German police kill four people in just one week

Marianne Arens

Candles lie on the pavement, an anonymous person has sprayed “No Justice No peace” on the ground. On the previous Monday, 16-year-old Mohammed D. was shot dead by the police in the courtyard of the St. Antonius congregation in Dortmund in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia.

German police [Credit: Max Pixel]

His fate is all the more tragic since he ought to have received special protection. As an unaccompanied minor, Mohammed only recently fled Senegal. On the day before his death, he reportedly visited a psychiatric clinic at his own initiative because of the risk of suicide, but was released. On Tuesday, a guardian of the youth facility where he lived alerted the police because he saw Mohammad handling a knife.

No less than eleven heavily armed policemen arrived, who first subjected the young man (who did not understand German) to pepper spray and electric batons and then shot him with a machine gun. Five shots hit him in the stomach, in the forearm, twice on the shoulder and once even in the face. They shattered the boy’s jaw, who died shortly afterwards in the hospital.

The latest police murder highlights the increased readiness of the German police to use violence. Four missions in just one week, as different as they were, all ended in the use of deadly force:

• On Tuesday, August 2, special operations (SEK) officers shot a homeless 23-year-old Somali in Frankfurt's Bahnhofsviertel. So far, only what the Hesse State Criminal Police Office reported is known. According to this, the police were called because a man in a hotel in the Red Light District had threatened two women. Armed with a knife, he injured a police dog when the officers arrived. Around 4 a.m., the young man was executed with a shot to the head.

• The following day, August 3, Jozef Berditchevski (48) was killed by police bullets during a forced eviction in Cologne. He is said to have resisted eviction from his home. Policemen attacked him with pepper spray and then fired their weapon.

• On Sunday night, August 7, a police operation in Oer-Erkenschwick near Recklinghausen had a deadly ending. A 39-year-old is said to have rioted in his apartment. The policemen called to the scene first used pepper spray and “fixed” him, whereupon he lost consciousness and died a short time later.

• So when the police shot Mohammed D. in Dortmund on Monday afternoon, this was the fourth horrific case in just one week in which police officers killed a person.

In response to Mohammad’s death, around 250 people spontaneously took to the streets on Tuesday and another 400 on Wednesday. With shouts of “Murderer! Killer!” they marched through Dortmund’s Nordstadt. A mourning and protest rally in front of the house of the victim Jozef Berditchevski took place last Saturday in Cologne under the slogan “Evictions destroy lives.”

Jozef was by no means the “violent Russian,” as numerous media outlets, especially the Bild newspaper, portrayed him. Bild wrote: “The dead man is said to be a native Russian who was often drunk and then rioted.” The newspaper emphasized in particular: “A Soviet flag hangs on the balcony.”

In reality, Jozef was a virtuoso street musician who was well known and respected in Cologne. Born in St. Petersburg, Joseph came from a Russian-Jewish family. His mother was a well-known Russian violinist, and he devoted himself to classical music from the age of 12. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the 19 year old came to Germany because he did not want to fight against Chechnya as a Russian soldier. Later he studied at the Cologne University of Music. There is a WDR report about him, which was posted on YouTube and can be seen here.

During the coronavirus pandemic, the ban on all street performers in Cologne also threw Jozef off the rails and deprived him of his livelihood. Added to this was the vicious Russophobia, which the media continues to deliberately fuel to this day to whip up support for the imperialist proxy war in Ukraine.

Jozef was known to the authorities as suicidal. How desperate he was can be seen in the official report. There, Chief Prosecutor Ulrich Bremer writes: “The deceased was already known to the police and courts. Most recently, he was indicted by the public prosecutor’s office at the Cologne District Court in June 2022. The charge was based on the accusation of having resisted police officers after the accused announced his suicide and had kicked the police officers who had rushed to his aid.”

The bureaucratically cold report makes it quite clear in passing that Joseph should not have been evicted from his apartment under such conditions, because evictions are prohibited if there is a risk of suicide.

The other cases also appear to have involved exceptional psychological crises for the victims. In order to deescalate such situations, experienced psychologists or social workers, not militarily-armed cops, ought to be present. For years, it has been known that the overwhelming majority of people killed by police officers were in a “state of psychological emergency.” This applies to two-thirds of all victims, according to a report by the RBB television channel in 2014.

In Oer-Erkenschwick on August 8, the alleged “rioter” was pepper sprayed, subdued and “immobilised.” He lost consciousness and died a little later. The police report states: “There are indications that the man from Oer-Erkenschwick had taken drugs.” What are the indications? Was his death actually the result of drug use? What role did the police “immobilisation” play, which interfered with his breathing, or the use of pepper spray? This method of exposing people to irritable gas is extremely dangerous and can lead to death, for example, for people who have taken psychotropic drugs.

All four deaths have been investigated, but it is doubtful whether the real causes and circumstances will ever come to light. The police headquarters in Dortmund is responsible for the case in Oer-Erkenschwick, and the one in Recklinghausen, to which Oer-Erkenschwick belongs, is responsible for uncovering the events in Dortmund. (The same applies to the neighbouring cities of Bonn and Cologne.) In recent cases, this means that the police department charged with Mohammad’s death is investigating the colleagues responsible for the death in Oer-Erkenschwick—and vice versa.

This practice, which the Ministry of the Interior of North Rhine-Westphalia claims guarantees a “neutral investigation,” has long been criticized by the German Bar Association (DAV). Instead, the association calls for an independent complaints body. In fact, police officers are practically never convicted of fatalities. The figures of the Federal Statistical Office show how low the chances of success after a complaint are. According to him, in 2020, out of 4500 investigative cases against police officers, only 70 cases were opened.

The killing of four people during police operations in less than a week marks a new level of police violence in Germany. It is reminiscent of American circumstances, where police attacks with fatal outcomes occur several times a day, more than 1,000 times a year. In the current year 2022, 588 people have already been murdered by the police in the USA. Two years ago, pictures of the brutal police murder of George Floyd triggered protests around the world.

In Germany, there are also repeated murders by the police, but so far not in such large numbers. The website polizeischuesse.cilip.de, which lists all incidents, has counted since reunification in 1991 at least 315 cases in which “persons were killed by bullets from the German police.” Other victims died in police custody, such as Oury Jalloh, or were killed in connection with a brutal deportation.

In parallel with the war policy of the “traffic light coalition” (Social Democratic Party, Free Democratic Party, Greens) and its rearmament of the state apparatus, this deadly practice is currently on the rise. This development is a sign of the ruling elite’s fear at the growing resistance of the working class.

During the coronavirus pandemic, the ruling class pursued a systematic profit-for-life policy. Since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, inflation has been fueled more and more, jobs have been destroyed and the living conditions of the socially vulnerable have been endangered. Due to glaring social inequality, a huge social storm is brewing.

This is the reason why ruling politicians, under all circumstances, protectively put themselves in front of trigger-happy policemen and defend them even when their right-wing extremism and racism are openly exposed.

In Hesse, in connection with the police scandal surrounding the far-right terrorist NSU 2.0 hate messages, it has now emerged that the head of the internal police investigation himself is said to have manipulated the results and warned other colleagues. In addition, he used to belong to the same SEK (special operations) unit associated with right-wing chats. A second supervisor from the police investigation office is also accused of having warned officials about the internal investigations.

At a press conference on August 10 in North Rhine-Westphalia, Minister of the Interior Herbert Reul (Christian Democrats) explicitly defended the police officers who shot Mohammed D. It was a matter of seconds, said Reul, and the boy (who was actually already blinded by tear gas) ran towards the police with a knife. “And in this situation,” said Reul, “it was about the question: Does he stab—or do the police shoot?”

This is nothing more than a carte blanche for further police murders.

US House passes pro-corporate climate bill

Barry Grey

On Friday, the US House of Representatives passed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 on a strict party-line vote. All Republicans voted against and all Democrats, who hold a narrow majority, voted in favor. The bill, having been passed in a similar party-line vote by the Senate last Sunday, will now be sent to President Joe Biden to be signed into law.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., receives the vote tally as she prepares to finish the vote to approve the Inflation Reduction Act in the House chamber at the Capitol in Washington, Friday, Aug. 12, 2022. [AP Photo/Patrick Semansky]

The Democrats and media outlets aligned with the Democratic Party are hailing the measure as a “landmark” and “historic” breakthrough in the fight against global warming and a major advance for tax fairness, affordable health care and inflation control.

None of this is true. The World Socialist Web Site has published several articles detailing the actual provisions of the bill and exposing the Democrats’ cynical and misleading hype. It is clear that the orchestrated effort to present this pro-corporate bill as a major piece of social reform legislation is a desperate attempt to reverse Biden and the Democrat’s collapsing popular support in the run-up to the November 8 midterm elections.

All the substantial social measures included in previous versions of Biden’s domestic initiative, at one time dubbed “Build Back Better,” already downsized last year from $3.5 trillion to some $2 trillion over 10 years, have been removed from the current legislation, whose outlays are estimated at only $433 billion.

Last November, in fact, the House passed a $2.2 trillion “Build Back Better” bill that included universal pre-kindergarten, subsidies for child care, expanded financial aid for college, hundreds of billions of dollars in housing support, home and community care for older Americans, a new hearing benefit for Medicare, an expanded child tax credit, and four weeks of paid parental and medical leave.

That bill died in the Senate due to opposition from two Democrats, West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin and Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema.

The 2021 House bill also included a surtax on ultra-high earners and increased taxes on corporations estimated to bring in nearly $1.5 trillion over 10 years.

None of these provisions are included in the current legislation. Its provisions for “clean energy” consist of massive handouts to solar, wind and other renewable energy corporations in the form of $369 billion in tax credits over 10 years. This is accompanied by far-reaching concessions to the fossil fuel industry demanded by Manchin, a coal business multimillionaire and unabashed shill for Big Oil.

Manchin, the Senate’s biggest recipient of campaign cash from oil and gas companies, used his leverage in the evenly divided Senate to demand that the bill include unprecedented guarantees of new leases of federal lands and offshore territories for gas and oil exploration. He also secured the agreement of Biden, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to vote this fall on a bill that would weaken the ability of environmental agencies to restrict permitting of new oil and gas pipelines and other infrastructure projects.

Since the Inflation Reduction Act contains no caps on greenhouse gas emissions or penalties on carbon polluters, there is good reason to believe that the net result will be a worsening of the climate crisis.

The other major spending in the bill is $44 billion to extend for three years enhanced subsidies to purchasers of private insurance on the Affordable Care Act’s exchanges, which were enacted as part of the CARES Act in March 2020. The Democrats made sure to include this in the bill because the increased support would otherwise have expired at the end of the year, and voters would have learned they faced sharply higher premiums right before the November elections.

Much is being made of provisions that for the first time empower Medicare to negotiate drug prices with the pharmaceutical corporations. This is estimated in the bill to generate $265 billion in federal revenue from lower Medicare outlays for prescription drugs, with the benefit passed on to enrollees. However, as is typical of the entire bill, this “reform” is hemmed in and pinched so as to minimize any loss of profits on the part of the drug giants.

The government will not begin negotiating drug prices until 2026 and will be limited to a mere 10 drugs. That will increase only to 20 drugs by 2029. A $2,000 annual cap on out-of-pocket drug costs for Medicare enrollees will take effect only in 2025 and will aid only some 1.4 million seniors. A fee on drug companies that raise prices higher than inflation will apply only to drugs purchased through Medicare, not to the private market. And a $35 monthly cap on insulin costs will similarly be limited to Medicare.

The claims about inflation reduction are entirely bogus. Supposedly, the bill will generate a net surplus of $300 billion in additional government revenues over net outlays in the course of 10 years, a drop in the bucket of ever-expanding government debt. That, plus projected decreases in drug costs, is the entirety of the so-called inflation reduction impact.

The Congressional Budget Office called the bill’s impact on inflation “negligible at best.” The Bipartisan Policy Center projected “small impacts one way or the other,” and the Penn Wharton Budget Model said the impact would be “statistically indistinguishable from zero.”

Claims about significantly shifting the tax burden from working people to corporations and the rich are no less fraudulent. The 2017 tax overhaul that dramatically slashed corporate and individual income taxes for the rich remains intact. The minimal tax hikes that were included in the deal worked out last month between Manchin and Schumer were gutted or removed at the insistence of Sinema, the biggest recipient in the Senate of campaign cash from the hedge fund and private equity billionaires.

She demanded and got the removal of a provision, estimated at $14 billion, to effectively end the notorious “carried interest” tax loophole that allows hedge fund and private equity managers to pay taxes on their income at the capital gains rate, barely half what they would pay at the normal rate for their income level.

The other major tax provision is a 15 percent minimum tax on corporations reporting annual income of $1 billion or more, projected to generate $222 billion over 10 years. However, Sinema, after a private call with the National Association of Manufacturers and the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, demanded and got the reinsertion of an accelerated depreciation allowance for manufacturing companies. This tax dodge, which is used by many highly profitable manufacturers to pay virtually no federal taxes, will render the 15 percent minimum corporate tax largely meaningless.

In place of the ending of the “carried interest” loophole, the Democrats inserted a 1 percent excise tax on stock buybacks, estimated to produce $74 billion in tax revenues over 10 years. The Wall Street Journal published an article last week headlined “Plan Isn’t Expected to Affect Buybacks,” citing various finance analysts who predicted the small fee would not dampen the enthusiasm of companies for purchasing their own stock, a parasitic use of profits to drive up the portfolios of big investors and the compensation packages of executives. Last quarter, in the midst of soaring consumer prices and shortages, US stock buybacks hit a record of $281 billion.

Every one of the so-called “progressive” Democrats in the House voted for this miserable pro-corporate bill. Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington, the chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said in a statement: “While we are heartbroken to see several essential pieces on the care economy, housing and immigration left on the cutting room floor…we know that the Inflation Reduction Act takes real steps forward on key progressive priorities.”

Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, a member of the so-called “Squad,” said, “While our work is unfinished—on paid leave, housing, disability justice, immigration, the care economy, environmental justice and more—this bill is historic and desperately needed. This is one more example of progressives pressing in support of the President’s agenda and the Biden White House delivering. …”

Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, another Squad member who is backed by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), called the bill a “massive step forward.”

Ukraine claims 60 dead, 100 wounded, in blasts on Crimea as satellite images show destroyed Russian aircraft

Clara Weiss

Anton Gerashenko, an adviser to the Ukrainian minister of internal affairs, claimed on Thursday that 60 pilots and technicians had been killed and 100 people wounded in a series of explosions at a Russian Saki air base on the Black Sea Crimean Peninsula on Tuesday. Since Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, the air base has housed the Russian 43rd Independent Naval Assault Air Squadron.

As of this writing, there has been no official denial of this claim by Russian officials, which have only acknowledged that one person had been killed and 14 wounded. While the Kremlin has deliberately sought to downplay the significance of the incident, more and more information has emerged indicating that it was far more serious than Russian officials have been willing to admit.

The blasts on Tuesday occurred close to a tourist resort, prompting panic among thousands of tourists, some of whom sought to leave the peninsula immediately. The Associated Press quoted one local resident who had heard a roar and saw a mushroom cloud from his window: “Everything began to fall around, collapse.”

Crimean officials have acknowledged that 62 apartment and 20 commercial buildings were damaged, and at least 250 people had to be temporarily evacuated. Satellite images appear to show that about 2 square kilometers (0.75 square miles) of grassland were burned at the air base, and two buildings destroyed.

These images also indicate that at least seven Russian war planes were destroyed and two damaged. This would mark the biggest loss of Russian military aircraft in a single day since World War II. Based on the satellite images, the destroyed aircraft were Su-24 and Su-30 fighter jets, each of which cost over $24 million.

There has been no official acknowledgment from Ukraine that it conducted strikes on Crimea. However, Oleksyi Arestovych, an advisor to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, effectively claimed Ukrainian responsibility for the blasts, stating that they had been caused either by Ukrainian-made long-range weapons or by Ukrainian guerrillas operating in Crimea. Without explicitly referring to the blasts, Zelensky stated on Tuesday, “Crimea is Ukrainian and we will never give it up.”

The Kremlin’s response to the blasts on Crimea was reminiscent to its reaction to the humiliating sinking of the Moskva, the flagship of the Russian Black Sea fleet, in March. Clearly seeking to downplay what would represent a grave military setback and the basis for a potentially major escalation of the war, the Russian government has vehemently denied that the blasts were the result of an attack by Ukraine. Instead, the Kremlin claims that the blasts were caused by the detonation of stored ammunition. The Russian media, which is only allowed to refer to the war as a “special military operation,” has virtually ceased all coverage of the incident.

The Saki air base is at least 125 miles or 200 kilometers from the closest Ukrainian military position and none of the weapons and ammunition officially in the arsenal of the Ukrainian army can strike targets that far away. The ammunition for the American-made HIMARS rocket system, which the US has been officially delivering since May, can only hit targets of a distance of up to 50 miles.

The German magazine Spiegel surmised that the blasts could have been caused by a Ukrainian Grim-2 short range missile, which has been in development since 2003 and could strike targets at a distance of up to 280 kilometers. Alternatively, the Spiegel noted, Ukraine could have used a modified Neptun missile which may have also caused the sinking of the Moskva. In either scenario, Russian missile defense systems on Crimea could have only been circumvented by American AGM-88 anti-radar missiles. Remnants of such a missile were recently found on Ukrainian territory even though the US has not confirmed that AGM-88 missiles were among the weapons and ammunition that Washington has officially delivered to Ukraine.

The Spiegel wrote, “This could mean that Kiev’s most important partners may have delivered also other weapons to Ukraine in secret, such as the MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS). The ATACMS can be used by the American HIMARS as well as the German and British M-270 multiple launch rocket systems, which have been deployed in Ukraine for the past several weeks and have been causing serious problems, especially for Russian logistics. Currently, they [these rocket systems] can only reach up to 80 kilometers with the GMLRS-rockets, but with ATACMS they could reach up to 300 kilometers, which theoretically could make strikes on Crimea possible.”

The blasts on Crimea occurred against the backdrop of ever more aggressive threats by the Ukrainian military and President Volodymyr Zelensky, that they were determined to “recover Crimea.” The US-backed adoption of the “recovery of Crimea” as Ukraine’s official military doctrine in March 2021 was a major factor in provoking the Russian invasion of February 24 and Russian officials have repeatedly warned that they could respond with nuclear weapons to any attack on Crimea. In July, a Pentagon spokesman has notably refused to preclude that American missiles will be used to strike the Russian-built Kerch bridge, which connects Crimea with the Russian mainland.

Writing for the Washington Post, David Ignatius interpreted the presumed Ukrainian attack on Crimea as the beginning of a long-announced “southern offensive.” Russian troops have now occupied about a fifth of Ukrainian territory, including most of the East and significant parts of the south. It is expected that the Kremlin will organize referendums in these territories about joining Russia in the coming weeks, and an offensive by Ukraine would not least of all be aimed at preempting such a development.

There is little question that any offensive, as well as any strike on Crimea, are not only carried out with the weapons and ammunition delivered by the imperialist powers, but also discussed and prepared in the closest consultation with Washington. Having staged a coup in Kiev in 2014 to install a NATO-compliant regime in Ukraine and transform the country into a launching pad for war against Russia, the US, Britain, Germany and other NATO powers have delivered weapons and ammunition to Ukraine worth tens of billions of dollars since February alone. Just this Monday, the Biden administration approved the largest single military aid package to Ukraine yet, worth $1 billion, including for ammunition for the HIMARS rocket systems and 1,000 Javelin missiles.

Only a week before the blasts on Crimea, Ukraine’s deputy head of military intelligence, Vadim Skibitsky, gave a provocative interview to the British Telegraph, acknowledging that every Ukrainian strike on Russian targets was preceeded by discussions with the US which “would allow Washington to stop any potential attacks if they were unhappy with the intended target.” Skibitsky also said that “we use real-time information” provided by the Americans to strike Russian targets.

The imperialist proxy war against Russia in Ukraine has already claimed the lives of over 5,000 civilians, while the losses among troops on both sides are estimated in the tens of thousands. Over a fourth of the country’s prewar population of under 40 million has been turned into refugees. An offensive in the south and an attempt to “recover Crimea” by Ukraine would directly threaten the lives of thousands, if not millions more, even as US imperialism is escalating its war provocations against China over Taiwan in the Pacific.

Italy faces the threat of a far-right government

Peter Schwarz

It is looking increasingly likely that a neo-fascist party will take over the government in Italy this autumn, exactly one hundred years after Benito Mussolini’s march on Rome.

Fratelli d’Italia leader Giorgia Meloni speaks at the February 2022 CPAC conference in Texas

With just under seven weeks to go before the September 25 general election, the right-wing alliance—comprised of the neo-fascist Fratelli d’Italia, the far-right Lega and Silvio Berlusconi’s Forza Italia—is well ahead in the polls. With a 45 percent share of the vote, it could win around 60 percent of the seats due to Italy’s complicated electoral system—a mixture of proportional representation and majority voting that clearly favours larger parties and party alliances.

Within the right-wing alliance, in turn, the Fratelli lead with 24 percent, followed by Lega with 11 percent and Forza Italia with 8 percent. Giorgia Meloni, the 45-year-old leader of the Fratelli, is therefore considered the most promising candidate for head of government.

Meloni leads a party that stands in the unbroken historical continuity of Mussolini’s fascist movement and still bears its symbol, the green-white-red flame, on its coat of arms. At the age of 15, Meloni joined the youth organization of the Movimento Sociale Italiano (MSI), which succeeded Mussolini’s fascist party after his death and provided a political home for numerous high-ranking fascists.

In 2008, Silvio Berlusconi appointed the 31-year-old, by then a member of the MSI’s successor party Alleanza Nazionale, as youth and sports minister. After the Alleanza Nazionale dissolved into Berlusconi’s Forza Italia, Meloni founded the Fratelli d’Italia in 2012 to continue the fascist tradition. The party pays homage to the memory of Il Duce and is supported by neo-fascist thugs. Its election rallies regularly feature the “Roman salute,” the Italian equivalent of the Nazi Sieg Heil.

Although Meloni herself no longer openly acknowledges Mussolini for tactical reasons, she does not distance herself from him either. Instead, she downplays the fascist dictator, saying that he must be “seen in the context of history.”

Her international allies and political views, however, leave no doubt where Meloni stands politically. She admires former US President Donald Trump and maintains close ties to Spain’s Vox, a party of Franco supporters, as well as to Hungary’s right-wing leader Viktor Orbán. She is also chairwoman of the European Conservatives and Reformers party, which includes the Polish PiS, the far-right Sweden Democrats and the Spanish Vox, as well as the British Tories.

Politically, Meloni represents a mixture of right-wing nationalism, aggressive xenophobia, and Christian fundamentalism. She rages against the “mass invasion of immigrants,” the “Islamization of our Christian identity,” the “LGBT lobby” and the “bureaucrats from Brussels.” She describes herself as a mother, a Christian and an Italian and sees these identities threatened by mass migration, by gender politics and by the European Union.

In April 1945, the fascist dictator Mussolini was executed by Italian partisans and his body publicly displayed in Milan hanging. How is it possible that 77 years later, one of his political heirs again has serious prospects of taking power in Italy? And this in a country that has a long anti-fascist tradition and a militant working class, and where social antagonisms are tense to the breaking point?

The answer to these questions lies not so much with Meloni and her party as with the so-called centre-left parties, the trade unions, and their pseudo-left appendages. The latter have long played a key role in rehabilitating far-right and fascist forces and have recently adopted their program—social attacks, war, stepping up the power of the state, and policies allowing the coronavirus to run wild in the pandemic—more and more openly, imposing them against growing resistance.

When the Italian economy was in free fall in early 2021 and the pandemic claimed tens of thousands of lives in Italy, all parties—from the Democrats (PD) and their various spin-offs to the Five Star Movement to Berlusconi’s Forza Italia and the far-right Lega, whose leader Matteo Salvini himself admires Mussolini—joined forces to form a government of “national unity” under former European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi.

A confidante of international finance capital, Draghi shifted the burden of the crisis onto the working class and brought Italy, which had previously maintained close political and economic ties with Russia, onto NATO’s war course. The Democrats and the trade unions suppressed any opposition to this and supported Draghi even more resolutely the more obvious the anti-working class character of his policies became.

They would also have readily included Meloni in their government of “national unity,” but the Fratelli, which received only 4.4 percent of the vote in the 2018 general election, preferred to remain the only party in opposition—and grew rapidly.

The current election campaign being conducted by the Democrats under their leader Enrico Letta is on the basis of an extreme right-wing program. In late July, when Italian daily La Stampa reported on alleged close ties between Salvini and the Russian Embassy in Rome, Letta declared, “Today’s findings about the links between Salvini and Putin’s Russia are disturbing, the election campaign is starting in the worst way, with a big stain. We want to know if it was Putin who brought down Draghi’s government.”

In other words, Letta criticizes Salvini and his far-right Lega not primarily for their fascist tirades against immigrants and praise of Mussolini, but for not supporting the war course against Russia aggressively enough. On the other hand, as soon as the fascists swung behind NATO’s offensive, he was full of praise. When Meloni, during a joint appearance in the Italian Senate, made known her support for Western arms supplies to Ukraine and the NATO proxy war against Russia, Letta spoke of an “idyllic moment” with the fascist leader.

Enrico Letta (PD) and Giorgia Meloni (Fratelli d’Italia) in the Italian Parliament (Alberto Pizzoli/Pool photo via AP)

The Democrats are themselves working on establishing a coalition to tighten Draghi’s anti-working class stance. Earlier this month, Letta announced the formation of an alliance with former Economy Minister Carlo Calenda’s Azione party and former European Commissioner Emma Bonino’s Più Europa party, two right-wing liberal outfits that both support the European Union. When he then included the Greens and the Italian Left Party (Sinistra Italiana) in the alliance a few days later, however, Azione jumped ship again. According to political experts, this has “reduced to a minimum” the centre-left alliance’s chance of winning the election.

Sinistra Italiana plays a particularly foul role in these manoeuvres, whose main task is to strengthen the right-wing offensive and prevent any social mobilization against it. Founded in 2015, the party is a catch-all for shipwrecked former pseudo-left parties like Rifondazione Comunista and Sinistra Ecologia Libertà (SEL), each of whose policies ended in disaster. Between 2005 and 2008, Rifondazione was part of the “centre-left” government under Romano Prodi (PD), whose pro-war and austerity policies opened the door to Meloni’s entry into government.

Even defectors from the Democrats and the Five Star Movement, which governed with Salvini for 15 months from 2018 to 2019, have found shelter in Sinistra Italiana. The party’s role models are Greece’s Syriza and Spain’s Podemos, both of which carried out massive attacks on the working class as governing parties—in Syriza’s case, in alliance with the far-right Independent Greeks (Anel). Significantly, at EU level, Anel belongs to the same political grouping as Meloni’s Fratelli.

Italy is a social powder keg. Decades of attacks on the working class have driven social inequality, poverty and unemployment to record highs. Strikes and protests are mounting. The far-right is needed to intimidate the working class, channel social tensions along racist lines, build a police state and strip the security forces of their last scruples.

Salvini, whose far-right party has sat at the cabinet table with Letta & Co. for the past year and a half, already sees himself as a future interior minister again—though he has not yet given up hope of becoming head of government. A few days ago, during a campaign appearance at an immigration centre on Lampedusa, he promised to once again stop accepting refugees in Italian ports altogether.

Meloni went even further, proposing to impose a naval blockade on the North African Mediterranean coast, which, under international law, would be an act of war. She also made it clear that as head of government she would continue the social attacks of her predecessors. The next legislative period will be a difficult one, she said in an interview with US broadcaster Fox News. “We have to tell Italians the truth in the election campaign. We can’t promise something we can’t deliver.”

For all these reasons, Europe’s ruling circles are also looking forward to Meloni’s possible takeover of the government somewhat sympathetically, despite her anti-EU rhetoric. The European media paint an extremely flattering picture of the neo-fascist.

She also enjoys a lot of support in European capitals and in Washington because she is unreservedly on NATO’s side in the Ukraine war. “This conflict is the tip of the iceberg in a process aimed at realigning the world order,” she told Fox News. “If the West loses, Putin’s Russia and Xi’s China are the winners—and in the West, it’s the Europeans who pay the highest price.”

There is no doubt that if Meloni does indeed win the election, European leaders will welcome her into their ranks with open arms. Italy is not an isolated case. The ruling class is responding to growing social tensions and class struggles everywhere with a sharp shift to the right. Far-right parties like Spain’s Vox, Marine Le Pen’s Rassemblement National in France, and Germany’s Alternative for Germany (AfD) are preparing to take over the government or—as in refugee policy—are setting the political line being followed by governments.

Henan rural bank scandal points to wider social tensions in China

Jerry Zhang

Protests erupted in Zhengzhou, the capital of central China’s Henan province, on July 10, as thousands of village bank depositors complained about a financial scandal at several rural banks. The rally sparked a standoff between protesters and police, and in a widely circulated video, protesters were also beaten by unidentified thugs in uniform. This brought the scandal involving several rural banks in Henan to the public’s attention.

Protester at a central bank in Zhengzhou, Henan province, China, July 10, 2022. [Photo by Yang]

By April, many such banks in Henan Province had said depositors could not withdraw money, and closed their platforms for online withdrawals and transfers. At least a thousand customers began to travel to Zhengzhou hoping to solve the problem. Larger protests began in May. Hundreds of protesters gathered at the site of the Henan Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission on May 23 and were dispersed by police.

Official crackdowns only deepened the scandal, sparking a tsunami of public criticism and comment on the Chinese internet. Many savers said on social media that although they had undergone nucleic acid testing as required and had not been infected with COVID-19 or had close contact with someone with COVID-19, their “health codes” had turned red (meaning “risk personnel”). That meant they were restricted from travel or required to quarantine under the provisions of pandemic prevention and control. Health codes are QR codes set up by many cities in China for epidemiological investigations and are often associated with people’s travel and daily activities.

This response led to more criticism and wider public attention. Angry people questioned the abuse by authorities of pandemic measures to suppress protesters. Many accused officials of “acting as thugs for the capitalists.”

In response to these denunciations, in late June, a number of officials were punished. They included Feng Xianbin, executive deputy secretary of the Zhengzhou Municipal Political and Legal Committee and head of the city’s pandemic prevention and control headquarters, and Zhang Linlin, secretary of the Zhengzhou Municipal Committee of the Communist Youth League of Henan Province and deputy director of the pandemic headquarters.

According to the official investigation, a total of 1,317 village bank depositors were forcibly given “red codes” and restricted from traveling. The investigation report stated that Feng and Zhang had acted “without authorisation” and ordered their subordinates to implement their measures. This had “seriously endangered the seriousness of the management and use of health codes, and caused serious adverse social impacts.”

However, many people believed that the removal and demotion of such officials was not enough. The investigation report evaded or did not explain many key questions. How did the officials of the Political and Legal Affairs Commission obtain the personal information of depositors of the rural bank? By what means did these officials arbitrarily assign a ‘red code’? Several comments said other regions had used similar methods to suppress dissent.

After the initial public outcry passed, officials still provided no solution to the problems related to the rural banks, and that led to the protests on July 10. The violent attack that day caused tens of thousands of comments on social media in a short period of time, before related topics were blocked.

On the evening of July 10, Zhengzhou police issued a notice to try to calm the anger of depositors. The notice said the police had arrested a group of financial crime suspects and frozen the funds involved in the case. Henan province’s financial regulator said it was speeding up the formulation of a resolution plan.

But the violence of the day and the relationship between the thugs and the police remain unexplained. Moreover, according to online posts, some protesters were forced by the authorities to sign “guarantee letters” and “letters of admonition,” promising not to participate in rallies.

Subsequent news reports and investigations revealed that the banks involved are controlled by a group called Xincaifu (New Fortune), which was deregistered in February. According to media reports, the amount involved in the case currently exceeds 39 billion yuan ($US5.8 billion), and the affected depositors number up to hundreds of thousands of people. Many of these depositors are not local residents of Henan, but conduct business through third-party internet platforms, often because rural banks offer higher interest rates.

Since 2011, according to a police investigation, the New Fortune group has controlled a number of village banks through various means, including by installing or manipulating bank executives, using internet platforms to sell financial products and attract depositors, illegally transferring funds, and setting up companies to delete data.

In an attempt to ease the dissatisfaction of depositors, the Henan Provincial Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission said it would gradually release funds to relevant depositors. The first batch of funds was to be released on July 15, covering customers who had deposited less than 50,000 yuan. The second batch of funds was be released on July 25, extending up to deposits worth 100,000 yuan.

The scandal is just one reflection of the ongoing pressure on China’s economy. In recent years, the real estate crisis has worsened local economic and government finances. Over the past two decades, the real estate market has grown into an important pillar of China’s economy and local fiscal revenue. In fact, the real estate industry accounts for about a quarter of China’s gross domestic product (GDP).

Since the beginning of the year, house prices have dropped sharply, falling by 8.8 percent in May and 7.2 percent in June. This will inevitably affect financial companies and the capital markets.

At the same time, attention has been drawn to unfinished housing projects in many regions, with more than 100 being halted across 50 cities, prompting thousands of homebuyers to protest and refuse to pay bank loans.

The continuing scandals in the fields of economy and finance have led many people to believe this is just the tip of the iceberg, with concerns about a domino effect. Economic issues, along with rising youth employment and social inequalities, remain among the hottest topics on the internet.

United Nations – Nippon Foundation Fellowship Program 2023

Application Deadline: 14th September 2022

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: International

To be Taken at (Organisation): Participating host institutions and the United Nations Headquarters in New York.

About the Fellowship: The United Nations – Nippon Foundation Fellowship provides Government officials and other mid-level professionals from developing States with advanced training on ocean affairs and the law of the sea, as well as related disciplines, including marine science in support of management frameworks. Fellows will learn about international legal frameworks, key issues and best practices in ocean affairs, become familiar with the work of the United Nations, and develop professional skills. Fellows will also conduct individual research, under academic supervision, and develop a written thesis on a topic selected by them.

Upon completion of the Fellowship, Fellows are expected to return to their home countries and use their in-depth knowledge and extended experience to assist in formulating comprehensive ocean policy and in implementing the legal regime set out in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and related instruments, including through designing, implementing and/or evaluating specific improvement projects.PDF

Type: Fellowship

Offered Since: 2004

Who is qualified to apply? Candidates must meet all the following criteria:

• You must be between the ages of 25 and 40;
• You must have successfully completed a first university degree, and demonstrate a capacity to undertake independent advanced academic research and study;
• You must be a mid-level professional from a national government organ of a developing State, or another governmental or non-governmental agency in such a State, which deals directly with ocean affairs issues, and your professional position must allow you to directly assist your nation in the formulation and/or implementation of policy in this area. This includes marine sciences and the science-policy linkage. Your “Nomination and Recommendation Form” should be completed by a Government official or other official who can attest to the nature of your work with respect to the Government’s ocean affairs and law of the sea related activities, and indicate how an Award would directly contribute to these activities;
• Your proposed research and study programme must contribute directly to your nation’s formulation and/or implementation of ocean affairs and law of the sea policies and programmes; and
• You must be free of all non-Fellowship obligations during the entire Fellowship period unless otherwise authorized by the Division.

Women candidates are strongly invited to apply, with a view to achieving gender balance in the selection process.

Selection Criteria: Satisfaction of the above criteria must be clearly demonstrated by the candidate through the application forms.

Number of Awards: 12

Value of Nippon Award: Fully-funded. Fellows will receive a stipend in accordance with the cost of living in the country in which he/she will be studying; travel costs and other support.

Programme Structure: The 9-month UN Nippon Fellowship Programme is composed of two consecutive phases which provide Fellows with advanced and customized research and training opportunities in their chose fields:

• Phase One: 3-month Research and Training, which is normally undertaken between March/April and June at DOALOS at the United Nations Headquarters in New York.
• Phase Two: 6-month Advanced Academic Research and Study, which is normally undertaken between July and December at one of the prestigious participating Host Institutions and under the guidance of subject matter expert(s) who have recognized in-depth expertise in the Fellows’ chosen field of study.

The deliverables of the Fellowship Programme are:

• A 100-page written thesis
• A presentation of the research
• An ocean governance matrix

In addition, a number of assignments will be completed in the context of the training curriculum delivered during phase one of the programme.

How to Apply: The Fellowship application package consists of the following forms. To apply, please complete these forms:

The Online Form

For further details on the curriculum of the programme, please see this documentPDF and for full details of the programme requirements, please see this documentPDF.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for Details

UK RAEng Enterprise Fellowships 2022

Application deadline:

5th September 2022 by 4pm

Tell Me About Award:

Enterprise Fellowships is a 12-month accelerator programme for creative and entrepreneurial engineers who have an impactful innovation ready to commercialise at the seed or pre-seed stage. Over the course of the year, we will equip you with the confidence, skills, experience and networks you need to bring your engineering product to market.  

What Type of Award is this?

Entrepreneurship

Who can apply?

Broadly speaking, we support: 

• Researchers wishing to spinout a company from a university 
• Recent graduates seeking to found a startup 
• International PhD students (already based in the UK) wanting to spinout or startup  

You meet our key eligibility criteria if: 

• The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of your solution is 4 or above 
• Equity investment in your business is less than 500,000 GBP 
• Your innovation is protectable and you own or co-own the IP 
• Within the founding team, you own the highest equity stake in the company 
• You are, or have the ambition to be, the CEO or COO of the business 
• For startups: you are not a student or otherwise employed during our programme  
• In addition for startups: you have completed your very first university degree by 1 July 2017 
• For spinouts: you are currently employed by the university 
• If relevant, your PhD viva will be held no later than 30 November 2022 

Which Countries are Eligible?

African countries

Where will Award be Taken?

Remote

How Many Positions will be Given?

Not specified

What is the Benefit of Award?

What we offer works – we have provided £9.2 million in grant funding to upskill over 150 Enterprise Fellows, who have gone on to create companies valued over £550 million. As a charity, we don’t take any equity, all we ask in return is your passion and determination to become part of the next generation of entrepreneurs. 

You will receive: 

• Up to £75,000 equity-free startup funding grant, 
• Expert business mentoring and coaching, 
• 15 days of business training, 
• Subscription to our Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Toolkit, 
• Access to our community of Hub Members, Academy Fellows, investors, industry experts and partners, 
• Flexible working space at the Taylor Centre, our physical hub, 
• Hub membership for life. 

How Long is the Program?

12 months

How to Apply for Program?

Apply here 5 September 2022, 4pm >>

Visit Award Webpage for Details