International Monetary Fund agrees minimal loan for Lebanon amid potential social and political meltdown

Jean Shaoul

Lebanon’s government, headed by Najib Mikati, the country’s richest businessman, has accepted a $3 billion package as part of a 46-month financing loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

A drop in the bucket in relation to the country’s gross debt of 183 percent of GDP, the fourth highest in the world after Japan, Sudan and Greece, the IMF loan will exacerbate Lebanon’s political, economic and social crisis amid a regional geostrategic conflict for control of the country.

Beggars sit in front of shops that close for ever after the economy crisis, at the commercial Hamra Street, in Beirut, Lebanon, January 12, 2022. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla)

While the US and France welcomed the agreement, investment bank Goldman Sachs described it as more of a carrot 'than a promise of near-term financial assistance.'

In return, Mikati’s government has agreed to implement “several critical reforms”. This includes restructuring the financial sector and the country’s external public debt, fiscal reforms that will eliminate the few remaining social welfare programmes, reforming state-owned enterprises, particularly the electricity sector, and tackling corruption—all while aiming to pass a budget before the parliamentary elections set for May 15.

It will vastly exacerbate the desperate plight gripping Lebanon’s six million population, of whom at least 80 percent, including one million Syrian refugees, already live in terrible poverty.

The loan, still to be approved by the IMF’s management and executive board, comes amid a crippling economic crisis the World Bank has described as one of the world’s worst since the 1850s, with Lebanon’s GDP plummeting from US$52 billion in 2019 to around $22 billion in 2021, a collapse usually associated with armed conflicts or wars. The economic catastrophe was worsened by the blast at the port of Beirut in August 2020 that killed more than 200 people, ruined much of the city’s northern neighbourhoods and reduced the amount of food the country can store to just one month’s supply.

This 58 percent contraction, the highest in the world, is, as international financial institutions acknowledge, the result of the political and financial elite’s plundering of the economy over decades. The plight of this tiny country is a foretaste of what is to come as the global economic crisis, regional conflicts including the proxy war for regime change in neighbouring Syria, the COVID-19 pandemic and the US/NATO provoked war on Russia in Ukraine take their toll.

Lebanon’s currency fell by 200 percent against the US dollar in 2021, resulting in surging inflation, estimated at 145 percent last year, that places it in third place after Venezuela and Sudan. It is having a devastating impact. With food prices soaring, poorer households, more than 75 percent of the total, are struggling to make ends meet. Access to the most basic goods, including food, water, healthcare, with hospitals only accepting payment in US dollars, and education is in jeopardy. Widespread electricity outages are the rule due to fuel shortages, rampant corruption and mismanagement of the power supply.

The price of OPEC petroleum blends rose by 30 percent after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The cost of diesel, already selling at 331,000 Lebanese lira a gallon, half the Lebanese minimum wage, rose by 31 percent. The state-owned electricity company now has even fewer resources to buy fuel, while those who rely on small diesel generators to meet their electricity needs are seeing their costs rise.

Lebanon, which used to buy 60 percent of its wheat from Ukraine, now has barely enough reserves for six to eight weeks. Last month, the Economy Ministry announced punishing bread price increases for smaller bread bundles (reduced in weight from 1,750 grams to 1,125 grams): an astronomic 550 percent rise to 13,000 lira a bundle, up from 2,000 lira.

According to the UN’s World Food Programme, which has previously warned that the war in Ukraine could drive millions in the Middle East into food poverty and lead to global food insecurity, the cost of the basic food basket in Lebanon, the minimum a family needs per month, soared by 351 percent in the past year. It raises the spectre of malnutrition and hunger.

Government revenues are estimated to have halved in 2021 to just 6.6 percent of GDP, the third lowest after Somalia and Yemen, while its expenditure fell even more sharply, reinforcing the economic collapse and leading, as the IMF acknowledged, to a massive “increase in poverty, unemployment, and emigration.”

Last week, Lebanon’s Deputy Prime Minister Saadeh Al-Shami told Al-Jadeed news channel that the country and its central bank were bankrupt and that the losses would be distributed among the State, the Banque du Liban, banks and depositors. Last month, the judicial authorities charged Riad Salameh, long-time head of the country’s central bank, with corruption, embezzlement, illicit enrichment, money laundering and smuggling large amounts of money out of the country after he failed to attend a court hearing for a fifth time. Salameh's brother Raja was charged with “facilitating money laundering” following his arrest for financial misconduct. The heads of five banks were banned from travelling abroad. Their actions follow an investigation into Salameh’s wealth after Switzerland and at least four other European countries brought lawsuits against him.

While Mikati has said that his dysfunctional cabinet would approve the necessary bank restructuring measures and parliament would legislate the changes required by the IMF before the sectarian-based May 15 elections, this seems wishful thinking given that these measures have been under discussion for the last two years without any agreement among the political and financial elite. At the very least, he will leave a poisoned chalice for his successor.

All the major Sunni politicians, including former Prime Ministers Saad Hariri and Fouad Siniora, and Mikati himself, have said they will not take part in the elections, leaving most of the 27 Sunni-reserved seats up for grabs and prompting fears that supporters of Hariri’s Sunni Future Movement will boycott the elections. Under the post-civil power-sharing agreement, the prime minister must always be Sunni, the president a Maronite Christian and the parliament speaker a Shia Muslim. Whatever the result, the process of agreeing a new prime minister and a government typically takes months.

The IMF loan comes as the Sunni Gulf petro-monarchs of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Bahrain agreed to return their ambassadors to Beirut, after withdrawing them five months ago following earlier comments by incoming Information Minister George Kordahi criticising the Saudi-led military campaign against the Houthi rebellion in Yemen. Kordahi was forced to resign under pressure from Mikati and the Gulf States that used the 350,000 Lebanese expats working in the Gulf and their vital remittances to the beleaguered country as leverage.

The Gulf States have offered to provide financial support to Lebanon. They fear the country’s economic collapse and possibly that of Syria with which it is closely linked would strengthen Iran and its allies, including Lebanon’s Hezbollah party which heads the largest bloc in 128-seat parliament. But their support depends on political developments in the country and the outcome of May’s parliamentary elections. This has prompted fears that the elections will be postponed or torpedoed.

As the war in Ukraine continues and sanctions against Russia are tightened, raising the price of oil and gas, the Gulf states view this as an opportunity to strengthen their position in the region, offering aid to Lebanon, Egypt, Turkey, Jordan and other countries.

Lebanon and Israel, which have been developing ever closer relations with the Gulf states, are also reportedly considering a resource swap that would divide the offshore energy reserves in the disputed maritime areas more equitably between the two countries, instead of demarcating the contested areas along geographical lines. The exploration of oil and gas has long been delayed as there is no agreed maritime border between the two countries, which remain technically in a state of war, with neither able to extract gas from the reserves in the disputed zones. French energy giant Total has refused to drill in contested waters. If the estimates of offshore hydrocarbon reserves are correct, this could bring billions of dollars in revenue to both countries. Lebanon’s main customer for the gas would be Europe.

Digital Innovation for Development in Africa (DIDA) PhD Fellowships 2022

Application Deadline:

13th May 2022, 5 pm BST

Tell Me About Digital Innovation for Development in Africa (DIDA) PhD Fellowships:

We are delighted to announce a unique opportunity to undertake PhD research, supported by an international network of experts, developing digital diagnostics as transformative technologies for African Healthcare systems. We have 10 fully funded PhD fellowships starting in 2022, with projects spanning a range of disciplines including molecular diagnostic test development, clinical evaluation, health systems research, design engineering, and data modelling. Successful applicants will be based at African institutions and will be part of a close-knit cohort, receiving bespoke training in diagnostic development and professional skills which will equip them to be future leaders in this field.

What Type of Scholarship is this?

Fellowships

Who can apply for Digital Innovation for Development in Africa (DIDA) PhD Fellowships?

Applicants must be nationals of an African country and be suitably qualified to enter a PhD program at the host University. We expect that successful applicants will have a track-record of academic excellence, with a first class or upper second class (or equivalent) undergraduate degree and a relevant Masters degree (or clinical qualification). Applicants who do not have these qualifications but believe that they have equivalent relevant research or industrial experience should explain this clearly in their letter of motivation. For some projects additional eligibility criteria apply

How are Applicants Selected?

• Shortlisting. We will use the Curriculum Vitae and Letters of Motivation to shortlist applicants who can demonstrate that they have outstanding academic potential, and are scientifically curious, highly motivated, hard-working, professional, and excellent team players, with a strong interest in the potential of digital diagnostics technologies. We expect PhD fellows to demonstrate that they have knowledge, skills and some experience relevant to the project(s) they wish to undertake, or that they could easily gain relevant knowledge and skills.
• Interviews. Interviews will be conducted on-line. We will send further details to the candidates shortlisted for interview. We will require proof of identity, proof of qualifications, and any other relevant documentation to be presented at the interview. Interviews will be conducted by a diverse and gender balanced panel from within the network, including representatives from host institutions. We will try to offer flexibility in interview dates and times, but due to the number of applications and posts we may not be able to accommodate some requests.
• Although eligibility varies by project, our selection panel will aim to ensure our cohort of fellows is diverse, and we will strive to ensure gender balance and representation of students from countries with fewer opportunities for PhD funding, whilst also ensuring all fellows meet our rigorous selection criteria.
• After interview. Successful applicants will receive provisional confirmation of our intention to award them PhD Fellowship funding. This does not mean that they have been accepted onto the PhD programme at the relevant University. Applicants must also apply and be accepted to study at the University where the Fellowship will be held (see Table 1) before funding can commence.

Which Countries are Eligible?

African countries

How Many Scholarships will be Given?

10

What is the Benefit of Digital Innovation for Development in Africa (DIDA) PhD Fellowships?

Fully funded

How to Apply for Digital Innovation for Development in Africa (DIDA) PhD Fellowships:

Application Form (.docx format)

It is important to go through all application requirements before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

The Rise of Digi-Fascism

Thomas Klikauer & Meg Young

Photograph Source: Abhisek Sarda – CC BY 2.0

The neo-fascist culture war of right-wing extremists and adjacent Neo-Nazis seeks to change the present climate of a democratic society. One way of achieving this goal is through digital fascism. Just like Italian fascism of the 1920s and German Nazism of the 1930s, digi-fascism wants the downfall of democracy. Its mythical calling seeks to make fascist thinking a normality. Henry Giroux calls this, the mainstreaming of fascism.

Despite its horrific past – or perhaps “because of its past” – today’s version of fascism is doing rather well. In fact, in some quarters it has even become something of a life-style idea exemplified by those who invaded Capitol Hill on 6^th January 2021; right-wing extremists camouflaging themselves as Canadian truckers; some sections of the anti-vaxxers during the Coronavirus pandemic; politicians who claim that the Charlottesville Neo-Nazis are very fine people – this list goes on.

In short, the world of real fascism (1920s to 1940s), today’s reality of offline neo-fascism, and its latest mutation of online digi-fascism remains a simple world defined by good-vs.-evil emotions. It still is just as Nazism’s Aryan master ideologue – Carl Schmitt – once claimed, those who are identified as evil and as the enemy must be destroyed.

In its eternal white-power struggle for cultural and political hegemony, the so-called New Right – which all too often is neither “new” (as it tends to regurgitate old themes) nor “right” but is rather neo-fascist in the extreme – has been taking advantage of plenty of new opportunities offered by social media to distribute its propaganda – on both sides of the Atlantic and even beyond.

Online and offline, digi-fascism thrives from designing an illusionary world of individual experiences and spaces in which the supposedly oppressed and insecure can feel at ease. Now they are protected from an accelerated and ever increasing complexity of modernity.

Right-wing extremist’s propaganda constructs this idyllic and pre- or better: anti-modern world as a place in which an imagined white majority no longer needs to fear the loss of its social privileges. Ideologically speaking, digi-fascism follows an old but proven playbook.

During the 1920s and 1930s, many Europeans, including its rising middle-class, experienced many of capitalism’s inherent pathologies. It was fascism’s task to re-direct these capitalism-endangering forces towards two newly invented enemies: a rebellious working class in case of Italy, and a powerful working class and Jews in the case of Germany.

Today’s digi-fascism also re-directs more recent threats – many of which are caused by forty years of neoliberalism – towards an invented enemy. Again, the biting pathologies of neoliberalism are redirected away from capitalism.

Once more, the task falls onto fascism – now called neo-fascism. Just as during the 1920s and 1930s, the task at hand is to obscure the ever present pathologies of capitalism. Both – traditional fascism and today’s digi-fascism – conjures up negative feelings towards an enemy. It follows fascism’s classical playbook of: no enemy – no fascism.

In that, digi-fascism focuses on a wide range of feelings. Yet, there still is one core and most suitable feeling used as a common denominator of emotions that right-wing extremists’ use when seeking to unite people. At its core is a looming sense of danger, threat, and most of all: fear. Neo-fascism’s Politics of Fear has invented the oppressed who are subjugated by some dark but always illusive force: the deep state, the elite, refugees, etc. All of these have become very handy tools for right-wing conspiracy fantasies.

However, and this is central, these feelings are invoked in groups that are also made to feel to be neglected and sidelined. Even though the exact opposite is the case. In general, many of them aren’t marginalized but privileged. Digi-fascism targets the insecure, the white man, sections of the middle and even working class, the conservative, the xenophobic, the racists, the Aryan German, the White Power American, and so on.

Yet, digi-fascism is somewhat of a big word. When we hear fascism we tend to think of drilled men in black uniforms, raising their arm to the fascist salute wearing polished boots. Mussolini’s Fasci Italiani di Combattimento was one of them. It was a fascist organization following the Germany’s Führer principle. National Socialism parroted and perfected Italo-fascism’s hierarchy.

Today’s digi-fascism relate to this – somewhat. Yet, one might also like to emphasize the crucial differences between traditional fascism and digi-fascism. Fascism is generally understood as a radical right-wing extremist’s top-down movement. It had ideologically-driven leaders – Mussolini, Hitler, Horthy, Tojo, Antonescu, Yaroslava Bandera (Ukraine) etc. – at the top. These men (all of them were men!) conjured up what the German philosopher Adorno calls as the authoritarian character among their followers.

Le Bon’s crowd is to worship these leaders and to blindly follow them. Yet and unlike traditional fascism, in the Age of Digi-Fascism, the classical relationships of fascist authority no longer works. This is the key difference between traditional fascism and digi-fascism. Today, virtually anyone can create a right-wing tale of evil refugees, a dark elite, an overbearing state, the threat of migration, etc. on the Internet.

Via social media, spreading fascist ideologies by all kinds of people and into all kinds of places is no longer an impossibility. As a consequence, digi-fascism no longer has a Mussolini and a Hitler. Despite the fact that some minor figures tried this, inevitably, they ended up as Mini-Me Hitlers. And, digi-fascism has no need for them.

Today’s fascistic movements form from the bottom up. This remains one of the most decisive difference to the fascism of the 1920s. And, digi-fascism is forced to take this into account. It is largely because of advances in individualism and strangely, even in democracy, i.e. Hirschman’s voice. Via the Internet, participants in right-wing online engagements demand voice using online platforms.

Most importantly, a no-leader digi-fascism came about because of the conditions of social media. As a consequence, there is less blind-following of and no longer an obeying of a glorified leader. Instead, one participates in right-wing extremists’ narratives, conspiracy fantasies, semi-explanatory and even partly plausible tales of right-wing vindications.

Despite these changes, some elements of fascism have not changed. Ideologically, traditional fascism just as today’s digi-fascism continues to propagate white supremacy with the goal of a racist world order. Yet today, this comes more often from users on Facebook, YouTube, Telegram, WhatsApp, Instagram, etc. than by a propaganda ministry.

Digi-fascism’s participators no longer fancy obeying a leader. Instead, they communicate, invent conspiracy fantasies, and produce right-wing and fascist stories and, worst of all, are sharing these with each other. Even more troubling, this sharing can reach thousands, if not millions.

Under digi-fascism, fascism’s traditional principle of command and obedience no longer applies. There is no longer a blind obedience – not even when storming Capitol Hill to eradicate democracy. America’s right-wing extremist mob did not march behind its glorious leader. It was not a reply to Mussolini’s march in Rome.

Digi-fascism is different and one of the most important element is its communication strategy which is online and is highly visual: short videos, emotional photos, fear inducing pictures, simple cartoons, etc. Yet, many of these visual elements depict digi-fascism’s ideology.

One election image of Germany’s Neo-Nazi party The AfD, for example, showed a pregnant “white”(!) woman lying in an idyllic meadow with her exposed belly at the center. The slogan read, We make new Germans ourselves … AfD!

These new Germans are supposed to be white Germans. It is somewhat of a continuation of the reproductive ideology of Germany’s Nazis. Making Aryan children is framed as white resistance against an alienated world in which un-German hordes of Untermenschen invade the Aryan habitat destroying a racially purified future.

This is linked to neo-fascism’s ideology of the so-called great replacement, as well as the conspiracy fantasy of a great reset. According to the common right-wing extremist’s hallucination of a great replacement, white people are gradually being displaced in white majority societies such as the USA, Germany, Orban’s Hungary, Brexit-UK, etc.

The prophets of neo-fascism insinuate that white people are being alienated. On the other hand, the ideology of a great replacement refers to a recent demographic changes that actually exist. In the ideology of digi-fascism, these changes are associated with a right-wing doom-&-gloom scenario. Neo-fascism presents it as a loss of a supposedly ancestral white culture, the oppression of white people by an ever illusive and never defined elite, and as an anti-Semitic tale claiming that this replacement is part of a secret Jewish plot.

Digi-fascism believes that a coordinated struggle is waged against white majority societies seeking to turn those into – the much-hated – multi-cultural societies. It claims that very soon whites will be in a minority. They will be an endangered group. With rafts of migration figures and birth statistics, such fears are triggered and seemingly supported. This meets a diffused discomfort and white disempowerment.

This is the fruitful field of many key actors of digi-fascism that ploughs on the Internet. It is spiced up with neo-fascist messages like these, “your great-grandmother had twelve children, your grandmother had six children. Your mother had two children. You have an abortion and a dog. Whites have gone doggy!”

For neo-fascists, the decision to get a dog or an abortion is a betrayal of the people. Such images are right-wing extremists’ tales of a great replacement that has taken hold signified by a decline in white birth rates. Of course, there is no mention of the fact that those women were not allowed to vote, couldn’t earn money, had no access to contraceptives, and were forbidden to have an abortion.

In these tales, feminism particularly, when linked to reproductive self-determination becomes one of neo-fascism’s prime targets. Neo-fascism claims that feminism seeks to ensure that there is no more white procreation. This is a fascistic tale of decline, the extinction of whites, the feminization of men, perversion of the family, the end of the Volksgemeinschaft.

In digi-fascism, many private decisions are politicized and artificially linked to an imagined community. The hated female body becomes the battlefield of culture war. More recently, digi-fascism has linked much of this to the Coronavirus pandemic seeking to convert anti-vaxxers into the realm of neo-fascism. In that, digi-fascism uses online slogans against vaccination such as, “my body is mine!” This is implicitly linked to Feminism’s “my body – my choice” and “my body belongs to me.”

These are the hallmarks of digi-fascism’s online communication strategies. The radical right has been practicing this for a long time. Today, it adopts individualistic, feminist, and even emancipatory rhetoric. From the standpoint of digi-fascism, it is about the emancipation of an oppressed whites and a freedom struggle of the allegedly downtrodden and oppressed white men.

Not surprisingly, there are right-wing and neo-fascist demagogues seeking to exploit any occasion that comes up such as, for example, refugees, the Coronavirus pandemic, war in the Ukraine, etc. Since 2020, the Coronavirus pandemic has created the right conditions in which fear, feelings of threats, and sentiments of oppression can be joined up with neo-fascism’s ideological project. Many government demands caused by the pandemic have been common to all of us. Most have answered them by showing consideration and support.

Yet, digi-fascism has a rather different pattern of reacting to the Coronavirus pandemic. Their tale is spiked with its key ideology, “we – the whites, the healthy people, workers and so on are currently suppressed and replaced.”

Beyond that, digi-fascism also relies on the fact that many people feel threatened by Coronavirus, political correctness, cancel culture, migration, feminism, gender studies, changes in language, and gender-free language.

The ideological tales of imminent cultural decay can easily be carried over into neo-fascism denouncing social science as supposedly ideological science. For digi-fascism, all this is about much more than just language. When gender researchers describe gender roles and gender patterns in a variety of ways, male- dominated neo-fascism is threatened. Gender research formulates questions that have something to do with all people in all societies. And, Neo-fascism hates this.

Under digi-fascism, anti-gender sentiments are cranked up by what might be called right-wing emotionalism. Often rather unspecified emotions can be used by digi-fascism to move people into the orbit of neo-fascism. Yet, the endgame is clear. In neo-fascism’s totalitarian system, people will be deprived of their freedoms. This includes the freedom to be a completely normal person and a completely normal citizen.

Yet, in its right-wing populism, it advocates the so-called normal Germany. The ideological of so-called normal Germans or ordinary Germans plays on right-wing populism’s idea of setting ordinary people against the elite. Slogans like these turn the position of normal people into a seemingly threatened position. Now normal people are endangered by the elite, the migrant, the refugee, the feminist, the liberal, etc. Of course, under digi-fascism, normal continue to mean white and heterosexual.

Digi-fascism’s normal people always conveys the feeling that the radical right wants to trigger. For them, these supposedly normal people have somehow been marginalized. For neo-fascism, the idea of normality that is conjured up, suggests a state of life that takes place outside social conditions, outside of class, outside of capitalism, and outside of politics.

Instead, it invokes idyllic images of something like a “relaxation room of life.” This is linked to the Uber-romantic ‘good old days’. Yet, it is also something many people liked to imagine. However, the days of a quasi-natural order of life remains a deeply fascistic idea.

The Uber-romantic past of neo-fascism remains a time when women preferred to be at home and men go to work. These are dreamy feelings of an apolitical life that needs to be defended. Digi-fascism mixes a longing for such an imaginary relaxation room of life with the fear of a loss of the usual and normal life whatever this was and is. Digi-fascism also links this to a fear of the loss of privileges. This is what neo-fascism calls right feelings.

Everyone is certainly afraid of losses and many people have already lost a lot under neoliberalism’s reign during the past decades. To obscure these real losses – good union jobs, job security, decent incomes, the ability to buy a house, etc. – digi-fascism offers a tale that pretends to cater for the ordinary German. In this, the white, conservative, native men is in acute danger. He is forced to live in an alien culture determined by the left, feminists, and the state.

Digi-fascism’s culture war wants to change the political atmosphere of society. Digi-fascism calls this meta-politics, i.e. the ideologization of everyday life. Digi-fascism wants terms, words, and ultimately the language with which people communicate in society to change.

At times there are rather banal emotional points – climate change, Covid-19, refugees, etc. – at which digi-fascism begins to be agitated. It is exactly at this point where digi-fascism – via Facebook, Telegram, Instagram, YouTube, etc. – provides easy-to-grasp answers and semi-plausible formulas. Together with conspiracy fantasies, these are presented as having the ability to explain the world.

The next step for digi-fascism is to assure that its ideology and it online conversations maneuver successfully out of radical right Internet forums and into the mainstream. As a consequence, there has been digi-fascism’s media campaign strategy seeking to conquer the journalistic mainstream and ultimately to enter as deep as possible into the breadth of democratic societies. Yet, these are only intermittent steps. Once digi-fascism has progressed far enough, the willingness, acceptance, and actual violence follows.

Chinese health officials seem to make progress in the struggle against BA.2 in Shanghai

Benjamin Mateus

The National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China reported that there had been 26,462 COVID-19 cases across mainland China. These were further characterized as 1,351 symptomatic cases, and 25,111 asymptomatic. Imported cases accounted for 107 of these, of which 33 were symptomatic. These figures are posted daily on their website, offering a comprehensive look at every location across China’s 31 provinces, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macao.

The bulk of infections continues to be reported in Shanghai, the epicenter of the current Omicron outbreak across the country. Yesterday, the national health authority said there had been 24,943 new infections in the financial hub, of which only 1,006 were symptomatic. The megacity, home to over 26 million people, underwent a two-phased lockdown on March 28, which was then extended to a city-wide lockdown on April 1 as cases continued to rise.

On April 4, a city-wide mass testing of the population led to uncovering of more silent, asymptomatic cases, prompting a second round of testing on April 8. The current rise in case counts has been attributed not to further community spread but to more comprehensive efforts to locate every infection across the megacity.

Dr. Wu Zunyou, chief epidemiologist with the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the counterpart to Dr. Anthony Fauci in the US, explained that the repeat PCR testing enabled public health officials to bring to an end the current outbreak. Speaking with the press, he attributed the increase in cases to the mass screening with PCR tests.

The average incubation period for infection with the Omicron BA.2 subvariant is around three days. Repeat testing will identify the portion of the potentially infected population that initial testing missed. Dr. Wu said, “The first test helps screen only people who have already started to shed the virus, while those who are infected but test negative would become infective if not identified immediately on the second and third tests.” He added, “If a round of tests takes two or three days, then theoretically the goal can be achieved in 10 to 14 days.”

Shanghai health officials announced Saturday that districts that have maintained zero COVID-19 infections for 14 days after repeated rounds of testing could leave strict lockdown, which will alleviate the severe constraints endured by the population and allow them to access markets for food and supplies.

Across Jilin province and the rest of mainland China, COVID-19 cases have continued to trend down since the implementation of measures to restrict social mixing and institute other cornerstones of infection control that have been tried and tested for centuries.

These public health efforts, including those being employed in Shanghai, are enormous achievements in light of the extremely contagious nature of the Omicron BA.2 subvariant. These experiences will provide important lessons for future pandemic preparedness and response in complex, densely populated urban settings.

Despite the repeated attacks and venomous language being used by the overseas capitalist press, denouncing the lockdowns as inhuman, the small number of deaths and mostly asymptomatic character of the infections attest to the efficacy of these relentless efforts at elimination. It means that the clinically severe aspects of the illness can be prevented through early intervention.

These findings are not unique to China’s experience. Every country that had employed an elimination strategy was able to lower rates of infections and complications, including deaths. Early intervention so that the health system is not overwhelmed has meant lives were spared.

Dr. Wang Guangfa, a respiratory specialist at Peking University First Hospital, explained that symptomatic patients are quickly sequestered at hospitals and treatment is rapidly initiated, which prevents cases from progressing to a more severe or critical state. If restrictions were lifted, infections would rapidly spread, leading to overwhelmed hospitals and a rise in preventable deaths. He pointed out that comparing Omicron to the flu is both misleading and dangerous.

When the Omicron wave surged through Hong Kong in February, it killed close to 8,500 people and infected more than 1 million in less than two months. The population of the special administrative region of China is approximately 7.5 million. During the surge, the per capita death toll was the highest ever experienced by any area during the pandemic.

By comparison, the severe 2018-2019 flu season killed only 352 people in Hong Kong. In other words, BA.2 has been 24-fold deadlier. These figures are important in reinforcing Chinese health officials’ commitment to zero-COVID.

Notably, in the face of the purported massive rates of vaccination across high-income countries and claims that the variant is “mild,” Omicron has killed nearly 1 million of the 6.2 million COVID patients reported to have lost their lives during the pandemic.

Globally, BA.2, the dominant version of Omicron, continues to infect more than 1 million people a day across the globe despite the dismantling of COVID-19 data trackers across many countries. At least 3,500 people are still dying every day, of whom half are in Europe, where BA.2 has seen spikes in cases and hospitalizations, particularly in Germany, France and the UK.

Globally, rates of vaccination for COVID-19 have been declining. Evidence is also emerging that the second booster appears to provide, in the short term, a modest improvement in protection against severe illness with Omicron. However, its impact on preventing infections drops rapidly in just four weeks and is negligible by eight weeks. With waning immunity and the rapidly declining efficacy of vaccines, the long-term implications remain uncertain and should weigh heavily in pandemic response, especially given the nature of viral evolution.

The United States will soon face the brunt of BA.2, which has begun its surge in the country. However, due to the nearly complete dismantling of state COVID-19 data trackers, the country is essentially flying blind into this surge. After the US CDC shifted to relying on hospital admissions and ICU capacity to determine community risk, state after state rapidly changed their reporting intervals from daily to twice or even once per week.

Dr. Scott Gottlieb, former US Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, speaking on “Face the Nation,” said in response to host Margaret Brennan’s question on the current state of the pandemic, “There’s no question that we’re experiencing an outbreak in the northeast, also the mid-Atlantic, [and] parts of Florida as well … It’s driven largely by BA.2. And I think that we’re dramatically undercounting cases. We’re probably only picking up one in seven or one in eight infections. So, when we say there are 30,000 infections a day, there’s probably closer to a quarter of a million infections a day.”

Despite this enormous level of infection, given the current low number of hospitalizations, the majority of the country is considered low risk. Hospitalizations and deaths are lagging indicators of infection, and without detecting the infections, it will be far too late to do much of anything about it. And BA.2 is surging when there are no mitigation measures really in place to slow the course of infections.

Yesterday, Jonathan Karl, co-anchor of ABC’s “ This Week,” asked Dr. Fauci, the White House chief medical adviser, what he thought of a Washington Post op-ed by Dr. Leana Wen, one of the more vociferous advocates of the full-scale reopening of schools, businesses and public gatherings of all kinds.

He quoted her: “At this point in the pandemic, we have to accept that infections will keep occurring. During the winter Omicron surge, almost half of Americans contracted the coronavirus. The new Omicron subvariant BA.2 is even more contagious. The price to pay to avoid coronavirus infection is extremely high. Some Americans might choose to continue to pay that price, but I suspect most won’t.”

Fauci replied, “You know, Jon, I think she—Dr. Wen articulated that pretty well. There will be—and we’ve said this many times even in our own discussions between you and I, that there will be a level of infections. This is not going to be eradicated, and it’s not going to be eliminated.”

The contrast with his counterpart in China, Dr. Wu Zunyou, who patiently explained that the outbreak could be cleared at the community level within two weeks, couldn’t be more revealing. The class struggle will determine if the war against the virus can be won.

Victor Orbán wins fourth election victory, remains Hungarian prime minister

Markus Salzmann

Victor Orbán remains head of the Hungarian government. His right-wing Fidesz party won the parliamentary elections on Sunday for the fourth time in a row.

Victor Orbán (Photo: EPP/CC BY-SA 2.0/wikimedia)

With 53 percent of the vote, Fidesz did much better than predicted, winning 135 of 199 parliamentary seats, and retaining a two-thirds majority in parliament. The opposition alliance “Hungary in Unity,” a coalition of six parties, fell far short of expectations with 35 percent.

Also represented in parliament is the ultra-right party “Our Homeland,” which achieved 6 percent of the vote. And one mandate goes to the representative of the German minority. Voter turnout was around 70 percent, the same as in the last election four years ago.

Orbán is not popular. He is responsible for countless social attacks and has built up an authoritarian system of rule over the past twelve years, restricting democratic rights and bringing the press into line.

The class nature of his government has been particularly evident during the coronavirus pandemic, during which 45,510 people have died from the virus in Hungary. In relation to the size of population, only Bulgaria has more deaths in the EU.

The health system is in a disastrous state. For this reason, the government banned doctors, nurses, and other hospital staff from giving press interviews as early as 2020. Critical journalists are not allowed to enter public hospitals. According to the European Health Care Systems Index (EHCI), Hungary ranks 33 out of 35 countries.

At the beginning of March, the government lifted all coronavirus protections. At the same time, there has been no serious vaccination campaign. By the end of March, only 64.2 percent of the population in Hungary had been vaccinated twice.

The inhumane treatment of refugees, the enforced conformity of the media and the executive’s open influence on the judiciary meet with strong popular hostility. However, the fact Orbán was nevertheless able to win the elections is due to the bankruptcy of the so-called opposition.

The only thing on which the alliance of six parties—ranging from the fascist Jobbik party to the Greens, and two completely discredited social democratic parties—agreed was the desire to get rid of Orbán. On many issues it was clearly to the right of him.

The fact that Peter Márki-Zay, a right-wing, Christian fundamentalist provincial politician, entered the election as the alliance’s top candidate speaks volumes. The mayor of the small south-eastern Hungarian town of Hodmezövasarhely accused the xenophobic Fidesz of being only against immigration in words. He accused Orbán, who locks up refugees in concentration camps at the border, of preventing the effective control of immigration by generously granting “golden visas” and residence permits.

While Orbán maintains his distance from Brussels—at least in words—the alliance promised to improve relations with the European Union. It criticised Orbán, saying his tax cuts and economic aid for businesses were too small.

It is significant that this right-wing alliance received support from politicians in several European countries. Greens, such as Germany’s Anton Hofreiter, explicitly supported it, even though Jobbik’s anti-Semitic and racist representatives would have held ministerial posts had it won the elections.

Ultimately, the decisive factor for Orbán’s clear electoral success was the Ukraine war. Initially, the alliance had run an “anti-corruption” election campaign against Orbán. When the war broke out, Márki-Zay fully backed NATO and supported its aggressive war policy.

Members of the six-party alliance demanded arms deliveries to Ukraine and the deployment of their own soldiers. Orbán was “a disgrace in Europe” because he had lost the support of NATO, without which Hungary could not be protected, they claimed. In the end, the alliance ran its campaign under the motto, “Putin or Europe.”

Orbán pursued an ambiguous course; he supported the EU’s sanctions but did not join in its warmongering, avoiding open criticism of Putin and presenting Hungary as a neutral force between the EU and Russia. He accused the opposition of wanting to drag Hungary into the war, while he favoured neutrality and was keeping the country out of the war.

This won Fidesz more votes than originally predicted. Significant sections of the Hungarian population, as in other European countries, reject both NATO’s war policy and Russia’s war policy. Orbán took advantage of this.

His election victory caused anger in Brussels and Berlin. Two days after the election, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced that the EU was now initiating the long-delayed procedure against the country for violations of the rule of law.

European Parliament Vice-President Katarina Barley (Social Democratic Party, SPD) said, “We now have an avowed EU opponent, an avowed Putin friend in the ranks of the European Council.” The leader of the Left Group in the EU Parliament, Martin Schirdewan, added that Orbán’s election was an encouragement for other authoritarian-oriented heads of government. “The contradictions especially along the conflict line of democracy versus authoritarianism will increase massively.”

In fact, the representatives of German and European imperialism are not concerned with defending democracy. Rather, in view of the escalation in the Ukraine war, governments fear that there will also be fierce conflicts within Europe.

In Serbia, where elections were also held on Sunday, there was a similar development. The incumbent President Aleksandar Vucic won the first round of the presidential election with over 58 percent. In the parliamentary elections, his Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) scored more than 42 percent.

Vucic, who in the past was considered pro-Moscow, held back on criticising Russia in the Ukraine conflict. He rejected the attack on Ukraine, but also the threats of war against Russia.