 pandemic, which has further damaged its fragile economy. The South’s Bank of Korea estimated at the end of July that the North’s economy had shrunk by 4.5 percent last year, the most since 1997.

As of late July, North Korea had reported no cases of COVID-19 to the World Health Organisation but had conducted limited testing—a total of just over 35,000 tests. No vaccination program is underway in part because the country needs to develop the infrastructure to store and develop the vaccines. The regime has imposed strict border controls including a three-month quarantine for all goods entering the country, compounding the economic crisis.

In June, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un warned that the country was facing a food shortage. He stated during a Workers Party of Korea plenum, “The people’s food situation is now getting tense as the agricultural sector failed to fulfill its grain production plan due to the damage by typhoon last year.” KCNA stated at the time that authorities would be “directing all efforts to farming this year.”

Last year, North Korea imported 550,000 tonnes of fertilizer from China, an amount the South Korean government called unusually high. Fertilizer and oil also made up the majority of Chinese exports to North Korea this past spring. However, despite the importation of these materials, much of the strict border controls to prevent the spread of COVID-19 remain in place. North Korea has so far rejected aid from the US and South Korea. Pyongyang similarly rejected any aid following the typhoon and floods last year.

13 Aug 2021

Shaping Fate: Canada and Haiti

Yves Engler


Canada is a major player in a coalition shaping the fate of 11 million Haitians, yet few citizens of this country have even heard of the Core Group.

Recently, the Core Group (representatives of the US, Canada, France, Spain, Germany, Brazil, UN and OAS) published a note saying Ariel Henry was the prime minister of Haiti. Henry has no constitutional legitimacy as he was named by a (now dead) president whose mandate had expired. Henry was also not approved by parliament and there’s little sign that Henry is popular. Still, the Core Group succeeded in having the other individual claiming to be prime minister quickly fall into line behind Henry.

Many Haitians have criticized the Core Group’s ‘selection of Haiti’s leader by statement’. On its front-page Haiti Liberté declared “Le Gouvernement Core Group-Ariel Henry installé!” (Core Group-Ariel Henry government installed) while Le Nouvelliste noted “Des partis politiques de l’opposition retirent leur soutien à Ariel Henry, le Core Groupe le supporte” (Opposition parties withdraw their support for Ariel Henry, Core Group backs him).

A coalition of foreign ambassadors that periodically release statements on Haitian affairs, the Core Group is nakedly imperialist. If you doubt this truth, just imagine the Jamaican, Congolese, Guatemalan and Filipino ambassadors releasing a collective statement on who should be prime minister of Canada. Remarking on the racial dimension, Haitians on social media often contrast the skin tone of Core Group ambassadors to most Haitians.

Some have labeled a group that meets regularly with Haitian officials a “fourth branch” of the Haitian government. But the Core Group’s success at rallying government factions behind Ariel Henry demonstrates its influence may be greater than that.

In a sign of the divide between the imperial centre and periphery, there’s a remarkable gulf in awareness of the Core Group between those dictated to and those who dictate.

Outside of the Haitian community, very few Canadians have even heard of the Core Group. I’d wager 99% of regular readers of ‘serious’ Canadian newspapers haven’t heard of it and the same for 90% of international affairs academics.

In Haiti, on the other hand, almost all modestly informed adults would be aware of the Core Group. There’s graffiti in Port-au-Prince targeting the coalition and protesters regularly hold signs criticizing the Core Group. Haitian media refers to the coalition matter-of-factly, as if people are expected to be familiar with the Core Group.

The same cannot be said of Canadian media. A recent search of the Globe and Mail and National Post databases found only one mention of the Core Group in its 17 years of existence.

The Core Group was officially established by a UN Security Council resolution on April 30, 2004. That resolution replaced the two-month-old Multinational Interim Force — created after US, Canadian and French troops invaded to overthrow the elected government — with the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH), which occupied the country for 15 years. Point 5 of the resolution “supports the establishment of a Core Group chaired by the Special Representative and comprising also his/her Deputies, the Force Commander, representatives of OAS and CARICOM, other regional and subregional organizations, international financial institutions and other major stakeholders, in order to facilitate the implementation of MINUSTAH’s mandate, promote interaction with the Haitian authorities as partners, and to enhance the effectiveness of the international community’s response in Haiti.”

While it is specifically cited in the UN resolution, CARICOM (Caribbean Community) hasn’t played much of a role in the Core Group, John Reginald Dumas recently explained. He is a Trinidadian diplomat who was the UN Secretary-General’s Special Adviser on Haiti at the time of the Core Group’s creation.

Unofficially, the Core Group traces its roots to the 2003 “Ottawa Initiative on Haiti” meeting. In a rare major media look at that private meeting, Radio Canada’s Enquête pointed out that the Core Group was spawned at the “Ottawa initiative on Haiti”. Held at the Meech Lake government resort on January 31 and February 1, 2003, no Haitian officials were invited to a gathering where US, French, OAS and Canadian officials discussed overthrowing Haiti’s elected government, putting the country under UN trusteeship and recreating the Haitian military, which largely transpired a year later.

The Core Group seeks to dictate Haitian affairs. But it’s also a forum for the bigger bullies to ensure the lesser bullies toe the line.

When the US, France and Canada invaded in 2004, they didn’t want to keep their troops in Haiti long term. They pressed the UN, especially Brazil, to take over. But they didn’t want Brazil, which led MINUSTAH, or the UN to become an independent force in Haiti. That might enable popular and anti-imperialist forces.

As a result, the Core Group seeks to minimize division between the foreign powers because dissent of that sort generally benefits Haiti’s impoverished majority. For example, when the 2004–2006 coup government finally held elections, the Core Group tried to block former social democratic president René Préval from winning. As counting dragged on for a week thousands of marked ballots were discovered half-burned in a garbage dump outside of Port-au-Prince. The apparently stolen ballots added fuel to simmering discontent with the coup government’s bid to rig the election against Préval. An explosion of protest following their discovery led to division among the primary foreign actors in Haiti. The US, French and Canadian ambassadors insisted the electoral council continue counting votes to force a second round while Brazil and Chile, as well as the UN representative, wanted to grant Préval a first-round victory. The US/France/Canada were forced to concede.

Having learned their lesson, the Core Group now seeks to lessen the room for popular, anti-imperialist forces to maneuver. Hence the note anointing the new prime minister. A key characteristic of imperial control is making clear who is running the show.

Many Canadians celebrate the supposed fact that their country has never been an imperialist power. Perhaps it is time for them to revisit their beliefs about Canada’s role in the world.

Global Billionaire Pandemic Wealth Surges to $5.5 Trillion

A Viable—and Perhaps the Only—Path to Lasting Peace in Afghanistan

Vijay Prashad


As each day goes by, the Taliban’s forces edge closer to controlling all of Afghanistan. In the first week of August, the Taliban swept through the northern provinces of the country—Jawzjan, Kunduz, and Sar-e Pul—which form an arc alongside the borders of the Central Asian states of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. The violence has been severe; the pain inflicted upon civilians by the intensity of the fighting has been terrible. Having withdrawn its ground forces, the United States sent in its B-52s to bomb targets in the city of Sheberghan (capital of the province of Jawzjan); reports suggest that at least 200 people were killed in the bombings. It shows the weakness of the government in Kabul that its Ministry of Defense’s spokesperson Fawad Aman cheered on the bombing.

It’s unlikely that the Afghan government of President Ashraf Ghani will outlast the Taliban’s lightning strikes. The U.S. bombing will slow the advance, but it will not be able to reverse the tide. That is why regional powers in Asia have deepened contacts with the Taliban’s leadership, whose governance of the entire country seems inevitable.

‘Moderate’ Taliban

“The Taliban is not an entity by itself,” Heela Najibullah said when I spoke to her during the second week of August. “It is made up of groups of extremists and militants who use the rhetoric of jihad to achieve power.” Najibullah, author of the important book Reconciliation and Social Healing in Afghanistan (2017), is the daughter of Mohammed Najibullah, the president of Afghanistan from 1987 to 1992. Since the Doha Agreement (2020), Heela Najibullah said, “the Taliban has demonstrated in action that it is not moderate but has become even more extreme in the type of violence it is carrying out against the Afghan people and state.” The Taliban has rejected every overture of a ceasefire from Afghan peace organizations.

A close look at the Taliban leadership reveals little change since its founding in September 1994. The public face of the Taliban—Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar—founded the Taliban and was a close associate of the first emir of the movement, Mullah Omar. After the United States attacked Afghanistan in October 2001, it was Baradar who took Mullah Omar on the back of a motorcycle to their refuge in Pakistan. Baradar, trusted by Pakistani intelligence, puts no daylight between himself the current leader of the Taliban—Mawlawi Haibatullah Akhundzada—and his two deputies—Mullah Yaqoob (son of the late Mullah Omar) and Sirajuddin Haqqani (leader of Pakistan’s Haqqani network). Akhundzada ran the Taliban’s judicial system from 1997 to 2001 and was responsible for some of the most heinous of its judgments. When COVID-19 infected most of the leadership, decision-making fell to Baradar.

At the March 2021 international peace conference in Moscow, the entire 10-person Taliban delegation—led by Baradar—was male (to be fair, there were only four women among the 200 Afghans in the process). One of the four women at the table was Dr. Habiba Sarabi, who was appointed as minister of Women’s Affairs in 2004 and then became the first female governor of an Afghan province in 2005. It is important to note that she was the governor of Bamyan, a province where the Taliban had blown up two sixth-century statues of Buddha in March 2001. In October 2020, Dr. Sarabi pointed out that Afghan women are “more mobilized,” although Afghanistan now faces “a crucial moment in our fight.” Reports have already appeared of forced marriages and public floggings of women in Taliban-controlled areas.

National Reconciliation

Women are more mobilized, says Dr. Sarabi, but they are not a powerful social movement. Afghanistan’s more liberal and left social forces “are active underground and are not an organized force,” Najibullah tells me. These forces include the educated sections, who do not want “extremist groups to drag the country into another proxy war.” That proxy war would be between the Taliban, the U.S.-backed government in Kabul, and other militant groups that are no less dangerous than the Taliban or the U.S. government.

Najibullah reaches back to the time when her father proposed the Afghan National Reconciliation Policy. A letter President Najibullah wrote to his family in 1995 could have been written today: “Afghanistan has multiple governments now, each created by different regional powers. Even Kabul is divided into little kingdoms… unless and until all the actors [regional and global powers] agree to sit at one table, leave their differences aside to reach a genuine consensus on non-interference in Afghanistan and abide to their agreement, the conflict will go on.”

Heela Najibullah says that the National Reconciliation Policy would require the political participation of a range of actors in an international and a regional conference. These actors would include those who have used Afghanistan for their own national agendas, such as India and Pakistan. At such a conference, Najibullah suggests, Afghanistan needs to be “recognized officially as a neutral state,” and this “neutral state” should be endorsed by the UN Security Council. “Once this is achieved, a broad-based government can be in charge until elections are held, reforms are discussed, and mechanisms are drawn for its implementation,” Najibullah says.

Proxy Politics

In the 1990s, President Najibullah’s policy was hampered by the deepening of proxy politics. Foreign powers acted through their armed emissaries—people such as Abdul Rasul Sayyaf, Burhanuddin Rabbani, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, and Sibghatullah Mojaddedi—to cause mayhem in the country. They opened the door to the Taliban, which swept out of northern Pakistan across Afghanistan. Najibullah took refuge in the UN compound in Kabul, and then was killed mercilessly by the Taliban inside that compound in September 1996. Neither the U.S.-Saudi-Pakistani-backed forces (from Rabbani to Mojaddedi) nor the Taliban were interested in any kind of reconciliation policy.

Nor are they now invested in a genuine peace. The Taliban have shown that they can make significant advances and that they will use their territorial gains for political advantage; nonetheless, pragmatic members of the Taliban say that they just do not have the resources and expertise to govern a modern state. President Ashraf Ghani barely controls his own government, largely defenseless without U.S. air power. Each could bring something to the table in a reconciliation process, but its likelihood is low.

Meanwhile, foreign powers continue to treat Afghanistan as a battlefield for their regional ambitions. Blindness to history governs the attitude of several capitals, who know from previous experience that extremism cannot be contained within Afghanistan; it devastates the region. Heela Najibullah’s call to consider her father’s National Reconciliation Policy is not merely a daughter’s hope. It is perhaps the only viable path for peace in Afghanistan.

Google to cut the pay of employees who continue to work remotely

Kevin Reed


Google and its parent corporation Alphabet, Inc. have unveiled a compensation calculator called the “Work Location Tool” that uses an employee’s residence location to impose pay cuts on tech workers who choose to continue working from home.

Googleplex is the corporate headquarters of Google and its parent company Alphabet in Mountain View, California

According to a Reuters report on Tuesday, Google employees who still work for the company at the same location where they were employed prior to the pandemic could see a dramatic reduction in their pay if they choose to work from home permanently.

Recognizing the policy as a bellwether for corporate America, the report says, “Google stands out in offering employees a calculator that allows them to see the effects of a move. But in practice, some remote employees, especially those who commute from long distances, could experience pay cuts without changing their address.”

Reuters spoke with Google employees in different cities and discussed how the calculator will impact their compensation. For example, an employee that was hired in San Francisco but decides to relocate and work from home in Lake Tahoe will experience a pay reduction of 25 percent. This is despite the fact that the cost of living in Lake Tahoe is almost as expensive as San Francisco.

In another instance, a New York City employee deciding to work from home in Stamford, Connecticut—a commuting distance of approximately one hour—would have to take a 15 percent pay reduction while another employee living in the city and working from home would have no pay cut.

The Reuters report also said, “One Google employee, who asked not to be identified for fear of retaliation, typically commutes to the Seattle office from a nearby county and would likely see their pay cut by about 10 percent by working from home full-time, according to estimates by the company’s Work Location Tool launched in June.”

Reuters interviewed Jake Rosenfeld, a sociology professor at Washington University in St. Louis who specializes in pay determination. Rosenfeld pointed to the real purpose of Google’s new pay structure system that is raising alarms over who will feel the impacts most acutely, including families. “What’s clear is that Google doesn’t have to do this. Google has paid these workers at 100% of their prior wage, by definition. So, it’s not like they can’t afford to pay their workers who choose to work remotely the same that they are used to receiving.”

When asked about the policy, a Google spokesperson defended it, saying, “Our compensation packages have always been determined by location, and we always pay at the top of the local market based on where an employee works from,” adding that pay will differ from city to city and state to state.

The Google Work Location Tool specifies that it uses US Census Bureau metropolitan statistical areas known as CBSAs and locations such as Stamford, Connecticut, for example, are not included in the New York City CBSA.

According to CBS News, Google developed the compensation calculator in June in order to “help employees make informed decisions about which city or state they work from and any impact on compensation, if they choose to relocate or work remotely.” It was a response to the fact that approximately 10,000 of the company’s 135,000 employees requested permission “to work remotely on a full-time basis or to relocate to a different office once COVID-19 subsides.”

There is no question that the Google remote employee compensation plan is part of a broader attack by the corporate establishment to both beat back the demands of workers for increased wages as well as an attempt to force employees back into the office despite the unsafe health conditions arising from the ongoing pandemic.

The move no doubt also reflects calculations by major corporations that they can use remote work, which effectively separates labor from any particular physical location, to drive down wages, using workers in cheaper areas of the country or overseas as a cudgel against workers living in more expensive urban areas.

In a cryptic reference to the intensification of the class struggle that has been evident throughout the pandemic, Julia Pollak, a chief economist at ZipRecuiter, told USA Today that companies cutting wages for remote workers “may see a decrease in employee retention.” Pollack also added that workers are demanding economic equality: “Culturally, we’re seeing a rise in pay transparency, and people feel very strongly that it’s not fair to be paid different amounts for the same work and for the same quality output of work.”

The position of the ruling establishment was articulated openly by Catherine Merrill, CEO of the monthly magazine, The Washingtonian, who wrote in an Op-ed in the Washington Post in May that people who work from home should have their status modified to hourly contractors and not full-time employees. “I am concerned about the unfortunately common office worker who wants to continue working at home and just go into the office on occasion,” Merrill wrote, adding, that such workers should be “paid only for the work they do” and have their health care insurance, 401K and other benefits eliminated.

In response, the staff of The Washingtonian took a one day work stoppage, refusing to publish on May 7 and retweeting a group statement that said, in part, “We are dismayed by Cathy Merrill’s public threat to our livelihoods. We will not be publishing today.”

A similar outlook was articulated by Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman who denounced employees for wanting to continue working remotely during the pandemic, saying in June, “If you want to get paid New York rates, you work in New York. None of this, ‘I’m in Colorado ... and getting paid like I’m sitting in New York City. Sorry, that doesn’t work.” Gorman increased his compensation in 2020 by 22 percent, earning a whopping $33 million.

The position of Merrill and Gorman expresses the overall contempt within the financial elite for the health concerns of workers and their families throughout the pandemic in which corporate profits on Wall Street and wealth accumulation by the super-rich have been placed above the lives of working people.

US sending 3,000 troops to Afghanistan as major cities fall to Taliban

Bill Van Auken


The Pentagon announced Thursday that the US is sending 3,000 US soldiers and Marines into Afghanistan with the ostensible mission of securing US diplomatic facilities in Kabul and organizing the evacuation of American civilians. Britain is sending 600 soldiers for the same purpose. The US deployment of one Army and two Marine infantry battalions has been ordered as the lightning offensive of the Taliban—and the unmitigated rout of the US-backed Afghan security forces—has steadily tightened a noose around the Afghan capital.

Taliban in Kunduz city, northern Afghanistan on Aug. 9, 2021. (AP Photo/Abdullah Sahil)

The collapse of security forces loyal to the US puppet regime in Kabul accelerated exponentially on Thursday with the Associated Press reporting the Taliban’s conquest of Afghanistan’s second largest city, Kandahar, in the south. It came on the heels of the fall to the insurgency of Herat in the west.

Both cities have populations of approximately 600,000. Kandahar is the historic birthplace of the Taliban and constituted a major military center for both the US-led occupation and the Afghan regime. Herat, a predominantly Persian-speaking city, is the strategic gateway to Iran.

These defeats leave the government of President Ashraf Ghani in control of little outside of Kabul. He staged an emergency trip to Mazar-i-Sharif, a besieged city of half a million in the north, in an attempt to mobilize forces loyal to Afghan warlords responsible for some of the worst crimes of the country’s bloody civil war of the 1990s.

In southern Helmand province, the capital city of Lashkar Gah has nearly fallen to the insurgency, with the Taliban capturing the police headquarters Thursday. US warplanes have carried out airstrikes in an attempt to halt the Taliban advance, killing and wounding civilians in the city.

The heavily armed US troops being dispatched to Afghanistan will reportedly be deployed to Kabul’s international airport. Another Army brigade combat team of between 3,500 and 4,000 US troops is being sent to Kuwait to be on “standby” for a possible rapid deployment to Afghanistan.

With some 4,200 employees, the US Embassy in Kabul is one of the largest in the world. State Department spokesman Ned Price said Thursday that it would be drawn down to a “core diplomatic presence.”

US President Joe Biden had initially announced that all US troops would be withdrawn from Afghanistan by September 2011, in fulfillment of an agreement negotiated between the Trump administration and the Taliban in Doha in February 2020. While the overwhelming majority of US troops and military contractors have already left Afghanistan, the official day for the completion of the pull-out was moved up to August 31. Washington stated that it was leaving a force of 650 soldiers and Marines behind to guard the US Embassy and the Kabul airport.

The Pentagon has been providing armed support for the puppet regime’s security forces in the form of “over the horizon” airstrikes, including by B-52 strategic bombers, and drone attacks which have led to an escalation of civilian casualties and destruction in urban areas under siege by the Taliban.

US military and intelligence officials have been cited by the Washington Post as predicting that Kabul could fall to the Islamist insurgency in 30 to 90 days. Previously, these same sources had assumed that no provincial capitals would be taken before the fall. Their latest predictions were made, however, before the stunning defeats suffered by the Kabul regime over the last 48 hours.

There is every reason to believe that the new US deployments are aimed not merely at evacuating US personnel, but at forestalling, at least temporarily, the precipitous overrunning of Kabul by the Taliban and a humiliating spectacle like that in South Vietnam in 1975, with US personnel fleeing from the Saigon embassy rooftop. Whether they are merely the advance guard of another US military intervention in a war that has killed hundreds of thousands of Afghans remains to be seen.

The fall of Kandahar and Herat on Thursday evening followed that of Ghazni, a strategically important provincial capital that straddles the main highway linking the capital of Kabul to the country’s south. Qala-i-Naw, the capital of Badghis Province, in northwest Afghanistan, was also taken by the Taliban Thursday night, leaving it in control of 12 of the country’s 34 provincial capitals.

In one city and district after another, Afghan national security forces have either surrendered without a fight or merely stripped off their uniforms and melted into the general population. Taliban fighters captured the headquarters of the Afghan army corps in Kunduz in charge of the north of the country Wednesday without a struggle, taking control of large stocks of arms, Humvees and a military helicopter.

Washington is desperately trying to broker a deal with the Islamist movement. The perpetual US envoy to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, formerly the representative of Unocal oil company’s interests in the country, was dispatched to Doha for talks that have included China, Russia, Pakistan, the European Union, Germany, the United Nations and the former Soviet republics of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.

Also present was Abdullah Abdullah, chairman of Afghanistan’s High Council for National Reconciliation and President Ghani’s electoral rival in elections that he and his supporters claimed were rigged.

The talks in Doha reportedly produced an offer to the Taliban of a power-sharing agreement in exchange for a cease-fire. Iran declined to take part in the negotiations.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan told the media that any such deal hinged on the removal of US-backed Afghan President Ghani. Khan has bitterly denounced Washington, charging that the US only wants Pakistan to clean up the “mess” Washington has created in Afghanistan. He added that his government, faced with US alignment with India, has “options” in terms of its relations with China.

Washington’s determination to broker a “political settlement” in Afghanistan is driven not by concerns over terrorism or the rights of women, but rather US imperialism’s interests in preventing China, Russia or Iran from expanding their influence in the country.

It is to that end that US troops are once again being deployed in the longest war in American history.