17 Dec 2022

Department of Energy announces successful nuclear fusion ignition

Bryan Dyne & Don Barrett


On Tuesday, a joint press release from the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the department’s National Nuclear Security Administration announced that scientists at the National Ignition Facility (NIF) have achieved a controlled nuclear fusion reaction which resulted in a net energy gain. Data from the facility show that 2.05 megajoules (Mj) of input energy—just under 0.6 kilowatt hours—was used to produce 3.15 Mj of output fusion energy.

Preamplifiers at the National Ignition Facility that are used to begin generating the energy required by the facility's lasers to initiate nuclear fusion. [Photo: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory]

To produce the results, nuclear physicists at the NIF used 192 spherically arranged lasers aimed at a half-centimeter target vessel containing deuterium and tritium, two heavy variants of the element hydrogen. An extremely brief and powerful pulse of light from the lasers is channeled by the target to produce a symmetrical explosion about the inner hydrogen fuel, imploding and heating it to the extreme conditions where nuclear fusion takes place.

This process, of “burning” hydrogen into helium, powers stars like our Sun over billions of years, but the NIF produces fusion conditions for only 100 trillionths of a second: it reaches temperatures and pressures 10 times higher than those at the center of the Sun to fuse a significant amount of its fuel during that instant, forcing an implosion of the material that ignites the material and starts nuclear fusion, the process through which the Sun and all stars shine.

The achievement is what is known as scientific breakeven, when the energy produced by the implosion is equal to or greater than the energy transferred to the capsule.

The announcement marks one of the major milestones since the NIF was established in 1997. It was developed as an arm of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to study a method of achieving nuclear fusion, known as inertial confinement fusion. Construction was completed in 2009 and NIF has been performing experiments ever since, leading up to this week’s results.

One of the major difficulties of inertial confinement fusion is that the lasers must hit the target in an exactly spherically symmetrical pattern, otherwise the precise implosion needed to produce fusion either will not occur or will only produce small amounts of energy. As recently as 2018, the NIF was only capable of producing 54 kilojoules of energy, 58 times less than the most recent results.

A major breakthrough was achieved last year when the scientists developed new techniques to more fully master the symmetries and asymmetries of the system, resulting in an energy yield 25 times greater than the results from 2018. While they at the time had yet to achieve scientific breakeven, the researchers reached 70 percent of that goal. The announcement Tuesday is a further refinement of what was developed last year.

Technicians and engineers performing repairs inside the chamber where the target capsule of deuterium and tritium is hit by 192 lasers, igniting nuclear fusion. [Photo: US Department of Energy]

And while scientific breakeven is an important success in the pursuit of controlled nuclear fusion, it is not yet the panacea of clean and abundant energy that will help abate and reverse climate change being presented in the corporate media. There is still a great deal of work to reach what is known as engineering breakeven. The main problem is that the lasers used by the NIF are inefficient. Only about 0.5 percent of the total energy powering the lasers is actually delivered to the target to kindle nuclear fusion.

In other words, the energy output needed to really start considering inertial confinement fusion as a power source for industrial, commercial and residential use needs to be more than 240 times what was reported on Tuesday. And that does not include the further efficiency considerations surrounding somehow converting the energy produced into electricity.

Inertial confinement is not generally considered the method upon which a nuclear fusion power plant will be based. The more likely strategy is a tokamak reactor, a word coined by Soviet scientist Igor Golovin in 1957 and which stands for either toroidal chamber with magnetic coils or toroidal chamber with axial magnetic field, depending on the Russian transliteration. The concept uses magnetic fields to confine and compress super-hot plasma into a toroidal (donut-like) shape.

Dozens of tokamak reactors have been built since they were first theorized in the 1950s, each generation built on engineering and physical insights gathered with the previous ones. The drive has been toward larger tokamaks, necessary to increase their efficiency in the drive towards scientific breakeven. But the costs of each generation have been sharply higher. The most successful previous tokamak was the nearly half-billion dollar Joint European Torus (JET), which first operated in 1983 and which still is used in fusion studies. Its most successful experiment occurred just last year, in which it achieved a five second operation producing about one-third the output of scientific breakeven.

The roughly $20 billion tokamak ITER, which is expected to start operations sometime in the next three years, is expected to have a minimum of a six-fold gain in energy production over the NIF result. ITER is an international collaboration that has been in development since 1979 and includes personnel and funding from China, the European Union, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the United States. The project has been compared to the Large Hadron Collider and the International Space Station in cost, scale, complexity and ambition.

The successor to ITER, “DEMO,” is already under discussion, but the international collaboration which continues in ITER has largely fallen apart under the developing world crisis and the competitive advantages for a nation-state which was able to hold the details of a functional demonstration unit closely. Given that the National Academy of Sciences outlined in 2019 a strategy for continuing development through “private-sector ventures,” future costs and timescales are now subordinate to the capitalist system, not driven by scientific planning.

There is also deeply a militaristic aspect to the research at the NIF as compared to tokamak reactors. Nuclear fusion on a vast scale by implosion was achieved in 1952 after President Harry Truman ordered the development of the hydrogen bomb in response to the first atomic bomb test by the Soviet Union in 1949. The only way to achieve the necessary physical conditions to achieve fusion was to use a nuclear fission bomb of the sort dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 to start the fusion reaction and cause a thermonuclear detonation.

The first full-scale test of such a device was the test “Ivy Mike,” a 10.4 megaton explosion. Since then, uncontrolled nuclear fusion has been the basis of every fusion nuclear weapon developed.

The mushroom cloud from the world’s first test of a thermonuclear device, dubbed Ivy Mike, over Enewetak Atoll in the Marshall Islands on November 1, 1952. (AP Photo/Los Alamos National Laboratory) [AP Photo/Los Alamos National Laboratory]

Further research into and production of these weapons was the reason the Lawrence Livermore facility was established in the first place. Throughout the Cold War, it played a key role in developing myriad nuclear weapons, a role which continues today. The laboratory is also used to maintain and refurbish the nuclear stockpile of the US military.

Alongside this, LLNL conducts a great deal of research into the physical properties of plutonium in order to make better fission bombs to ignite fusion warheads. One such avenue uses the laser array that generates fusion energy to implode plutonium. It is a way to study and refine atomic explosions without detonating nuclear weapons, which is prohibited by numerous international treaties.

Turkish presidential hopeful sentenced to prison

Ulaş Ateşçi


A local court has sentenced Istanbul Metropolitan Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu of the Kemalist Republican People’s Party (CHP) to 2 years, 7 months and 15 days in prison and a political ban, for allegedly “insulting” public officials.

Ekrem İmamoğlu, Mayor of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality [Photo: VOA]

The prosecutor found the sentence insufficient and immediately appealed to a higher court. If the verdict is confirmed, İmamoğlu will lose his office and may not be able to run in the 2023 presidential elections. For the verdict to become final, it must be approved by higher courts.

The antidemocratic character of “defamation” cases and “political ban” decisions in Turkey is clear, and the interference of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government in İmamoğlu’s case is undeniable. Shortly before the verdict, the judge of the court was replaced; the daily Cumhuriyet published a photo of the new judge with an AKP (Justice and Development Party) executive. It was also revealed that the prosecutor is a nephew of an AKP mayor.

The Socialist Equality Group (SEG) in Turkey condemns this decision, a product of pressure from the Erdoğan government, as an obvious attack on basic democratic rights. However, our principled opposition to this decision and to Erdoğan’s police state measures in no way diminishes our opposition to the bourgeois opposition parties led by the CHP.

The conviction of İmamoğlu, a major potential rival of Erdoğan, comes as Turkey moves towards presidential and parliamentary elections in 2023 amid a deepening economic, social and geopolitical crisis.

Erdoğan, at odds with his NATO allies over the war against Russia in Ukraine, has already announced a new ground invasion against US-backed Kurdish nationalist forces in Syria—an operation backed by CHP and its official allies. Moreover, last week Erdoğan further escalated tensions with Greece by stressing that Turkey’s newly developed ballistic missiles (“Tayfun”) could hit Athens.

The government’s aim to suppress growing class tensions amid an unprecedented rise in the cost of living plays a critical role in its escalation of nationalism, militarism and police state measures. This week, workers at the Bekaert steel plant in Kocaeli went on a wildcat strike, defying Erdoğan’s presidential ban on strike action on the grounds of that it is “threat to national security.” Indeed, preventing an explosion of working class opposition is as much a concern of the bourgeois opposition as it is of the Erdoğan government.

The origins of the İmamoğlu case date back to 2019. Speaking in France that year, Imamoğlu accused the government of using public resources for its own benefit in local elections and stated that they “wanted to win the election in Istanbul by having it canceled by a Supreme Electoral Council (YSK) decision.”

As the candidate of the Nation Alliance, a coalition of the far-right Good Party and the CHP, İmamoğlu narrowly defeated his rival from Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) in local elections held on March 31, 2019. After the YSK, pressured by the AKP, ordered a re-vote of the elections, İmamoğlu won a landslide victory, raising his margin of victory from 13,000 to 800,000.

Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu targeted İmamoğlu upon his remarks in France, stating: “I am telling the fool who went to the European Parliament and complained about Turkey. This nation will make you pay for this.”

İmamoğlu responded to Soylu by saying: “Those who canceled the elections on March 31st are fools, let him focus on that first.”

A lawsuit was thereupon filed against İmamoğlu with the demand for imprisonment and political ban on the grounds that he called the members of the YSK “fools.” İmamoğlu argued that he did not mean YSK members and that he was responding to Soylu.

On Wednesday, shortly before the verdict was announced, İmamoğlu called on voters to gather in Saraçhane, where the Istanbul municipal building is located. “Istanbul and Turkey will protect its will today, just as it has protected its will before,” he declared. At the rally held after the verdict, Imamoğlu was joined on the platform by Good Party leader Meral Akşener, as well as leaders of pseudo-left groups such as Labour Party (EMEP) and the Workers’ Party of Turkey (TİP). They rallied behind the CHP in 2019 local elections.

Declaring the ruling “null and void,” İmamoğlu pointed to the presidential elections, saying: “We have hopes for 2023. In order to carry our nation to brighter days, we will defeat the mentality that is trying to damage this country in the elections in 2023. We succeeded in Istanbul, we will succeed in Turkey.”

On Thursday, in the same place, a rally titled “The nation is claiming its will” was called jointly by the bourgeois opposition (the “Table of Six,” a new name for the CHP-led Nation Alliance). Beyond İmamoğlu, CHP leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, Good Party leader Akşener, Erdoğan’s former top leaders Ali Babacan (DEVA) and Ahmet Davutoğlu (Future Party), as well as representatives of the Islamist Felicity Party and the Democrat Party attended and spoke. Istanbul police put the number of people attending at 25,000, while Istanbul municipality claimed over 200,000 attended.

Declaring that Turkey is at a “crossroads,” İmamoğlu signaled his presidential candidacy in 2023, stating: “We have to make a choice between those who accept the sovereignty of the nation and those who have an allergy against the national will. For this, I will be the most hardworking member of the ‘Table of Six.’”

He also added, “I am not scared of them and the null-and-void decisions they dictate. I have no judges, prosecutors or courts to rely upon. I have you behind me. I have the patriotic leaders of this table and the alliance of Turkey they established … Believe me, 2023 will be very beautiful.”

These claims, supported by numerous pseudo-left organizations, have nothing to do with reality. İmamoğlu, like the “Table of Six” as a whole, does not represent a “progressive” alternative to the reactionary Erdoğan regime, but a right-wing rival. This is summarized by the fact that the alliance includes two parties that broke away from the AKP; the Good Party, which broke away from the far-right Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), an ally of Erdoğan; and the Islamist Felicity Party, from which the AKP emerged.

This alliance speaks for a rival pro-NATO faction of the Turkish ruling class and is as incapable as the Erdoğan government of solving the fundamental social and democratic problems facing the masses of workers and youth.

The political and media establishment in the US and Europe condemned the conviction. US State Department spokesman Ned Price said Washington regretted and was disappointed by the ruling, while the German Bild and the British Independent referred to İmamoglu as Erdogan’s main rival without hiding their sympathy for him.

It is a sheer hypocrisy for the US-led NATO powers and the pliant media they control to talk about “democracy.” NATO, which has been waging wars in the Middle East for thirty years with the complicity of the Turkish and Kurdish ruling class, destroying entire societies, are now threatening all of humanity with a nuclear annihilation through their proxy war with Russia in Ukraine. Moreover, these powers have been ardent defenders of the Erdoğan government for many years.

For some time they have supported the bourgeois faction opposing Erdoğan, mainly because of growing conflicts with Ankara on geopolitical issues, including the war with Russia.

Significantly, CHP leader Kılıçdaroğlu recently visited Washington, London and Berlin and met with powerful political and financial figures. The “Vision” program recently announced by the CHP was almost a repetition of the projects of TÜSİAD, Turkey’s main business confederation. The Table of Six’s newly prepared draft “constitution” still ignores fundamental democratic and social problems—especially the Kurdish question—facing millions of working people in Turkey.

Both Erdoğan and the CHP have a long history of attacking basic democratic rights and using the judiciary against its opponents. By backing Erdoğan’s proposal to lift parliamentary immunity of deputies from the Kurdish nationalist Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), the CHP paved the way for their imprisonment. Moreover, after the 2019 local elections, the CHP and its allies were largely silent as many HDP or Kurdish Democratic Regions Party (DBP) mayors elected in Kurdish provinces were undemocratically removed from office by the government.

Former HDP co-chair Selahattin Demirtaş, who has been in prison for six years thanks to CHP complicity, made a statement on the verdict, referring to the CHP’s dirty role in their imprisonment. He, however, again declared: “It is not too late. Now is the time to resist together and win together.”

Prime Minister Bainimarama under challenge in contentious Fijian election

John Braddock


Incumbent Fijian Prime Minister and former military coup leader Frank Bainimarama is fighting off a strong challenge in the South Pacific island country’s general election, which concluded on Wednesday. Final results are not due to be announced until Sunday, and official figures are only slowly being publicly released.

Fiji prime minister and FijiFirst leader Frank Bainimarama addressing climate conference in 2017. [Photo by Flickr/James Dowson / CC BY-NC-SA 2.5]

On Saturday morning, the Peoples Alliance Party (PAP) of another former coup leader and ex-prime minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, was running a close second to Bainimarama’s Fiji First Party (FFP). With votes from 717 of 2,071 polling stations officially validated, Fiji First was sitting on 40.2 percent of votes with the PAP at 36.9 percent.

Rabuka may be well placed for any horse-trading to form a coalition government. The PAP has campaigned throughout with the National Federation Party (NFP), currently third on 8.1 percent.  They are followed by the FFP-aligned Social Democratic Liberal Party (SODELPA) on 5.9 percent. Meanwhile, the Fiji Labour Party, which governed twice in 1987 and 1999, is below the 5 percent threshold required to win a seat, along with six other parties.

The credibility of the counting process has been seriously questioned after the official election app crashed on Wednesday night, only to reappear later with the figures reversed in favour of Fiji First.

Rabuka declared he had no confidence in the count and along with other opposition parties called for it to be halted. Rabuka said he would complain to the Supervisor of Elections, the Army Commander and Office of the President. He said his PAP would do “everything according to the law” and people should “remain calm.”

Nevertheless, involving the army commander raises the possibility of military intervention. The 2013 Constitution gives the commander a broad mandate to ensure the “safety and security of the country.” Commander Major General Ro Jone Kalouniwai told Radio New Zealand on Friday that he had rejected Rabuka’s request and the military would “respect” the electoral process. Rabuka was later taken in by the police and questioned over his comments.

Fears of anti-democratic manoeuvres, including another coup, have been near the surface throughout the campaign. Rabuka earlier claimed Bainimarama would try to use the courts to hang on to power if he lost. Bainimarama told an Australian Special Broadcasting Service journalist that “of course” he would respect the outcome, but he has previously been evasive over whether he would surrender office.

Fiji elections are “democratic” in name only. Fiji, an archipelago of more than 330 islands with a population of just over 900,000, has had four coups since formal independence in 1970. That is largely a legacy of British colonial policies that restricted the economic activities of indigenous Fijians while bringing thousands of indentured laborers from India. As in the 2018 poll, the election has been a contest between two parties run by former coup leaders and military strongmen. Rabuka led two coups in 1987, while Bainimarama seized power in 2006 before “legitimising” his rule with a bogus election in 2014.

Successive regimes, resting on the military, have been authoritarian and anti-working class. Harsh austerity measures that have heightened social inequality and misery have been accompanied by repressive laws, media censorship and violence by the police and military.

The final weeks of the campaign were dominated by accusations the government was taking extraordinary measures to intimidate opposition parties. Prominent Indo-Fijian lawyer Richard Naidu was found guilty of contempt of court, following a charge brought by Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, for pointing out a spelling mistake in a court document. Naidu now faces the possibility of jail.

Days out from polling, two PAP deputy leaders, Daniel Lobendahn and Lynda Tabuya, were arrested on charges by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption over allegations of vote buying. The pair strenuously denied the allegations, which were purportedly connected with soliciting funds during a “Rock the Vote” campaign earlier this year. Rabuka denounced the arrests as an attempt to derail the PAP’s election campaign and “muzzle candidates.”

The election was marked by widespread voter abstention, indicating significant alienation from the official political set-up. From 692,000 registered voters, a turnout rate of just 51 percent was reported an hour before the polls closed on Wednesday, a sharp decline from 73.3 percent in 2018. Many young people aged under 40, who for the first time made up the majority of possible voters, stayed away.

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation reported that cost of living issues were “front and centre” for many voters. Two Fijian seasonal workers in Australia told an interviewer: “Our family back home have been complaining about the high food prices. Everything has been skyrocketing.” They added: “There is no money, no work. The unemployment rate is very high and everything is going up.”

Such sentiments were suppressed by the major parties. The FFP ran a fraudulent campaign, claiming an eight-year record of “growth and prosperity” and featuring vague plans for the economy, education, agriculture, health care and infrastructure. The PAP manifesto promised amendments to the Constitution, wiping out tertiary education debts for students, reinstating the privileged Great Council of Chiefs, and repealing “all decrees that suppress basic human rights.”

Fiji First warned that Indo-Fijians could face renewed persecution if Rabuka was victorious, saying he wanted to introduce discriminatory laws favouring ethnic Fijians. Rabuka has publicly apologised for his coups and declared Indo-Fijians will be treated fairly by the PAP. Rabuka quit SODELPA two years ago to form the PAP and is also in electoral alliance with the NFP, which represents the interests of the ethnic Indian business elite.

Among the working class and rural poor, a social catastrophe has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The poverty rate was nearly 30 percent in 2020, but half the population is now estimated to be struggling to put food on the table. Youth unemployment has increased since 2002, escalating from 15.6 percent in 2019 to 18.06 in 2021.

The overall unemployment rate, which hovered around 6 percent before COVID hit, increased to 35 percent. The tourism industry, the main foreign exchange earner, collapsed with the loss of 100,000 jobs. Half the country’s population experienced financial hardship and food shortages.

For a considerable period during the COVID outbreak the country’s vaccination program proved inadequate and the health system faced collapse. Bainimarama refused to implement a nationwide lockdown to control the escalating numbers, saying it would “destroy” the economy. With another COVID surge emerging, the country has recorded 68,553 COVID cases and 878 deaths.

The Economy Ministry has predicted a recovery with GDP growth of 11.3 percent for 2022. However, this follows three years of economic decline, including the largest contraction of 17.2 percent in 2020. Total debt is 88.6 percent of GDP. In line with global trends, Fiji faces escalating inflation, currently 5.2 percent.

The regional imperialist powers, Australia and New Zealand, along with Washington, are watching the situation closely. The Australian Strategic Policy Institute warned in the Strategist on December 7 that Australia “must be prepared for an undemocratic outcome in Fiji’s election.” Canberra, however, has never been concerned about “democracy” in Fiji but with its own geo-strategic interests

Fiji is pivotal in the escalating US-led geo-strategic confrontations in the Southwest Pacific against China. Over the past year, Bainimarama has played a key role in orienting Fiji and other Pacific countries to line up with the US. As chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, he was instrumental in arranging a presentation by US Vice President Kamala Harris to the organisation’s summit in July, from which China was excluded.

With Bainimarama emerging as a key ally, signing military agreements with both Australia and New Zealand and supporting the US over the Ukraine, Washington has earmarked Fiji as one of the main “hubs” of its upgraded engagement in the region. Should Rabuka take office, he will come under immense pressure to fully comply.

The imperialist powers prepare for World War III: US, Japan, Germany plan record military spending

Andre Damon


Over the past week, the United States, Germany, and Japan, three of the principal combatants in the last world war, moved to approve their largest military budgets since World War II, each marking a major escalation in their preparations for military conflict with Russia and China.

On Thursday, the US Senate voted overwhelmingly to approve an $858 billion National Defense Authorization Bill that is $45 billion larger than that requested by the White House, which was in turn larger than the request by the Pentagon.

Two US Air Force B-1B bombers, top center, South Korean Air Force F-35 fighter jets and US Air Force F-16 fighter jets, bottom left, fly over South Korea Peninsula during a joint air drill in South Korea, Saturday, Nov. 19, 2022. [AP Photo/South Korean Defense Ministry via AP]

The budget marks an eight percent increase over last year and a 30 percent increase in military spending over the 2016 Pentagon budget. The massive surge in military spending comes as the typical US household had its real income fall by three percent in the past 12 months.

The overwhelming majority of the American population was not informed that the measure was being debated or voted on. Neither the passage of the record-setting budget through the House of Representatives or Senate this week was reported on the evening cable news.

The bill increases funding for every single military department and weapons program. The US Navy will get $32 billion for new warships, including three Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and two Virginia-class submarines. And the Pentagon is authorized to purchase a further 36 F-35 aircraft, each costing approximately $89 million.

Members of Congress did not even bother hiding the fact that the central purpose of the bill was to prepare for what they called “a future conflict with China” and the ongoing US-led proxy war against Russia.

“This year’s NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act] takes concrete steps towards preparing for a future conflict with China by investing in American hard power, strengthening American posture in the Indo-Pacific, and supporting our allies,” Wisconsin Republican Representative Mike Gallagher said.

The US NDAA would upend the US’s decades-old One China policy in relation to China by providing $10 billion in direct military funding to Taiwan for the first time. The bill would also institute no-bid contracting, typically only used in wartime, allowing defense contractors to charge the US government whatever they want.

The bill transforms Taiwan into a frontline proxy for conflict with China, in a manner similar to how Ukraine is serving as a US proxy for war with Russia. In a press statement, Gallagher praised the fact that the bill “Provides similar drawdown authority to arm Taiwan as we have Ukraine.”

On Friday, just one day later, the Japanese government unveiled a new national defense strategy that would double the country’s military budget and transform its military into an offensive fighting force. For the first time, Japan would procure long-range missiles capable of striking China in an offensive strike.

The strategy openly defies Japan’s constitution, which declares that “land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be sustained.”

The Japanese population is overwhelmingly opposed to military rearmament, stemming from  popular horror both at the crimes committed by Japanese imperialism throughout Asia, and at the devastating toll the war with the United States took on the Japanese population.

The Japanese imperial government oversaw the murder of millions of people through massacres, starvation and forced labor. In China alone, which was invaded by Japan, it is estimated that between 10 and 25 million civilians died in the war. During its war in the Pacific, the United States and its allies killed over one million Japanese civilians, including in the fire-bombing of Tokyo and the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

On Wednesday, the budget committee of the German parliament voted to approve the purchase of nuclear-capable F35 aircraft from the United States. While Germany does not have nuclear weapons of its own, as a member of NATO it participates in nuclear weapon sharing with the United States, and US nuclear weapons are stationed in Germany.

The purchase of the F-35 fighters is part of a $100 billion spending package passed through the German parliament earlier this year, which more than doubles previous German military spending.

As in Japan, there is broad popular opposition in Germany to military rearmament as a result of the horrendous crimes of German imperialism in the Second World War. The Nazis murdered six million European Jews in the Holocaust and millions of other European civilians, laying waste to large portions of the continent. German imperialism is also responsible for the murder of as many as 19 million civilians in the Soviet Union against which it conducted a brutal “war of annihilation.”

Both the First and Second World Wars were preceded by years of military spending increases in a massive global arms race. During the Nuremberg tribunal, a key pillar of the case against the leaders of Nazi Germany was that they facilitated a years-long military build-up in preparation for waging aggressive war.

Now, too, both Germany and Japan are making preparations for wars that risk consequences for their populations as devastating as those of the Second World War.

In June, NATO published a strategy document declaring that the alliance, which includes Germany, must prepare “for high-intensity, multi-domain warfighting against nuclear-armed peer-competitors” including Russia and China.

The United States, Germany, Japan and other imperialist powers are preparing for a new imperialist world war. Their targets are Russia and China: two countries that, for many decades, were excluded from direct exploitation by imperialism as a result of the Russian and Chinese revolutions. They remained outside the direct control of imperialism even after the Stalinist restoration of capitalism. But while the primary targets of the imperialist war drive are now Russia and China, the logic of inter-imperialist rivalries will inevitably lead to the reemergence of open and bitter conflicts among the temporary allies of today.

The war in Ukraine, instigated, provoked and prolonged by the United States, has become the catalyst for this new global redivision of the world. That war is only intensifying, with US officials now openly discussing Ukraine’s stated goal of retaking Crimea – a move that threatens nuclear retaliation by Russia.

In an interview this week with the Economist, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky doubled down on his declaration that Ukraine’s aim is to retake Crimea, which was annexed by Russia in 2014. Asked what “price would be too high” for Ukraine to advance “to the 1991 borders,” Zelensky made clear that his aim was to fully retake the peninsula, no matter the cost.

16 Dec 2022

Nationwide crackdown on “Last Generation” climate activists in Germany

Ulrich Rippert


On Tuesday morning, heavily armed police units searched the homes of 11 members of the climate activist group “Last Generation” in a nationwide raid. The public prosecutor’s office in Neuruppin, Brandenburg, had ordered the house searches.

Chief public prosecutor Cyrill Klement announced that the investigations were being conducted by the political department of his office, on “suspicion of forming or supporting a criminal organisation, disrupting public services, trespassing and coercion.”

Carla Hinrichs of the “Uprising of the Last Generation” is carried away during a blockade of the A100 in Berlin in February 2022. [Photo by Stefan Müller / wikimedia / CC BY 2.0]

The background to the investigation is apparently several protest actions by the climate activists against the Brandenburg oil refinery PCK Schwedt in the spring of this year. At that time, members of the group had, among other things, turned off emergency valves of a crude oil pipeline leading from Rostock to Schwedt. The action only temporarily interrupted operations but did not harm anyone. It was a form of civil disobedience, but not a criminal offence.

The police action took place only a few days after the large-scale raid against a comprehensive right-wing terrorist network of the so-called Reichsbürger, which reaches deep into the German armed forces, the state security apparatus, and social elites.

The house raids on climate activists are intended to criminalise peaceful protest and distract from the extent of the fascist threat in Germany. They show that the tightening of internal security laws is not directed against the right, but against oppositional youth and workers. Peaceful protest, civil disobedience and other forms of resistance are to be criminalised and intimidated.

Carla Hinrichs, one of the spokespersons for the climate protest group, confirmed that her flat, among others, was searched. At a spontaneous demonstration in Berlin-Kreuzberg on Tuesday evening, she said it was already “very scary when the police ransack your wardrobe.” It frightened her, but she would not be intimidated by it, she said. “What I cannot accept is that our government is trying to silence us,” Hinrichs told the dpa press agency. “The criminalisation of peaceful protest is an attack on all of us,” she stressed.

In contrast, the parliamentary domestic policy spokesperson of the Greens and former police officer Irene Mihalic said about the raid against the climate activists: “We take the accusations made very seriously, and they must be fully investigated. The responsible public prosecutor’s office and the police must now investigate accordingly. We will certainly also deal with the issue in the [parliamentary] Domestic Affairs Committee at an appropriate time.”

The action against the “Last Generation” group is reminiscent of conditions in the Weimar Republic in the 1920s, when the judiciary ruthlessly prosecuted opponents of war such as Carl von Ossietzky and communists. At the same time, right-wing perpetrators of violence and Nazis—such as the murderers of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht, and Hitler after the failed putsch of 1923—were spared or received petty sentences.

Paragraph 129 of the German Criminal Code, on which the prosecution of the climate activists is being based, stands in this tradition. From 1871 to 1945, it was directed against any “association hostile to the state.” Under Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, it was used to persecute social democrats in the 19th century and, after the First World War, the German Communist Party (KPD). In the 1950s, KPD members who only a few years earlier had been released from the Nazi concentration camps were again confronted with this paragraph. It was used in the 1950s and 1960s to prosecute opponents of rearmament and actual or alleged supporters of the KPD, which was banned in 1956.

Legally, the investigations against the climate activists are baseless. Legal Tribune Online quotes Tübingen constitutional law professor Jochen von Bernstorff saying that even “disruptive forms of protest are generally protected by the fundamental right to freedom of assembly.” Von Bernstorff points out that the debate is not new. He recalls the sit-ins against nuclear reprocessing and final storage sites in the 1980s and protests in front of US barracks against nuclear rearmament in the so-called hot autumn of 1983.

At that time, leading intellectuals such as the writers Heinrich Böll, Günter Grass, Walter Jens, the theologian Helmut Gollwitzer and Otto Schily (who later became SPD interior minister) took part in sit-ins against the NATO Double-Track Decision, which contained a threat to deploy more medium-range nuclear weapons in Western Europe.

But since then, criminal law has been systematically tightened. As early as 1976, Paragraph 129 was supplemented by Paragraph 129a, which makes the formation, membership, and support of a “terrorist organisation” as well as promoting it a punishable offence. Terrorist attacks by the Red Army Faction (RAF) and the 2nd June Movement served as justification.

Implementing regulations of the Criminal Procedure Code associated with section 129a represent an unprecedented encroachment on the democratic rights of defendants and defence lawyers. They allow pre-trial detention on mere suspicion, restrict visiting and postal traffic of detainees, allow control of postal traffic between defence counsel and clients, and prohibit defence counsel from representing several defendants at the same time.

Solitary confinement can be imposed after a conviction under section 129a, which violates the United Nations Convention on Human Rights and has earned Germany multiple complaints from Amnesty International, the UN Human Rights Committee and the European Parliament. In addition, section 129a offers the possibility of extensive police surveillance and the elimination of data protection regulations.

The more fiercely popular resistance to war, inflation and social devastation develops, the more the powers of a police state are being heightened. In Bavaria at the beginning of November, the police put 12 climate activists in preventive detention because they had glued themselves to the Stachus square in the city centre and obstructed traffic for an hour and a half. This Tuesday, coinciding with the raids, Bavarian judges confirmed the weeks of preventive detention.

The actions against “Last Generation” clearly show the ruthlessness with which those in power will act against any resistance that really threatens their interests. “Last Generation” advocates extremely limited political demands that do not challenge the capitalist profit system, the cause of environmental destruction—calling for a general speed limit of 100 kilometres per hour on motorways, a law against food waste, a €9 ticket covering local and regional travel.

The group does not address itself to working people, who are most affected by the devastating consequences of climate change, but to governments. It seeks to put them under pressure with spectacular protest actions that are meant to attract as much media attention as possible. Its demands explicitly include a discussion with the federal government.

The group was formed a year ago when activists staged a hunger strike in Berlin’s government quarter during the federal election. It demanded talks with the three candidates for chancellor from the Christian Democrats (CDU), Social Democrats (SPD) and Greens and “immediate measures against the climate crisis.”

Since then, “Last Generation” has networked with similar groups in other countries, which, in addition to street blockades, also carry out spectacular attacks on works of art and other precious objects. As the WSWS pointed out in an earlier article, such actions are “misguided and reactionary in several respects.”

Criticism of the methods of “Last Generation,” which spring from a combination of despair at the devastating scale of the climate crisis and misguided politics, does not, however, justify persecution by the state. On the contrary, the group’s democratic right to freedom of expression and protest must be vigorously defended.

Tens of thousands of UK National Health Service nurses strike for first time

Robert Stevens


Tens of thousands of nurses began two days of strikes on Monday. It is the first mass strike by nurses in Britain for over 100 years and the first ever in the National Health Service.

Nurses walked out at 76 hospitals and health centres for 12 hours from 8am to 8pm across the NHS in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The second strike takes place December 20. Nurses and supporters flooded pickets lines in many parts of the country. At the Royal Victoria Infirmary in Newcastle, the picket was more than 100 strong.

National Health Service nurses took strike action across the UK on Thursday. They will hold another strike on December 20. The nurses walked out to demand a pay increase of 19 percent. WSWS reporters spoke to some of the nurses on picket lines about the issues in the dispute.

The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) members are demanding a pay increase of almost 20 percent—inflation, based on the current RPI measure (14.2 percent), plus 5 percent. The government awarded one million NHS staff employed under its Agenda for Change contracts a uniform £1,400 backdated from last April—just 4 percent on average to health workers. UK nurses are paid less than in most European Union countries, the US and Australia.

The nurses’ strike is the most politically significant of a wave of strikes across the public and private sectors that began in the summer.

The strike was provoked by the Conservative government, which wants the defeat of nurses to further its plans to destroy much of the NHS and hive the most profitable sectors off to the private sector—depriving millions of workers of life-saving services built up over 70 years. Their plans to crush the NHS workers, numerically the largest section of the working class with massive popular support, includes mobilising hundreds of soldiers to run ambulance services.

Years of systematic underfunding, with £400 billion required just to plug cuts over the last decade, have left the NHS chronically under-resourced and understaffed. The government’s “let it rip” COVID policy, responsible for the deaths of over 212,000 people, resulted in the deaths of over 1,500 health and social care workers.

  • Hundreds are still dying of COVID weekly with infections in the week to November 21 rising to over a million once again. This threatens, along with increases in flu and RSV cases, a “tripledemic” this winter amid a marked increase in the number of deaths of children from Strep A bacteria.
  • NHS waiting lists have risen from around 5 million at the start of the pandemic to over 7.2 million today.
  • According to a study by the Guardian, NHS vacancies in England alone “have risen to a new record high with more than 133,000 full-time equivalent (FTE) posts unfilled.”

The strike went ahead after Conservative government Health Secretary Steve Barclay refused to even discuss the pay claim during talks on Monday with RCN leader Pat Cullen. Cullen pleaded that the strikes did not need to go ahead, after signaling the RCN would accept a below inflation pay deal. Today, the government even rejected calls for the NHS’s pay review body to update its recommendation for nurses given the surging inflation rate since February.

Workers throughout the public and private sectors are already engaged in determined struggle against the government and employers in ongoing national strikes in the rail, postal and university sectors. Hundreds of thousands more are being balloted to strike. Mass popular support for the nurses means that their action has the potential to galvanise and unite the many disparate struggles of workers that are being isolated by a trade union bureaucracy doing everything to end the strike wave.

Striking postal workers from Wolverhampton Mail Centre, West Midlands, protest at this week's national rally in London [Photo: WSWS]

In this fight, workers are up against not just the Tories but every institution of the capitalist state. They confront enemies just as bitter as the Tory government on the opposition Labour benches. This week Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer, who has repeatedly denounced strikes and banned his front bench from attending picket lines, attacked the pay claim of the nurses as “unaffordable”, with Shadow Health Secretary Wes Streeting ranting in the pro-Tory Sunday Telegraph that in office Labour would fight what he described as a “something-for-nothing culture in the NHS”.

The following day Streeting addressed parliament, acknowledging the offer by the RCN and Unison to “call off strikes this week” if the government was “willing to negotiate with them seriously on pay” and asked, “what on earth are they [the government] playing at?”

The union bureaucracy is desperate to ensure that workers are driven into the dead-end of support for Starmer’s “proud to be pro-business” party. This week the Labour-supporting Mirror newspaper hosted a meeting of seven union leaders involved in disputes, including Cullen. It reported, “The summit… called on Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer to be ‘more vocal’ when it came to the strikes.”

This is a transparent fraud. Labour, described by Starmer as “the party of NATO”, agrees with the Tories that Britain’s major role in the war against Russia in Ukraine, and plans to confront China, mean that the ruling elite can no longer tolerate the spending of hundreds of billions of pounds on public health care, education, housing and welfare benefits. Only a few months ago, the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think-tank said of a Tory pledge to spend £150 billion more on the military in the next eight years that it would mark “the end of the peace dividend.”

It complained that “Since the mid-1950s, the UK has been able to fund the growing share of its national income devoted to the NHS and state pensions through cuts in the GDP share spent on defence.” That was no longer possible.

The same agenda of looting public spending is being carried out in every major capitalist country, fueling an escalation of the class struggle.

German states strike mask requirements in public transportation

Tamino Dreisam


In Germany more than 100 people are dying daily from COVID-19, clinics are at capacity and a winter storm of coronavirus is brewing. In spite of this, German state governments are striking down the last protective measures against the unchecked spread of the virus.

Last Monday, federal and state health ministers met to conclude a common approach to mask requirements on public transportation. When those meeting failed to reach a consensus, several state governments unilaterally lifted the mask requirement on mass transit. Others announced their intention to soon follow suit.

A packed BVG bus in Berlin, Germany. [Photo: WSWS]

On Thursday, Saxony-Anhalt lifted the mask requirement, as did Bavaria on Saturday. Bavarian Health Minister Klaus Holetschek (Christian Social Union, CSU) justified this by saying that the mask requirement was “no longer proportionate.”

The state government of Schleswig-Holstein announced that it would let the mask mandate expire at year’s end. The majority of federal states declared that they would extend the mask requirement until the end of the year, but not what would happen after that. There are many indications that other states will soon follow the example of Bavaria, Saxony-Anhalt and Schleswig-Holstein. The state coalition government in Bremen (Social Democrats-SPD, Left Party and Greens) had previously announced that it would end mandatory masking in March.

The state governments of Thuringia and Hesse did declare a desire to retain mask requirements for the time being. Yet they simultaneously stressed it would difficult if it were abolished in the other federal states. Past experience has amply demonstrated that when one state repeals a measure, the others move to follow.

At the federal level, Finance Minister Christian Lindner, chairman of the liberal Free Democrats (FDP), reacted to the Bavarian government's decision by calling for the abolition of masking requirements throughout Germany: “Right decision ... to do away with the mask requirement in public transport. Hope that this decision sets a precedent throughout the country.”

Federal Minister of Health Karl Lauterbach (SPD) made an appeal to retain obligatory masking in local transit, but this was a lie. He himself played a leading role in drafting the current “Infection Protection Act,” which eliminated most mitigating measures and gave the states the power to abolish those remaining.

It is particularly telling that the unions support the abolition of masking requirements. In recent days, both major rail unions—the EVG and the GDL—spoke out in favor of a nationwide abolition of required masking on local and long-distance trains.

EVG chairman Martin Burkert told the major weekly Der Spiegel that wearing masks on trains should be voluntary. The current patchwork of rules is “simply no longer comprehensible,” he said.

GDL leader Claus Weselsky spoke similarly: “It certainly proved its worth during the hot phases of the pandemic and made sense at the time. Now it is starting to take on grotesque form because my colleagues are the only ones who are still obliged by their work to strictly adhere to it ... It’s enough at some point. We, as a railroad, are the only mode of transportation for which masks are still required on long-distance and commuter services.”

The unions’ support for the workplace infection of their members shows their anti-worker character. Throughout the pandemic, their goal has been to force workers back on the job, despite unsafe conditions, to keep profits rolling in. Now they are calling for the elimination of the last workplace protections.

Local and long-distance transport is the only sector where a mask requirement—and thus one of the last remaining protective measures—still applies. At the end of November, Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Hesse and Schleswig-Holstein lifted the isolation requirement for those infected. Rhineland-Palatinate followed suit at the beginning of December.

The lifting of obligatory masking ahead of the winter wave amounts to codifying viral death into law. Contrary to the general claim of politicians and the media, the virus has by no means become harmless, rather it remains extremely deadly.

About 110 people die from the virus every day in Germany. Ten thousand people are hospitalized every week. The number of coronavirus outbreaks is increasing in medical facilities as well as in nursing homes and homes for the elderly.

There were 191 outbreaks in medical facilities last week (compared to 119 the previous week) and 280 in nursing homes and homes for the elderly (compared to 269 the previous week). These coronavirus outbreaks resulted in 26 reported deaths in the medical facilities and 69 in the nursing homes. These numbers are bound to rise as the anticipated winter wave of coronavirus rolls over Germany.

A number of other respiratory diseases are also spreading due to the abolition of measures against coronavirus. As Lothar Wieler, president of the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), the federal institution responsible disease control and prevention, explained, “One notices at present that ever more people are catching the flu. That’s why I think there won’t be a pure Corona wave in the winter, rather multiple respiratory infections will spread in parallel.”

According to the RKI, the number of respiratory illnesses is “currently above the peak level of severe flu waves from previous years.” The current RKI report estimates the number of acute respiratory illnesses in the population totals around 9.5 million. According to internal evaluations of the health insurance provider DAK, more people had reported sick this November than in the previous three. Compared to November 2021, the number has doubled.

This is reflected in hospitals. According to the German Interdisciplinary Association for Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (Divi), the number of vacant intensive care beds has fallen below 2,000 for the first time since the pandemic began. As of Thursday last week, there were only 1,886 beds free. A year ago at the same time there were 2,250 and two years ago almost 4,000.

And the figures refer only to intensive care beds for adults. At the children’s hospitals, the situation is even more catastrophic. The spokesman for the Professional Association of Pediatric Doctors (BVKJ), Jakob Maske, told the broadcaster Deutschlandfunk: “It is the case at the moment that the health of children and adolescents and also their lives are fairly endangered.”

Seen as a whole, German clinics are on the verge of collapse. “We now have a very normal increase in infectious diseases, as we see every winter, and the systems are breaking down,” said Maske. Critically ill children, for example, are being transferred hundreds of kilometers from Berlin because there are no beds available in the capital.