Israel’s war of annihilation against Palestinians puts King Abdullah’s regime in Jordan on a knife edge

Jean Shaoul

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s goal of erasing Hamas, with the full backing of US imperialism and its European allies, is the prelude to a far broader, regional war against Iran and its allies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen that puts Jordan firmly in the line of fire. It is destabilising King Abdullah’s autocratic rule that has little or no popular legitimacy.

Jordan was carved out of the former Syrian province of the Ottoman empire by British imperialism in the aftermath of World War I as a frontline state to defend Britain’s strategic interests in the oil-rich region. It would be ruled by the Hashemite family from the Hejaz in what is now Saudi Arabia. Always unviable, the Hashemite monarchy was from the very beginning dependent on aid from first Britain and since 1957 from the United States. Washington currently provides about $1.5 billion a year in economic and military aid, an amount equal to almost half the state budget.

Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Dunford Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, meets with King Abdullah II at his palace in Jordan, March 9, 2017. [Photo by Dept. of Defense photo by Dominique A. Pineiro / CC BY 2.0]

Abdullah, who inherited the throne from his father 25 years ago, rules as an absolute monarch. He has maintained his corrupt and venal rule—amassing untold riches at the expense of the Jordanian people—by pitting the local Arab population, or “East Bankers”, against Palestinian refugees. Driven out or fleeing Israel’s wars of 1948 and 1967, Palestinians make up just over half of the country’s nearly 11 million population. While a few have become exceedingly rich, the vast majority are brutally exploited and largely deprived of political rights. Palestinians who left the occupied territories after 1988 when Jordan relinquished claim to the West Bank do not qualify for Jordanian citizenship.

Parliamentary elections earlier this month were fraudulent, with just 32 percent of the 5.1 million eligible voters turning up to cast their vote. Playing no role in determining the government, the parliament serves only as a talking shop and cover for Abdullah, who appoints and dismisses prime ministers at will to deflect criticism away from his corrupt rule that depends on censorship, surveillance and a system of military patronage drawn largely from the East Bankers. To criticise him in casual conversation is to court arrest amid a powerful security apparatus that works closely with Israeli and western intelligence services and the United Arab Emirates.

Nevertheless, the elections were held under new rules whereby 41 out of the 138-seat parliament, which has long been dominated by tribal and pro-government factions, could be contested by political parties. And they saw support for Palestinian Hamas surge, with the Islamic Action Front (IAF), the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood to which Hamas is affiliated, winning 31 seats. Though led by upper-class Jordanians from East Bank families, the championing of Palestinian issues means that much of the IAF’s rank-and-file consists of Jordanians of Palestinian origin in refugee camps.

While it is the largest vote for the bourgeois clerical group since 1989, when the Muslim Brotherhood gained 22 out of 80 seats in parliament, the parliament remains largely in the hands of tribal and pro-government members.

The vote highlights the importance of the Palestinian issue in Jordanian political life. Israel’s war on Gaza and now daily attacks on the West Bank have aroused popular anger, while Washington’s full-throated support for Israel has fueled anti-American sentiment. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has carried out scores of drone strikes, helicopter gunship attacks and airstrikes targeting heavily populated towns and cities, as well as refugee camps in Jenin, Tulkarem, and Nablus, that have, according to the UN, killed more than 650 Palestinians, including 115 children and injured at least 5,500—as well as arresting over 10,300 since the start of the Gaza war.

On August 27, the IDF sent hundreds of ground soldiers, drones, warplanes, and bulldozers into the cities of Tulkarm and Jenin, as well as the Al Fara refugee camp near Tubas, in the largest military operation in the West Bank since 2002. Israel’s Foreign Minister Israel Katz described it as an operation designed “to thwart Islamic-Iranian terror infrastructure that was set up there.” Officials in Jenin reported that even before the latest attack the IDF had bulldozed over 70 percent of Jenin’s streets, destroyed 20 kilometres miles of water and sewage infrastructure, and cut off water to 80 percent of the city.

The IDF attacks have been accompanied by daily assaults by fascistic settlers on the Palestinians, their homes and farms. Last month, settler violence in the northeast of the West Bank caused the largest wave of forcible transfers of Palestinian communities since the start of the war on Gaza as they drove out 119 Palestinians in three communities, erected new settler outposts and blocked access to water.

Fears are rife that Israel intends to carry out a “Nakba 2.0,” driving the nearly three million Palestinians out of the West Bank and transforming Jordan into a Palestinian state as members of Netanyahu’s far-right cabinet openly call for pushing the Palestinians into the country, a move that Jordanian Foreign Minister Safadi said would be treated as a “declaration of war.”

Last July, just before Netanyahu’s address to Congress in Washington, the Knesset passed a resolution outlawing a future Palestinian state. It declared: “The Israeli Knesset opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state on any piece of land west of the Jordan River. The existence of a Palestinian state in the heart of Israel will pose an existential threat to the State of Israel and its citizens, will further extend the Israel-Palestinian Arab conflict and be a source of destabilisation for the entire region.”

For Jordanians, the words “any piece of land west of the Jordan River” mean that the only place Israel will tolerate a Palestinian state will be in Jordan. It prompted Abdullah to warn that the region will “not accept having [its] future held hostage to the policies of the extremist Israeli government” and that Israel’s attacks on the occupied West Bank constitute a direct threat to Jordan’s security that could spark a wider regional conflict. The Jordanian parliament unanimously endorsed a motion to review its 1994 treaty with Israel that expressly forbids any such expulsion, stating, “within their control, involuntary movements of persons in such a way as to adversely prejudice the security of either Party should not be permitted.”

In another provocative move, Katz repeated his call—echoed by other ministers as well as the prime minister—to build a wall along the border with Jordan, Israel’s longest at 482 kilometres (300 miles), to prevent “gun smuggling”. Israel claims that the weapons have fueled a surge in violence in the predominantly Arab towns and cities in Israel and have been used against soldiers and civilians in the West Bank. Israeli daily Maariv claimed in August that over 40,000 people had breached the border with Jordan into the West Bank in recent months.

Also under threat is Jordan’s control of the al-Aqsa Mosque compound in East Jerusalem, the third holiest Muslim site, although access is under the control of Israeli security forces. Last month, Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir sparked outrage when he said that he would build a synagogue on the compound—the site of the Jewish temple destroyed 2000 years ago—a deliberate challenge to Abdullah’s custodianship of the holy sites in Jerusalem.

Ben-Gvir has staged numerous provocations prompting sometimes violent reactions from Palestinians. He told Army Radio that Jews should be allowed to pray in the compound, claiming that the “current policy allows Jews to pray at this site.” He has also threatened to collapse Netanyahu’s coalition if he agrees any ceasefire in the Gaza war.

Earlier this month, a Jordanian truck driver killed three Israelis at the Allenby Bridge on the border between Jordan and Israel, near the city of Jericho, before Israeli soldiers shot him dead. The authorities on both sides have closed the crossing.

Abdullah, while making ritual statements opposing Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, has played the most open role in repressing popular opposition to Israel. Following the government’s extension of the range and definition of a cybercrime to include “spreading fake news”, “provoking strife”, “threatening societal peace” and “contempt for religions,” the authorities have arrested scores of people taking part in pro-Palestinian demonstrations, according to Human Rights Watch.

Along with several other Arab states, Jordan has kept Israel’s economy functioning during the war, providing a land corridor through the Kingdom to help Israel circumvent the Houthi attacks on Israeli-linked shipping in the Red Sea.

After an Israeli airstrike killed two Iranian generals and others in Damascus in April, Jordan came to Israel’s defence when Tehran launched a widely trailed counterattack on Israel. The Jordanian Air Force shot down dozens of Iranian drones headed for Israel and Abdullah allowed Israeli fighter jets to enter Jordan’s airspace and intercept Iranian missiles. Last month, the authorities took to the airwaves to deny that Israeli warplanes would be allowed to use its airspace to foil an expected attack by Iran after Israel’s assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran in July, an announcement that was dismissed with contempt. Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi flew to Tehran to urge the Iranian regime to avoid Jordanian airspace in any retaliation against Israel.

Amman, Jordan’s capital, is set to host NATO’s first Middle East liaison office, as the prospect of a US-backed war between Israel and Iran and its allies mounts. The move suggest that NATO is seeking to organise its allies in the region more directly as indicated by the coordinated regional response, including by Jordan and Saudi Arabia, to Iran’s missiles last April.

Discontent is mounting, exacerbating Abdullah’s problems in keeping the lid on his restive and angry subjects. Official unemployment—likely much higher in reality—is 21 percent, well above its pre-COVID-19 rate of 15.1 percent between 2012 and 2019, with youth (46 percent) and women (31 percent) the worst affected. Wages for those in work—and many in the informal economy earn far less—are no more than $3,000 a year. Poverty and inflation, especially the price of (mostly imported) food, are soaring. Many families are only kept afloat thanks to remittances from Jordanians working in the Gulf.

Jordan, like all the Arab regimes, has made a pact with the devil: to provide support for Israel and US imperialism—including in their moves towards war against Iran, as part of American preparations for war with China—in return for Washington’s commitment to back their “security” in the event of a new mass movement to unseat them.

New studies show growing risk of chronic neurological diseases associated with Long COVID

Benjamin Mateus

As the US enters the autumn, more than one million Americans continue to be infected with COVID-19 every day, with nearly every state registering high to very high rates of transmission. While transmission has declined slightly in recent weeks, it remains at the highest level for any September of the pandemic.

Modeling these trends, which are based on wastewater data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the PMC COVID-19 Forecasting Model predicts that a trough in infections will arrive in early November before climbing again during the winter holiday season. However, the lull in this scenario will remain a blistering 850,000 infections per day. Indeed, this 9th wave of infections has produced the highest rate of transmission for this time of year, underscoring that the virus that causes COVID is not seasonal and the ongoing pandemic has not set into a predictable pattern that could be described as “endemic.”

Graph showing daily new infections in the US based on wastewater modeling. [Photo by Dr. Mike Hoerger]

The latest PMC forecast notes:

The year-over-year comparisons suggest that we are experiencing the highest-level of transmission all-time during this time of year. The surge is both high and wide, meaning sustained high levels of transmission... Schools and businesses that lack multilayered mitigation (vaccines, masking, excellent indoor air quality, better-than-CDC isolation guidance, testing) should expect illness and absences. 

The authors warned about possible complacency upon entering the slow decline in transmission, noting:

Barring significant retroactive corrections, all evidence suggests that the 9th wave has peaked. However, remember that 50-60 percent of transmission often occurs on the back end of a wave, which is why ongoing mitigation remains important. Expect more than one million new infections per day for almost another month and most of the remaining year.

The fact that these warnings emanate not from the nation’s public health agency, but a collaborative organization based at Tulane University in New Orleans, Louisiana—started early in 2020 with the mission of helping reduce COVID transmission—underscores the utter bankruptcy of the CDC and federal and state governments to address the ongoing pandemic. 

Fomenting complacency on the one hand, and obscuring the epidemiological landscape through willful omission of relevant clinical data on the other, has been the CDC’s primary strategy in ensuring the “forever COVID” policy is normalized and becomes the approach to any present or future threats from communicable diseases. Indeed, the 9th wave of this pandemic is passing without an iota of concern or trepidation on the part of any leading health officials.

A recent post by BNO News noted the complete collapse of pandemic surveillance, stating, “[only] 33 percent of hospitals in the US submitted COVID data this week, down from 91 percent in early May. This means actual case numbers and hospitalizations are substantially higher than reported.”

Partial data would indicate that this year more than 360,000 people have been hospitalized for COVID, while over 41,000 have officially died. This is the fifth week in a row with more than 1,000 new COVID deaths in the US. At the current pace it is possible that more than 60,000 people, mainly the eldest and most vulnerable, may officially lose their life to COVID, while more accurate estimates of excess deaths will be far higher. 

Compounding this criminal negligence, research into Long COVID is finding disturbing links between the manifestation of chronic debility and the development of chronic neurological diseases. As a recent report in Bloomberg explained,

More than four years after the pandemic began, researchers are recognizing the profound impacts Covid can have on brain health, as millions of survivors suffer from persistent issues such as brain fog, depression and cognitive slowing, all of which hinder their ability to work and otherwise function. Scientists now worry that these symptoms may be early indicators of a coming surge in dementia and other mental conditions, prolonging the pandemic’s societal, economic and health burden. [Emphasis added]

While imaging studies conducted early during the COVID pandemic from the brains of COVID patients, even those with mild symptoms, had demonstrated injury consistent with accelerated aging, more recent investigations indicate that the cognitive deficits appear to persist.

In particular, elderly patients who have suffered from severe disease and were hospitalized have shown significant cognitive declines compared to their uninfected spouses, in a follow-up study conducted three years post-infection.

The UK-based study recently published in The Lancet: Psychiatry found at the 2-to 3-year point, a group of elderly COVID survivors had seen their cognitive scores decline significantly across all measured domains, with an average deficit equal to a 10 point drop in their intelligence quotient (IQ). One in nine had severe cognitive deficits equivalent to a 30-point drop in their IQ. A quarter of the study patients had to leave their occupations after having COVID due to poor health associated with cognitive deficits.

Prevalence of severe psychiatric, cognitive, and fatigue outcomes at 2–3 years as a function of recovery at 6 months, based on three predefined clusters of recovery (one per column). [Photo by Taquet, MaximeLone, Nazir et al. / CC BY 4.0]

Paul Harrison, one of the co-authors, stated, “The findings show that problems affecting attention and memory, as well as fatigue, depression, and anxiety, continue to afflict some people even three years after COVID-19 infection, especially those who had not recovered well by six months.”

It is important to note that these changes were not attributable to aging.

Harrison added, “These results apply only to people who needed acute hospital admission when they had COVID-19. We suspect, but do not know, whether similar kinds of problems might affect the much larger number of people who did not get hospitalized.”

People with known neurological diseases like Alzheimer’s have shown an acceleration of their memory loss after COVID. Healthy elderly adults face an increased risk of developing new onset dementia after their infections. Even younger people with what is called mild illness may face memory issues and brain fog that worsen during mental exertion or stress which has considerable impact on their ability to work and socialize.

Another study published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) earlier this year found that among nearly 113,000 people who completed an online cognitive assessment, those who had recovered from COVID before four weeks had similar small deficits in their global cognition as those whose symptoms persisted beyond 12 weeks as compared to those who were never infected. Those with persistent symptoms or who were hospitalized demonstrated larger deficits.

While researchers and investigators attempt to elucidate the underlying mechanism for COVID’s terrifying pathogenesis, these studies and findings corroborate the ongoing dangers posed by the pandemic. Furthermore, it provides concrete evidence of the utterly criminal character of the “forever COVID” policy that threatens every living person on the planet. Current estimates place the impact of Long COVID at 410 million, or five percent of the planet’s inhabitants.

Massive explosion at Russian arms depot leaves unanswered questions

Andre Damon

A sprawling, highly fortified Russian arms depot located north of Moscow exploded in a giant fireball Wednesday night, against the backdrop of an escalating media and political campaign demanding that Ukraine be allowed to strike Russia with NATO weapons.

Explosions at the Toropets missile depot [Photo: Telegram ButusovPlus]

The explosion marked one of the largest strikes on a Russian arms depot since the start of the war. The arsenal in Toropets, located 300 miles north of Ukraine and 230 miles west of Moscow, reportedly housed long-range missiles and glide bombs.

The massive blast registered on earthquake monitors, and NASA’s Fire Information for Resource Management System showed the entire arsenal on fire.

West of Moscow and north of Vitsebsk, Bealrus, is Toropets, marked in orange. [Photo: www.openstreetmap.org]

The Washington Post reported that an official from Ukraine’s security service, the SBU, took credit for the attack, declaring the arms depot was “literally wiped off the face of the Earth,” and that the operation involved “more than 100 drones.”

Meanwhile, the Tver regional government said in a Telegram post that “a fire started as a result of drone debris falling while air defense forces were repelling an attack.”

Neither the Ukrainian explanation of a major coordinated drone strike nor the Russian explanation of drone fragments lighting a fire aligns with previous Russian statements about the arsenal’s defensive capabilities.

In 2018, when the site was renovated, the Russian Ministry of Defense declared the site met the “highest international standards” and could defend against weapons from missiles and “even a small nuclear attack.”

How a hardened facility built to withstand a strike by a nuclear weapon could have been completely destroyed by drones carrying, at most, a few dozen kilograms of explosives each, has not been explained.

Moreover, the town is significantly closer to Latvia, a NATO member, than it is to Ukraine, leading to speculation—as yet without evidence—that the strike could have been launched from Latvia.

The attack takes place against the backdrop of an escalating campaign by the US media and political establishment to allow Ukraine to carry out long-range strikes against Russia using NATO weapons.

Unlike Ukraine’s kamikaze drones, the UK’s Storm Shadow missile carries a payload of nearly 1,000 pounds and is capable of penetrating hardened targets.

Last week, the Guardian reported that “British government sources indicated that a decision had already been made to allow Ukraine to use Storm Shadow cruise missiles on targets inside Russia.”

While an announcement about the move was expected last week at a meeting between US President Joe Biden and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, no announcement was made at the time.

Instead, US and UK media outlets began raising the suggestion that the US could simply authorize the strikes in secret, without making any such announcement. As the Economist wrote at the time, “There is unlikely to be a public announcement. A decision may be quietly communicated to Kyiv, to downplay its significance and to keep it secret. It may not be until targets in Russia are struck with Western missiles that a change will be confirmed.”

Last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin declared, “If this decision is made, it will mean nothing less than the direct participation of NATO countries, the US and European countries, in the conflict in Ukraine.” He added, “Their direct participation, of course, significantly changes the very essence, the very nature of the conflict.”

Former Russian President Dimitri Medvedev added that “formal prerequisites” exist for turning Kiev into a “giant gray melted spot,” in a threat to retaliate against attacks on Russia using nuclear weapons.

Regardless of these warnings and threats by Russian officials, the NATO military alliance is openly advocating such strikes.

Over the weekend, Admiral Rob Bauer, the chair of the NATO Military Committee, argued that NATO had the legal right to facilitate strikes against the Russian mainland. “Every nation that is attacked has the right to defend itself. And that right doesn’t stop at the border of your own nation,” Bauer said.

He continued, “You want to weaken the enemy that attacks you in order to not only fight the arrows that come your way, but also attack the archer that is, as we see, very often operating from Russia proper into Ukraine.”

He added, “So militarily, there’s a good reason to do that, to weaken the enemy, to weaken its logistic lines, fuel, ammunition that comes to the front. That is what you want to stop.”

On Tuesday, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg added his name to calls for strikes on Russia in an interview with the Times of London. “There have been many red lines declared by him before, and he has not escalated, meaning also involving NATO allies directly in the conflict,” Stoltenberg said. “He has not done so because he realizes that NATO is the strongest military alliance in the world.”

In a separate series of remarks to the British media, Stoltenberg declared, “We have a full-scale war in Europe launched by Moscow. There are no risk-free options in the war. But I continue to believe that the biggest risk for us will be if President Putin wins in Ukraine.”

On Thursday, UN officials announced that Ukrainian President Zelensky would address the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday. Zelensky will also meet next week with US President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris at the White House to discuss a purported “victory plan” for the war against Russia.

Zelensky’s visit comes amid a series of military setbacks for the Ukrainian military in Russia’s continued offensive in the Donbas. Against the backdrop of a potential collapse of the Ukrainian military, the US-aligned media and political establishment are agitating for an escalation of US involvement in the war as a means to turn the tide.

An op-ed published Wednesday in Politico concluded, “the Ukrainians are ceding ground in the eastern Donbas region and fighting off massive drone and missile attacks on their largest cities. They need a morale and momentum shift. Lowering the restrictions on missile use could help.”

Draghi report reveals deep crisis of European capitalism

Nick Beams

A report on European Union (EU) competitiveness released last week highlights the existential crisis of the organisation and the impossibility of overcoming it within the framework of the capitalist nation-state system. The report was prepared for the European Commission (EC) by the former head of the European Central Bank and previous Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi.

Mario Draghi, former head of the European Central Bank and former Italian prime minister [AP Photo/Josh Reynolds for MIT Golub Center for Finance and Policy]

These conclusions were not drawn by Draghi—he advanced proposals aimed at trying to overcome the crisis of the EU—but they emerge clearly from the report.

And Draghi himself is more than aware of what is at stake. In comments introducing the report, he said of his recommendations: “Do this, or its slow agony.” And to underscore the point he continued: “This is an existential challenge.”

The report, which was commissioned last autumn by EC president Ursula von der Leyen, arose out of the recognition that as a result of slowing growth, extending back decades and virtual stagnation in recent years, the EU is falling ever further behind the US and China in its economic development.

It is not possible to detail here all the areas where Europe is falling behind; they extend across the economy. Draghi began with the claim that Europe, with a single market of 440 million consumers, 23 million companies and 17 percent of global GDP, has the foundations in place to be a highly competitive economy. But the report shows this is not taking place.

He noted that growth in the EU has been slowing because of weakening productivity growth, “calling into question Europe’s ability to meet its ambitions.”

EU economic growth “has been persistently slower than in the US over the past two decades, while China has been rapidly catching up” with the gap between the level of GDP at 2015 prices widening from slightly more than 15 percent in 2002 to 30 percent in 2023.

Other figures cited recently by the London-based Telegraph economics correspondent Ambrose Evans-Pritchard showed that in 1990 the EU, then comprising 12 states, accounted for 26.5 percent of global GDP. Today the EU of 27 states accounts for just 16.1 percent.

In a comment piece in the Economist magazine, Draghi commented that in the past, slowing growth “could be seen as an inconvenience but not a calamity. No more. Europe’s population is set to decline, and it will have to lead more on productivity to grow. If the EU were to maintain its average productivity growth since 2015, it would only be enough to keep GDP constant until around 2050.”

The key problem is that the conditions which led to EU growth, even at a slowing rate, are disappearing.

The report stated that the post-Cold War situation, involving an expansion of world trade supporting EU growth, is now “fading.” And the “the multilateral trading order is in deep crisis and the era of rapid world trade growth looks to have passed.”

With the “normalisation” of relations with Russia after the liquidation of the USSR in 1991, Europe was able to meet its demands for energy. “But this source of relatively cheap energy has now disappeared at huge cost to Europe.”

The result is that while energy prices have fallen somewhat from their peak in 2022, following the start of the Ukraine war—provoked by the US and the other NATO powers—EU companies still face electricity prices that are 2-3 times higher than in the US and natural gas prices 4-5 times higher.

The first requirement for a transformation in the EU is the “need to accelerate innovation and find new growth engines.” Here Draghi points to the development of advanced technologies, in particular the use of artificial intelligence, to drive future growth. But in this critical area the position of Europe is declining.

Only four of the world’s top 50 tech companies are European and from 2013 to 2023, the EU’s share of global tech revenues fell from 22 percent to 18 percent while that of the US rose from 30 percent to 38 percent.

The report noted that one of the key reasons for the rising productivity gap between the US and the EU from the mid 1990 was “Europe’s failure to capitalise on the first digital revolution led by the internet.” And with a new digital revolution underway, Europe “currently looks to set to fall further behind.”

“The largest European cloud operator accounts for just 2 percent of the EU market. Quantum computing is poised to be the next major innovation, but five of the top ten tech companies in terms of quantum investment are based in the US and four in China. None are based in the EU.”

While certain innovations have been developed in autonomous robotics and AI services “innovative digital companies are generally failing to scale up in Europe and attract finance, reflected in a huge gap in later stage financing between the EU and the US. In fact, there is no EU company with a market capitalisation of over €100 billion that has been set up from scratch in the last fifty years, while in the US all six companies with a valuation above €1 trillion have been created over this period.”

The development of the EU and the establishment of a common currency, the euro, in 1999, was an attempt by the European ruling classes to create a more viable framework for economic development and try to overcome the problems arising from the outmoded division of the continent into rival nation-states.

But the unification of Europe on a capitalist basis was always a utopia, because each of the European ruling classes remains grounded in the nation-state system under conditions where the conflicts between them have been intensifying, not lessening.

This has meant that attempts to develop a cohesive industrial policy have been hindered. The Single Market has been adversely impacted by the ability of countries “with the most fiscal space [the reference here is to Germany] and a lack of coordination among financing instruments.”

“While the EU collectively spends a large amount on financing its industrial goals, financing instruments are split along national lines and between members states and the EU. This fragmentation hampers scale, preventing the creation of large capital pools in particular for investments in breakthrough innovations.”

The report laid emphasis on Europe becoming a leader in decarbonisation and green technology. But earlier advantages it may have enjoyed are now being eroded. It noted that since 2020, patent innovation has slowed. From 2015 to 2019, the EU represented 65 percent of venture capital development from hydrogen and fuel cells, but this declined to just 10 percent from 2020 to 2022.

In his foreword to the report, Draghi wrote that the global decarbonisation drive is a “growth opportunity” for European industry but it is not guaranteed.

“Chinese competition is becoming acute in industries like green tech and electric vehicles, driven by a powerful combination of massive industrial policy and subsidies, control of raw materials and the ability to produce at a continent-wide scale.”

The EU is facing a dilemma. On the one hand China may offer the cheapest route to achieving decarbonisation targets, while on the other “China’s state-sponsored competition represents a threat to our productive clean tech and automotive industries.”

As the global struggle to acquire access to critical minerals needed to develop green technology intensifies, decarbonisation is directly linked to military spending and capacity, along with access to the most advanced computer chips.

Europe needs a “foreign economic policy” under conditions where “physical security threats are rising and we must prepare. The EU is collectively the world’s second largest military spender, but this is not reflected in the strength of our defence industry capacity.”

It is “too fragmented, hindering its ability to produce at scale, and it suffers from a lack of standardisation and interoperability of equipment, weakening Europe’s ability to act as a cohesive power.”

In the body of the report, Draghi wrote that dependencies on others for crucial raw materials are becoming increasingly vulnerable, threatening supply chains. At the same time, aggregate defence spending is one third of that of the US and the European defence industry is suffering from decades of underinvestment and depleted stocks.

“To achieve genuine strategic independence and increase its global geopolitical influence, Europe needs a plan to manage these dependencies and strengthen defence investment.”

In order to meet its objectives in technology, decarbonisation and military capacity, Draghi calculated that the EU will need to lift investment by €800 billion, that is, to almost 5 percent of GDP per year. By comparison, the boost provided by the Marshall Plan in the period 1948-51 was between 1 and 2 percent of GDP for recipient countries.

This would require a massive restructuring of the financial system including all EU debt. Acknowledging that joint borrowing was a “very sensitive” issue, Draghi said it would be “instrumental to reach the EU’s objectives.”

Those sensitivities were immediately revealed. The managing director of the Eurasia Group consultancy firm, Mutjaba Rahman, told the Financial Times that the “political realities in Paris and Berlin mean his recommendations have zero chance of being implemented.”

The reaction from Berlin confirmed that assessment. German Finance Minister Christian Lindner wrote on X/Twitter that joint EU borrowing would not solve structural problems. Companies did not lack subsidies but were “tied down by bureaucracy and a planned economy.”

His Dutch counterpart Eelco Heinen said he totally agreed that Europe had to grow but that required reform and “more money is not always the solution.”

As she received the report von der Leyen avoided endorsing the issue of more debt.

But Draghi has insisted the EU faces an existential crisis if this kind of back and forth continues. “We should abandon the illusion that only procrastination can preserve consensus. In fact, procrastination has only produced slower growth, and it has certainly achieved no more consensus.”

Draghi did not spell out in detail the consequences of a continuation of the present path. But be provided some indications, alluding to the dangers to “welfare” and Europe’s supposed “social model.” That is, further, deeper attacks on the social position of the European working class.

But his plan does not provide a way forward. Rather, it is an expression of the deep crisis of European capitalism in a situation where the conditions which made possible some limited advancement for the working class have been shattered by vast changes in the very foundations of the global capitalist economy.

Large class sizes and “well below” average spending on early years education in UK schools, OECD reports

Margot Miller

The annual report by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Education at a Glance 2024, found that, compared to 50 other nations, the UK spends “well below” the average on early years education.

The average spent on a child from birth to age five across the OECD is £9,700. The UK spends an abysmal £5,700. Investment in early years education as a proportion of gross domestic product (GDP) fell 13 percent from 2015 to 2021 in the UK, while rising 9 percent across the OECD.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Bridget Phillipson, Secretary of State for Education visit Primary school children in Orpington. [Photo by Simon Dawson / No 10 Downing Street / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0]

The report reveals entrenched inequality in educational attainment across the age range correlated with family income and parents’ education. This is the case for all OECD countries but is particularly pronounced in England. In London, for example,71 percent of 25–64-year-olds have a tertiary (post-secondary) qualification, compared to 42 percent in North East England where deprivation is high.

Not only does the UK fare badly in terms of early years spending—vital, formative years for child development—but UK class sizes across the age range are larger than those in Mexico, Turkey and Columbia. The average class size in OECD countries is 21, while Luxemburg and Croatia have 15 children per class. In the UK teachers struggle with classes of 27 pupils on average.

According to the report, the pupil-teacher ratio in the UK is among the highest: fifth out of 50 countries, behind India, Mexico, Colombia and Brazil. Yet in terms of GDP, the UK ranks sixth in the world.

Teachers in the UK tend to be younger than their OECD counterparts and therefore less experienced, due to the problem of teacher retention. The report notes that 9 percent of teachers left the profession in 2022-23, one of the highest rates in the OECD.

Education in the UK, like the National Health Service, is in a shambles after years of austerity cuts since 2010 to finance the bank and pandemic bailouts, and now to pay towards NATO’s widening wars in the Middle East and the expanding Ukraine war against Russia.

An Institute for Fiscal Studies’ report, Education Spending Spring Budget 2024, revealed that “total school spending per pupil fell by 9 percent in real terms in England between 2009-10 and 2019-20…the most sustained cut in school spending … in at least 40 years, and probably a lot longer.”

Underpaid teachers struggle to teach increasingly impoverished pupils in oversized classes. The workload is crippling and the curriculum proscriptive, not based on pedagogy but tests and targets, leading to mental health problems for children and staff. School buildings have not been adequately maintained. Some schools are verging on collapse, being built with substandard material. Spending on special needs has been cut into the bone.

The new term heralds a further spread of respiratory illnesses including COVID, with no mitigation measures in place though the technology to purify air exists. Neither are children in the UK offered a COVID vaccine unless immune compromised, unlike in the US.

Responding to the report, Labour Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said, “We need to get early education and childcare right so that all children get the very best start in life and all parents get the power to pursue their careers. But as your report shows, the gap in enrolment in childcare between rich families and poor families in the UK is one of the biggest in the OECD.”

Phillipson is referring to the correlation between family income and childcare take-up in pre-school settings. In the UK, the take-up is 32 percent of children between the ages of zero and two from the poorest families, compared with 50 percent whose parents are in the top income bracket. Hardly surprising, considering that childcare is not state funded before the age of three, and the prohibitive childcare costs.

“Those first steps into education are so important for a child’s life chances and the sad truth is that a significant part of the attainment gap is already baked in by the age of five,” continued Phillipson.

But talk is cheap. The Labour government led by Sir Keir Starmer promises to be the most right-wing in history. The “attainment gap” will only grow as more families are pauperised. One of its first acts in office was to commit to the Tory’s two-child cap on welfare benefits.

Continuing where the previous Conservative government left off, Labour has begun rolling out plans for free childcare places—progressive on the surface but only as a soundbite.

“I’m delighted that last week, hundreds of thousands of working parents started receiving 15 funded hours for their young children [nine months plus] for the first time,” declared Phillipson. Ministers also promised 3,000 new nursery places in England.

High-quality childcare with fully trained staff in appropriate settings demands substantial investment, not shabby provision such as converting empty classrooms as is suggested. What the government has in mind are holding pens freeing parents to work in cheap labour jobs.  

According to mainstream commentators, the economy is blighted by “worklessness”—a drain on government revenue due to less income from taxes and increased take-up of benefits. Singled out to be pressured back into the jobs market are some of the most vulnerable—the disabled, many with Long COVID, and those suffering mental illness.

The response of the education unions to the OECD report was to issue the usual pro-forma criticisms of a situation they enabled by closing down all resistance among their members.

Welcoming the election of a Labour government, general secretary of the National Education Union Daniel Kebede said, “Fourteen years of Conservative cuts to real-terms education budgets are coming home to roost.”

Paul Whiteman, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, said, “The fact that the UK is among the lowest of all OECD countries when it comes to per-pupil expenditure in early childhood education should be a source of deep concern.”

Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said, “Tackling the high level of child poverty in the UK is vital to closing the attainment gap. We need to see tangible action from the government as a matter of urgency.”

The OECD report trails a school survey announced by children’s school commissioner Dame Rachel de Souza, which the government has made statutory for all schools in England.

The survey, explained de Souza, aims to “better understand the role schools play in children’s development… If we are to create a system that is properly resourced and funded to meet the needs of every child, we need irrefutable evidence about what’s going on in our schools.”

This is said of a system that has been inspected to death by schools’ inspectorate Ofsted.

Like Labour’s report into the National Health Service by Lord Darzi, nothing by way of extra resources can be expected from de Souza’s recommendations. The Labour government has made clear its priority is to resolve the £22 billion black hole in government finances at the expense of the working class.

Like health spending, education and welfare spending, as well as workers’ pay, are considered a drain on profits and funds for government initiatives  aimed at warding off illegal immigrants, national security and defence.

A recent program on Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour dedicated to SEND (children with special educational needs and disabilities) support in the UK revealed a collapse in provision. SEND children may have speech and language difficulties, autistic spectrum conditions, dyslexia, hyperactivity, or moderate to profound learning difficulties. Some children may have a mental or physical disability so severe they cannot carry out normal day to day activities.

Parents and practitioners spoke of the bureaucratic hurdles in the way of obtaining an EHCP, a legal document that obliges the local education authority to provide support for a child with SEND needs. With few special schools and councils verging on bankruptcy, many children even with an EHCP get little support. Most shocking, the program highlighted the fact that 11,000 children are not in school because there is no appropriate provision for them.

Asked how she would convince Chancellor Rachel Reeves to release funds for SEND provision, Labour Minister of State for School Standards Catherine Mckinnell waffled about schools cooperating with each other and reforming the school curriculum. When the program moderator asked the audience, “Are you convinced about what you’re hearing?” they answered with a resounding “No”.

An investigation by the BBC revealed that councils in England are facing an aggregate shortfall in SEND funding of £926 million.

Commonwealth Foundation Grants 2025

Application Deadline: 24th October 2024

Eligible Countries: Commonwealth countries, UK

About the Award: The Foundation offers grants of up to £200,000 over four years in support of innovative project ideas and approaches that seek to strengthen the ability of civic voices to engage with governments and that have the potential to improve governance and development outcomes through their active participation.

The Foundation believes in the power of stories and storytelling for social change and will award grants for creative approaches that have the potential to influence public discourse.

All proposals must ensure that the cross cutting theme of gender is mainstreamed throughout the project.

Fields of Funding: The Foundation’s Strategic Plan 2021-2026 is strongly linked to the Commonwealth Charter and its values and aspirations, and it identifies three thematic areas of focus:

• Health
• Environment and climate change
• Freedom of expression

Type: Grants

Eligibility: To be eligible for a grant, the following criteria must be met:

1. The applicant and, when applicable, partner(s) are registered not for profit civil society organisations (CSOs).
2. The applicant and, when applicable, partner(s) must be based in a Commonwealth Foundation member country and the project should take place in an eligible Commonwealth Foundation member country. A list of countries eligible under this call is available at Annex 1.
3. The application is for funding for a maximum of £50,000 per annum
4. The applicant is applying for funding for a maximum of four years
5. The applicant does not have an existing grant from the Commonwealth Foundation at the time the application window is open.
6. The average of the applicant’s total income over the last two years is less than £3m
7. The project must address one or both Commonwealth Foundation’s outcomes
8. The applicant will provide the following documents as part of the application:
   • a completed logic model using the Commonwealth Foundation template
   • a copy of the organisation’s registration certificate1 (the official registration document provided by the relevant authorities in the country concerned)
   • a copy of the organisation’s most recent audited accounts (it must include both the accounts and the opinion of the external auditor who has certified them; it should not be older than December 2016)
   • a copy of the registration certificate for all partner organisations

Selection Criteria: The application for a grant is a two-stage process: preliminary application and full application. Only shortlisted organisations will be invited to submit a full application.

Preliminary applications will be assessed on the criteria below:

1. The application has a clear problem definition.
2. The application clearly demonstrates that it is demand driven and relevant.
3. The project must address one or both Commonwealth Foundation outcomes
4. The application clearly shows how the planned activities will deliver outputs that lead to the project outcomes.
5. The organisation(s) has the capacity to deliver the submitted proposal.
6. The project must mainstream gender in the project design and project plan

Full applications will be assessed on the criteria below, in addition to the criteria used at the preliminary application stage:

1. The application clearly illustrates a strategy to sustain the positive outcomes from the project beyond the duration of the funding received from the Commonwealth Foundation
2. There is a clear Monitoring and Evaluation strategy for the project
3. The project includes a strong gender analysis of the problem, mainstreams gender and identifies how the anticipated change specifically impacts women and girls.

The selection process is highly competitive and selected projects will have been designed to undertake work that has the potential to lead to one or more of the outcomes in the Foundation’s strategic logic model.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: up to £200,000 over four years

How to Apply: To apply applicants will need to complete and submit an online application form using the online application system in the link below.

It is important to go through every helpful application detail before submitting.

Visit Programme Webpage for Details