China retaliates against US with export restrictions on strategic metals

Peter Symonds

In the lead-up to US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen’s visit to Beijing this weekend, the Chinese government hit back at unilateral US economic bans and sanctions. It announced restrictions on Monday on the export of two critical metals—gallium and germanium. The metals are vital in a wide range of applications, including for specialised semi-conductors, solar panels, LEDs and fibre optic cables, to name a few.

Mining and production of rare earths in China. [Photo: Foreign Policy Research Institute]

The restrictions, which China justified on the grounds of “national security,” will come into force from August 1 and will require companies to apply for an export permit. No details have been released as to the requirements for a permit. Beijing has defended the move, insisting it was imposing export restrictions, not bans, and that they were not targeted at particular countries.

There is no doubt, however, that the Chinese announcement is in retaliation for US trade war measures, especially bans on the export of the most advanced computer chips and the equipment needed for their manufacture. The US also has been pressuring its allies to follow suit. Both Japan and the Netherlands have done so.

China announced the restrictions just days after the Netherlands announced plans to apply new controls to limit the export of high-end chipmaking equipment from September 1. The Dutch company ASML produces the most advanced equipment in the world for the manufacture of semiconductors and the move is another blow to Chinese hi-tech corporations.

The US and Japan had already announced similar measures. The Biden administration imposed bans last October on the export of advanced chips and chip-making equipment to China on “national security” grounds in a bid to cripple China’s hi-tech industries.

Further measures are reportedly now under discussion in Washington, including further limits on advanced chips made by US firms Nvidia and AMD used for Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications. The Wall Street Journal reported this week that the White House is also considering prohibiting Chinese companies from accessing the cloud-computing services of US tech corporations like Amazon and Microsoft.

Beijing has repeatedly criticised the US bans. In the wake of its own restrictions, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin this week reiterated: “We oppose the overstretch of national security concept and abuse of export control by a handful of countries and bullying practices of going all out to suppress and contain specific countries.”

In an interview with China Daily, former vice-minister of commerce Wei Jianguo warned: “This is just the beginning of China’s countermeasures, and China’s tool box has many more types of measures available. If the high-tech restrictions on China become tougher in the future, China’s countermeasures will also escalate.”

In May, the Chinese government banned the use of memory chips made by the US company Micron products in “critical national infrastructure,” citing national security risks. The move echoed measures taken by the US and its allies to block the Chinese tech giant Huawei from any involvement in the construction of 5G networks.

The latest restrictions imposed on the two strategic metals points to even tougher measures that China could impose across a range of critical minerals, including rare earths. China dominates the production and supply of these products, which are vital to a broad range of industries, with both commercial and military applications. According to one estimate, China produces more than 95 percent of gallium output and 67 percent of germanium.

According to Caixin, China’s business website, the top importers of China’s gallium products in 2022 were Japan, Germany and the Netherlands and of germanium products were Japan, France, Germany and the US.

Speaking of China’s announcement, Paul Triolo, a senior vice president at global strategy firm Albright Stonebridge, told Reuters: “It’s clearly timed to send a not-so-subtle message to the Biden administration that China holds significant cards when it comes to inputs to the semiconductor, aerospace, and automobile industries, and can and will increasingly be willing to inflict pain on US companies.”

Peter Arkell, chairman of the Global Mining Association of China, explained to Reuters: “Gallium and germanium are just a couple of the minor metals that are so important for the range of tech products and China is the dominant producer of most of these metals. It is a fantasy to suggest that another country can replace China in the short or even medium term.”

China’s announcement has provoked concerns in related corporations internationally about acute shortages of gallium and germanium and rising prices not only for the two metals but for a vast array of goods that incorporate them. The European Commission expressed its concern and German economy minister Robert Habeck warned that any expansion of the restrictions to materials like lithium would be “problematic.”

The Biden administration has lashed out at China’s announcement, declaring hypocritically that it “firmly opposes” the export restrictions on the strategic metals. A US Commerce Department spokesman told the South China Morning Post in an email that China’s actions “underscore the need to diversify supply chains.” The email added that Washington would “engage with our allies and partners to address this and to build resilience in critical supply chains.”

As it escalates its confrontation with China and prepares for conflict, the US is already engaged in intense discussions at home and with its allies to establish alternative supply chains for critical minerals to replace China in the time of war. For some of the rare earths, China is at present virtually the sole source.

The vulnerability of the US was underscored by a Pentagon spokesman who explained on Thursday that the Pentagon holds a strategic US stockpile for germanium but currently has no inventory reserves for gallium.

China’s announcement was clearly timed to coincide with the visit of Yellen, who is now in China. Yellen’s trip, following that of US Secretary of State Antony Blinken last month, is supposedly part of a US charm offensive aimed at easing tensions between the two countries. Yellen, however, like Blinken, is not coming with any olive branch or offerings, but rather with a set of demands and ultimatums.

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen testifies before the House Appropriations Committee on Budget and Oversight hearing on March 23, 2023, in Washington. [AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana]

At an event yesterday in Beijing organised by the American Chamber of Commerce, Yellen declared that she intended to raise a series of concerns with her Chinese counterparts, “including China’s use of nonmarket tools like expanded subsidies for its state-owned enterprises and domestic firms, as well as barriers to market access for foreign firms.”

In a brazen display of hypocrisy, while justifying escalating US punitive measures against China on the basis of “national security,” Yellen told her audience of corporate representatives: “I’ve been particularly troubled by punitive actions that have been taken against US firms in recent months.”

Far from healing the rift, Yellen’s visit will only add to the mounting tensions between the two countries.

United Nations – Nippon Foundation Fellowship Program 2024

Application Deadline: 8th September 2023

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: International

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

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

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

Type: Fellowship

Offered Since: 2004

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

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

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

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

Number of Awards: 12

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

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

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

The deliverables of the Fellowship Programme are:

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

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

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

The Online Form

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

Visit Scholarship Webpage for Details

Commonwealth Professional Fellowships 2024/2025

Application Deadline: 10th August 2023 by 4pm BST

About the Award: Commonwealth Professional Fellowships are for mid-career professionals from low- and middle-income countries to spend a period at a UK Host organisation working in their sector for a programme of professional development.

Purpose: To provide professionals with the opportunity to enhance knowledge and skills in their given sector, and to have catalytic effects on their workplaces.

Intended beneficiaries: Mid-career professionals (with five years’ relevant work experience) working organisations in low and middle income Commonwealth countries.

These fellowships are offered under six development themes:

• Science and technology for development
• Strengthening health systems and capacity
• Promoting global prosperity
• Strengthening global peace, security and governance
• Strengthening resilience and response to crises
• Access, inclusion and opportunity

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: To be eligible for these Fellowships, prospective fellows must:

• Be a citizen of or have been granted refugee status by an eligible Commonwealth country, or be a British Protected Person
• Be permanently resident in an eligible Commonwealth country
• Have at least five years’ full-time, or equivalent part-time, relevant work experience, in a profession related to the subject of the fellowship programme, by the proposed start of the fellowship – voluntary work experience will not be counted towards this minimum
• Be in employment at the time of application at an organisation that they will return to upon completion of the fellowship
• Provide at least two references, one of which must be from their current employer. Any applications for which references are not received by the reference closing date will be considered ineligible.
• Not have undertaken a Commonwealth Professional Fellowship within the last five years (at the time of taking up the award)
• Not be seeking to undertake an academic programme of research or study. Academics are eligible to apply for the scheme, but only to undertake programmes of academic management, not research or courses relevant to their research subject
• Be available to undertake their fellowship from the prescribed start date

In addition to the above, prospective fellows must ensure they meet any eligibility criteria set out by each individual host organisation.

Eligible Countries: Developing countries

Number of Awards: Up to 25 fellows (in total)

Value & Duration of Award: Each Fellowship provides:

• Approved return airfare from the Fellow’s home country to the UK
• Reimbursement of the standard visa application fee
• Stipend (living allowance) payable monthly (or pro rata) for the duration of the award at the rate of £1,944 per month, or £2,397 per month for those at organisations in the London metropolitan area (rates quoted at 2022/23 levels
• If a Fellow declares a disability, a full assessment of needs and eligibility for additional financial support will be offered by the CSC. See the CSC disability support statement for more information
• Arrival allowance of up to £1,061.10 (rates quoted at 2021/22 levels), including an element for warm clothing
• A maximum of £3,000 per fellow can be agreed by host organisations for short courses/conferences as well as travel to visit other UK organisations where this forms an integral part of the programme. Host organisations should bear in mind the restrictions set out in our guidance on claimable costs.

How to Apply: Applications for prospective Fellows are now open. 

In the application form, prospective Fellows will be asked to:

• List all undergraduate and postgraduate university qualifications obtained (where applicable)
• List up to 10 publications and prizes (if applicable)
• Provide details of your employment history and explain how each job is relevant to the programme you wish to undertake in the UK (up to 100 words per employment)
• Provide a statement on the relevance of your previous work experience to the proposed fellowship (up to 300 words)
• List names and positions of up to three referees who are qualified to comment on both your capacity to benefit from your proposed fellowship in the UK and your ability to deliver development impact afterwards. One of your referees must be your current employer

Provide a development impact statement in 4 parts.

• Part 1: (up to 200 words) Explain how participation on your selected fellowship relates to:
  • one of the six CSC development themes
  • development issues at the global, national and local level
• Part 2 (up to 100 words) Explain how you intend to apply your new skills once your Fellowship ends.

• Part 3 (up to 250 words) Outline what you expect will change in development terms following your fellowship including:
  • the outcomes that you aim to achieve
  • the timeframe for their implementation
  • who the beneficiaries will be
• Part 4: (up to 100 words) Write about how the impact of your work could be best measured.
• Confirm what your award objectives are and how each of them will be met by the fellowship programme
• Confirm what your objectives are for the next two years and how each of them will be met by the fellowship programme
• Confirm what your objectives are in the longer term and how each of them will be met by the fellowship programme
• Provide a personal statement to summarise the ways in which your personal background has encouraged you to want to make an impact in your home country. You should indicate areas in which you have already contributed, such as having overcome any personal or community barriers to your chosen career (up to 500 words)
• Summarise the ways in which you have engaged in voluntary activities and the opportunities you have had to demonstrate leadership (up to 500 words)
• Provide a scan of your passport or national identity card

• It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Thames Water brought to near collapse by private looting

Paul Mitchell

Thames Water, the largest water company in the UK, is on the verge of collapse. Both the chairman and CEO have resigned as the company’s board, investors and UK government claim that all is under control and a “turnaround plan” will be implemented under the auspices of new chairman Sir Adrian Montague.

Montague is currently Chairman of Cadent Gas Limited, Britain’s biggest gas network. Cadent Gas is run by the Australian banking group Macquarie, which owned Thames Water from 2006 to 2016 and is largely responsible for its current crisis, tripling its debts from £3.2 billion to £10.5 billion. Macquarie borrowed at a time of cheap interest rates against the company’s assets and paid out £2.8 billion in dividends to shareholders.

Thames Water HQ by the Thames In Reading, Berkshire [Photo by Jim Linwood / CC BY 2.0]

The banking group has carried out the same rapacious policy at Cadent, saddling the company with debts of £7.4 billion. Cadent made a record £945 million profit in the 2022-23 financial year and paid a £350 million dividend to shareholders, while announcing plans to close its defined benefit pension scheme.

The immediate cause of Thames Water’s demise is soaring inflation which has increased the cost of repaying the now more than £14 billion of debt its owners have saddled it with. Inflation has also increased the price of energy and chemicals, which are a huge cost for water companies.

Other water companies including Yorkshire Water, SES, Southern and Portsmouth Water also lack “financial resilience” according to the regulator Ofwat.

The debacle is an ignominious turning point for a company that originated in the New River Company, founded in 1617, to bring fresh water along a 28-mile aqueduct to London. Its successor, the Metropolitan Water Board, undertook huge water and sewerage infrastructure projects to advance public health in the Victorian era.

By the time the Board was privatised by the Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher in 1989 it was renowned internationally for its operational skill and scientific research. Its workers could retire on full pay at the age of 55.

[Photo by Bit Cloud / CC BY 1.0]

If the company goes under, the government will likely temporarily nationalise it in the hopes of cobbling together a rescue package. However, Susannah Streeter, head of money and market at Hargreaves Lansdown, said selling Thames Water would be difficult given its indebtedness. “Pouring more money into the financial black hole Thames Water appears to have dug is clearly an unwelcome prospect, with little hope of future returns given the huge infrastructure work needed to mend leaks and sewage discharges.”

When the Tory government privatised the water industry, it claimed there was gross bureaucratism and inefficiency which would be done away with through the introduction of competition, providing a massive injection of cash for investment. The sale would benefit consumers and deliver funds to the government and an independent regulator would defend against potentially abusive monopolies.

The opposite occurred. A Wild West-style rampage took place in which the previously state-owned water assets fell into the hands of bank consortiums, private equity firms and sovereign wealth funds committed to extracting every last penny from customers and workers and building up debts while splashing out on dividends.

Recent research by The Times newspaper has borne out the World Socialist Web Site’s contemporary analysis of this process. It explains that by 2021 nine of the 15 English water and sewage companies were owned by “special purpose companies” under the control of financial institutions, which “were then able to use water company revenue to generate significant returns to shareholders. And one way this happens is by hiking up company debts.” Zero debt at the time of privatisation has soared to £60.6 billion.

According to The Times, Thames Water was “the archetype of this model”. After it was taken over by Macquarie, debts rocketed over the next 10 years from £3.2 billion to £10.7 billion, while dividends of £2.5 billion were paid out. The company paid next to no corporation tax.

At the same time, as the Consumer Council for Water (CCW) which represents water customers has recently explained, “Nearly one in four households say they are currently struggling to pay their water bill amid the cost-of-living crisis and this will add to their worries.” Water bills have more than doubled in real terms to an average £448 this year.

While money has been sucked out of the company it has become notorious for polluting rivers and failing to stem leakage from its pipe network. It leaks more water than any other water company in the UK and was fined a record £20 million for pumping 1.9 billion litres of untreated sewage into the Thames in 2017. This week Thames Water was in court yet again for pumping, “unnoticed”, a roughly estimated “millions of litres” of raw sewage into rivers near Gatwick Airport, causing them to turn “black” and kill more than 1,000 fish.

The government claims the Environment Agency (EA) is being “empowered” to tackle sewage pollution and “is conducting its largest ever criminal investigation into potential widespread breaches of environmental permit conditions at wastewater treatment works by all water and sewerage companies.”

The EA declared, “Our initial assessment indicates that there may have been widespread and serious non-compliance of environmental permit conditions by all companies. We take the implications of this extremely seriously and are committed to understanding the scale and impact of any alleged offending.” It said inspectors might go and visit the guilty sites.

The same empty rhetoric has been trotted out year after year since privatisation. The EA is powerless to do anything as Parliament acknowledged last year when it declared that the agency had been “systematically defunded and disempowered to act.” EA whistleblowers have told the environmental ENDS magazine that they were powerless to do their jobs and the regulator was no longer a deterrent to polluters.

A major share of the responsibility for the crisis lies with the Labour Party and the trade unions.

The Labour government of Tony Blair (1997-2007) denounced opposition to Tory privatisation as “rigid dogma”. Current Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer ditched proposals to renationalise the water sector last year.

During privatisation the unions sabotaged overwhelming votes for industrial action. Since then, they have pursued a “partnership” agreement with the employers, claiming it was the best way to achieve job security, better wages and conditions. Instead workers have faced constant reorganisations, job cuts, declining wages and reduced pension schemes. The unions will now help impose anything that is demanded of them in the proposed “turnaround plan” to rescue the bankrupt Thames Water.

Israel warns more to come after withdrawal from Jenin

Jean Shaoul

Israel Defence Forces (IDF) pulled out of the northern West Bank city of Jenin Wednesday morning, ending its two-day invasion and bombardment of the city and the densely populated refugee camp.

Itamar Yaar, a former deputy head of Israel’s National Security Council and a colonel in the reserves, insisted the withdrawal was not the end and threatened more action to come. “It doesn’t mean we’ve done what we’ve done, we’re out and that’s it,” he said. “The operation was relatively short and limited. That means we might see similar activities” that could take place in Jenin “even tomorrow.”

Palestinians walk on a destroyed road following two days of Israeli military raid on the Jenin refugee camp in the West Bank, July 5, 2023 [AP Photo/Majdi Mohammed]

This threat echoed the earlier remarks of the IDF chief of central command and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It flows inexorably from the agenda of Netanyahu’s far-right coalition, which is committed to the annexation of the West Bank in defiance of international law—preferably “cleansed” of Palestinians or failing that, crowded into isolated and blockaded enclaves—in pursuit of its aim of establishing a Jewish Supremacist state in both Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. These fascistic forces have encouraged and incited their supporters to carry out vigilante attacks in the West Bank to terrorise and drive out the Palestinians, while demanding that the IDF take ever more aggressive action against the Palestinians.

The entire Jenin operation, planned over months and conducted with the full knowledge and consent of US imperialism—that never ceases to justify its own military aggression in the name of “humanitarian intervention”—was in flagrant violation of the international conventions on war and human rights outlawing military action against civilians.

The 1,000 plus troops, replete with massive firepower, had entered Jenin in armoured vehicles and bulldozers under cover of armed drones and helicopters. Their declared objective was to root out a few hundred Palestinian militants, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Lions’ Den, the Jenin Brigades, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and others that Israel designates as “terrorists,” and seize their arms and explosives. Israel’s security forces claimed that more than 50 shooting attacks have been carried out by militants from the Jenin area since the start of the year.

An IDF spokesperson insisted, “We didn’t come to conquer the refugee camp [in Jenin]. This isn’t an operation against the Palestinian Authority, it’s an operation against terror organizations in Jenin that are making the lives of the civilian population in Jenin miserable.” The operation would continue indefinitely, he added. “This will be a continuum of operations that aren’t necessarily limited in time throughout northern Samaria [the occupied West Bank], as intelligence and operational timing dictate.”

This was the pretext for soldiers to go on a planned rampage, ploughing up streets, destroying the utility networks, smashing up many of the refugee camp’s buildings—homes, residential buildings, medical facilities and mosques and destroying all the vehicles in their path—traumatizing the population and forcing around one quarter of the 14,000 residents of the refugee camp to flee their homes. They went on house-to-house searches, interrogated several hundred Palestinians of whom around 30 were detained for further questioning and seizing arms caches and explosives.

The IDF troops left behind whole areas of the city a war zone, with little or nothing for the fugitive families to return to—some 80 percent of the homes were damaged or destroyed—and no prospect of ever acquiring the financial and material resources to make good the damage as the Palestinians’ experience in Gaza has shown. This comes after decades of Israeli military control over Area C, some 60 percent of the West Bank, that has prevented the construction and rehabilitation of the water, sewerage, electricity and transport infrastructure, devastating the economy, wrecking livelihoods and causing untold suffering.

Israeli forces killed twelve Palestinians, including four minors. Palestinian Islamic Jihad claimed eight as its fighters. Israel injured more than 100, of whom 20 are in a critical condition, preventing many of the wounded from receiving medical treatment. It brings the total number of West Bank Palestinians killed by Israeli forces to nearly 150, while several dozen more have been killed in Gaza.

So one-sided was this week’s operation that just one Israeli soldier was killed—and as the troops withdrew—which the IDF said this was likely due to “friendly fire.” The IDF admitted that there were few armed clashes with the militants because the 300 wanted gunmen had fled the area.

On Wednesday, the Palestinians held mass funeral processions for the dead, with angry crowds expelling Palestinian Authority officials who had come to pay their respects, denouncing them as “traitors” for doing nothing to protect them from Israel’s attack and calling their actions “shameful.” Militants in the besieged Palestinian enclave of Gaza fired five rockets towards southern Israel in a token show of solidarity with Jenin that were intercepted by Israel’s Iron Dome system.

On Thursday afternoon, a Palestinian shot dead an Israeli soldier near the West Bank settlement of Kedumim. Israeli security forces gave chase to a car driver and killed him. The Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, the clerical group that controls Gaza, claimed him as a member and said his action was a response to Israel’s assault on Jenin.

On Thursday, the IDF carried out artillery strikes against southern Lebanon after an anti-tank guided missile fired from Lebanon exploded on the border fence close to the village of Ghajar that straddles the border. It comes amid rising tensions on the border. Last week, Hezbollah, the Lebanese clerical party allied with Iran that has provided vital support for President Bashar al-Assad during the 12-year long proxy war financed and supported by the Gulf States, Turkey and the CIA—and aimed at toppling his regime—said it shot down an Israeli drone flying over a village in southern Lebanon.

Israeli jets also carried out airstrikes against targets near the Syrian capital of Damascus on Wednesday night, the second Israeli strike on Syria this week, likely targeting warehouses storing “advanced Iranian weapons,” according to a report on the Ynet news site. The strikes came as Syria and Russia were holding joint air exercises, scheduled to last for several days, focusing “on joint air, air defense and electronic warfare operations to counter airstrikes,” according to the Russian military.

Early on Sunday, the IDF said that its fighter jets had struck a Syrian air defense battery after a Syrian anti-aircraft missile launched from the system had exploded in Israeli airspace. This was apparently in response to several Israeli strikes near the city of Homs that Syria’s state news agency reported had caused “material losses.”

Mobilization in Ukraine: Zelensky government on a manhunt

Maxim Goldarb

One of the most burning issues in Ukrainian society over the past year and a half has been the mobilization into the army. In our country, everyone is well aware of the enormous scale that not only the mobilization itself has reached, but also of numerous, systemic violations of human rights in the course of mobilization. However, most of the media in Western countries hush up this information. 

The law in Ukraine provides definite rules for the procedure of military registration and conscription to military service of conscripts and reservists. In particular, it regulates the procedure for delivery of summonses for conscription.

A summons for military service is a written document that is issued in the name of a specific person. The summons must be prepared in advance¸ and cannot be filled out in front of the person to whom it is handed. If the summons is issued correctly, the conscript is obliged to appear before the relevant state body responsible for mobilization—the Territorial Center for Recruitment and Social Support (TCR or TTsK in Russian and SS or SP in Russian). But if the summons has been issued incorrectly, the conscript does not have such an obligation.

According to the law, summonses cannot be delivered by messenger message, text message, phone call or e-mail. Employees of recruitment centers are not allowed to write out summonses “on the spot” in front of the person to whom the summons is addressed, or to add data to the partially completed form of the summons.

However, in practice, the legal framework for mobilization in Ukraine is being violated systematically and on a mass-scale. To name but a few cases: 

• In mid-January 2023, representatives of the TCR tried to check documents on the street in Odessa in order to issue a summons for military service on the spot.
• In Zaporozhzhia, in mid-January 2023, TCR employees, together with the police, stopped people on the street and filled out empty summonses. This case was recorded on video.  
• In late January 2023, the police detained people in villages and sent them, even without summonses, to the TCR.
• In late February 2023, in the city of Berehove in Transcarpathia, employees of the TCR demanded documents from citizens on the street and issued summonses on the spot.

Having seen enough of such methods of mobilization, many men, while on the streets, have begun to hide from people in military uniform (the mobilization is carried out by the military personnel of the TCR).

Then the authorities began to use even more blatant methods in order to send as many people as possible to the war. 

• In January 2023, in Odessa, representatives of the TCR hid inside an ambulance, and ten, when they saw men of military age (from 18 to 60 years old), they jumped out onto the street, handed out summons and forcibly dragged those who resisted into the ambulance. Even the military was soon forced to admit this fact.
• In late January—early February 2023, a number of cases were recorded in which TCR employees, either together with the police or independently, were literally catching people on the streets of Odessa and a number of other Ukrainian cities.
• In Ternopil in mid-February 2023, representatives of the TCR grabbed men of military age at a bus station and forced them into the bus.

Similar cases were reported in February 2023 in: Chernomorsk; Transcarpathia; Kropyvnytsky; Cherkasy and many other cities and regions.

There is no way to classify these cases other than as kidnappings—a criminal offense. This is also proven by a number of court decisions.

On March 3, 2023, the district court of Nikolaev ordered that a complaint by citizen I. Dirk about a criminal offense be entered into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations (ERDR). The applicant provided a video recording showing how a group of persons in military uniform forced him into a car and took him against his will to one of the regional Territorial Centers for Recruitment and Social Support. The complaint was filed under Articles 146, 371 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (unlawful deprivation of liberty or kidnapping; knowingly unlawful detention, custody, house arrest or detention).

On March 7, 2023, in Odessa, on April 10 Street, employees of the TCR forcibly grabbed  a citizen off the street and took him to serve the summons. In the evening, his wife wrote a statement to the police about the illegal kidnapping of her husband. Criminal proceedings were opened in the case.

In addition, there have been repeated reports about cases in which summons are handed out as a means of criminal or administrative punishment, which is illegal. Thus, on March 20, 2023, a video appeared of an incident in which an Odessa taxi driver expressed “insufficiently patriotic thoughts”. Then, on March 22, 2023, it was reported that “he was found and drafted into the army.”

These examples constitute only a relatively small list of cases of a large number of human rights violations during the mobilization. In fact, there are thousands such examples, and we only learn about those cases that are caught on video and are made public on social media or in the press. 

The Ukrainian government of Volodymyr Zelensky has organized a hunt for its own citizens. Men of military age, in gross violation of the law, are seized off the streets and forcibly sent into the army. Then, in a great many cases they are sent to the front with virtually no military training. As a result, they quickly die or are seriously injured.

By now, many men avoid going out at all and try to stay at home as much as possible. However, the need to work in order to provide for themselves and their families makes it impossible for most men to avoid appearing in public places.

Most Ukrainian men then become “cannon fodder” simply because they lack any kind of military training. Yet this does not go for the “chosen ones”—the ruling elite. None of its representatives—the president’s entourage, ministers, deputies, as well as the oligarchs— are fighting at the front. The same goes for their adult sons. All of them are either deep in the rear, or even went abroad without hindrance. They prefer to make money from war rather than die in it. The ruling elite leaves the right to die in this war to the working people, to the poor, to which, at this point, the majority of the population of Ukraine belong. In this context, it should also be noted that in Ukraine’s shattered economy, military salaries are just about the only possible income for the remaining able-bodied people who are forced to risk their lives and health in order to feed their families.

In the mobilization, the class essence of the ruling oligarchy has manifested itself with complete clarity. This also explains why the leading Western media maintain complete silence about this: they desperately try to preserve the false media image—which they themselves created—of a supposedly existing “unity of the democratic Ukrainian government and people”. But this has little to do with reality.

Thousands protest Sri Lankan government’s attacks on welfare subsidies

S. K. Irangani

Protests have erupted across almost all Sri Lankan districts during the past two weeks over the Wickremesinghe government’s exclusion of thousands of people from its new “Aswesuma” welfare program. Poor people excluded from the scheme gathered outside Divisional Secretariats, the government’s regional administrative units, demanding that they have access to the assistance.

Protesting women demand Aswsuma relief payments in Nuwara Eliya, Sri Lanka, on 26 June 2023 [Photo: Facebook]

Aswesuma was introduced by President Ranil Wickremesinghe in May to replace the previously existing “Samurdhi” program. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) demanded the government cut welfare and other social spending as part of its $US3 billion bailout loan in March. The welfare program, the IMF declared, should only assist “vulnerable sections.”

Most of the protesters previously received Samurdhi but are excluded from receiving Aswesuma. They accuse the government of not accepting their applications for the new program.

Sri Lankan governments have implemented various relief programs—Janasaviya (Empowering people) and Samurdhi—in previous decades, falsely claiming that the measures would eliminate poverty. These programs, however, have nothing to do with ending poverty but are desperate attempts to dissipate popular opposition to Sri Lanka’s capitalist ruling elite.

World Socialist Web Site (WSWS) reporters spoke to those impacted by the new scheme who angrily explained the desperate situation they now confront.

Ashoka Herath, from Handessa in the Kandy district, told the WSWS that she no longer receives the 2,500-rupee ($US8) monthly Samurdhi subsidy and now faces enormous difficulties.

Ashoka Herath

“My husband does not have a job but we have twin girls who are both studying for their advanced level exam. Their expenditure has gone up several fold,” she said.

Herath explained that officials surveying homes for the Aswesuma program had been instructed by the government to remove poor families like hers from the new welfare list.

“If you have a motor bicycle, small stall or a small chicken farm, your name is cut from the list. Does the government worry what you have to spend on your childrens’ education and medicine?” she said.

A woman who used to work at a private hospital in Kandy but lost her job because she was blind in one eye, endorsed Ashoka’s comments. “I received 3,500 rupees under Samurdhi but that has been cut under Aswesuma. We’ve been thrown into a desperate struggle to try and live,” she said.

A widow with three children from Dambaathupathana, Heeloya in Bandarawela explained that she will not receive Aswesuma welfare because she has done various odd jobs and received a daily wage.

“It’s been four years since my husband’s death and we do not have any permanent income. With Samurdhi I was just able to live and give my children porridge, even though I had an empty stomach. Now we’re being forced to die. In my village there are several people who are suffering even more than me after having been removed from Aswesuma,” she said.

H. Dhammika from Uthuru Kabillawela in Bandarawela worked as a housemaid for a monthly wage of 12,000 rupees and previously received a Samurdhi subsidy. She has been excluded from the new program. Her husband is incapacitated and cannot move following surgery on his back.

“I’m also a patient,” Dhammika explained. “My husband and I need medicine from Badulla general hospital but we now have to spend a lot of money buying it because it’s no longer available at the hospital. How can we live if we are spending large amounts of money on medicines while the prices are skyrocketing? How does it become aswesuma [relief] if the subsidies to extremely poor people like us are being gutted?” she asked.

Confronted with island-wide protests over the new welfare program, the government announced that those excluded from Aswesuma would have until July 10 to appeal. By Tuesday over 550,000 people had submitted appeals in a telling indication of the extreme poverty in Sri Lanka.

Protesters occupy Divisional Secretariat office in Nuwara Eliya, Sri Lanka, June 26, 2023 [Photo: Facebook]

While the presidential media unit reports that over 3.3 million people have qualified to receive Aswesuma, Wickremesinghe’s so-called relief program is such a pittance that it does not even cover the bare minimum expenses of a family for a day. Under the scheme, benefits will be provided to four distinct groups: transitional [those on the verge of being poor], vulnerable, poor and extreme poor.

Accordingly, 400,000 transitional beneficiaries/families will receive a monthly allowance of 2,500 rupees ($8) from July 1 to December 31; 400,000 vulnerable beneficiaries will get a 5,000-rupee monthly allowance until March 31, 2024; and 800,000 poor and extreme poor persons will receive 8,500 and 15,000-rupee monthly allowances respectively for the next three years.

According to the Department of Census and Statistics June survey, the poorest 40 percent of the population earns only 26,931 rupees a month, which is not enough to provide a family of four with three meals a day, let alone pay for other living costs. The poorest 20 percent earns a paltry 17,532 rupees per month.

Hyperinflation slashed real income in Sri Lanka by 40 percent over the past year. Amid these desperate conditions the government has replaced the limited Samurdhi welfare program with its criminally inadequate Aswesuma grants. This measure, which will throw millions more Sri Lankans in to poverty, further underlines what IMF officials meant when stating that their bailout loan would be linked to a “brutal experiment” in Sri Lanka.

Sajith Premadasa, leader of Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) and the parliamentary opposition, denounced the government, declaring in parliament that only 1.2 million people would receive Aswesuma benefits even though Sri Lanka’s poor had increased from 3 to 7 million in recent years. He failed to mention that the new welfare program is a direct response to IMF demands, policies which he and his party fully support.

Vijitha Herath, a Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) parliamentarian, recently told a media conference that many of those not qualifying for Aswesuma failed to receive it because of “errors” in the selection criteria. He also claimed that Aswesuma was not part of the IMF austerity program, and insisted that the JVP opposed it. These claims are false. The JVP is thoroughly committed to the IMF and international capital. In fact, Herath told parliament on March 24, 2023 that the JVP was not opposed to seeking an IMF bailout.

The trade union bureaucracies, which are busy suppressing workers’ opposition to government privatisation measures and attacks on jobs, wages and pensions, are maintaining a deathly silence about the vicious assault on Sri Lanka’s poor.

The Sri Lankan working class must come to the defence of the poverty-stricken masses and rally them in a unified political struggle against the government’s IMF austerity measures, which will throw millions more into abject poverty.