Oldest Homo fossil from Ethiopia links human genus to Australopithecus

Thomas H. Douglass

Scientists last week unveiled a new fossil jawbone from the Afar region in Ethiopia that extends the age of the human genus, Homo, back to 2.8 million years. The find is an exciting link between older hominins and our own ancestors who, only a few hundred thousand years later, would be manufacturing stone tools on a regular basis.

The bone contains critical anatomical features linking it to earlier Australopithecines as well as later fossils including Homo habilis. The fossil’s discoverers attribute the mandible, labeled LD350-1, to the Homo genus, which includes modern humans, or Homo sapiens. They have not specified, however, whether it should be considered H. habilis or perhaps belonged to another species.

LD-350-1’s discovery and publication in Science Express were made possible by collaboration between researchers in Ethiopia; at Arizona State, Penn State, and George Washington Universities in the United States; and at University College in London in the UK. Ethiopia has been the site of spectacular discoveries in human evolution, including the discovery ofAustralopithecus afarensis or “Lucy,” and more recently Ardipithecus ramidusand an infant Australopithecine from Dikika.

The LD-350-1 mandible

The LD-350-1 mandible, right, pictured next to an Australopithecus afarensis mandible. LD-350-1 has been provisionally attributed to the genus Homo.

The fossil, a left mandible fragment, includes the chin, parts of the canines and premolars, and the large molar teeth in the back of the jaw. Scientists attribute a range of features, including smaller canines, the orientation of blood vessel and nerve routes, and the shape of the jawline as characteristic of the earliest members of the human genus, H. habilis. But they note that other features of the chin, and of molar shape, are also consistent with Australopithecines like Lucy.

The new mandible digitized and reflected to show what the complete jaw would have looked like.

While the fossil record in East Africa is rich prior to 3 million years ago (Ma) and after 2.5 Ma, the period between 2.5-3 Ma is poorly represented in the region’s sedimentary record, leaving evolutionary history during this time more difficult to reconstruct. This time period, however, is especially crucial for the study of early human origins because the first stone tools are found between 2.3-2.6 Ma, meaning that, presumably, early human behaviors were evolving during a time of sparser fossil records.

Lee-Adoyta, Ethiopia, 2.8 million years ago

LD-350-1 was found in an area only recently excavated, in Ledi-Geraru, a part of Ethiopia’s Afar region. The exact location of the fossil’s discovery in Ledi-Geraru, called Lee Adoyta, was described in a paper by geologist Erin DiMaggio and colleagues accompanying the description of the new fossil.

The LD-350-1 mandible was found in the Lee-Adoyta region of Ledi Geraru, in the Afar depression of Ethiopia. The depression, a part of the east African Rift Valley, has yielded many spectacular fossils.

Speaking to the World Socialist Web Site, DiMaggio described the research as “very interdisciplinary, collaborative and also international. Our team includes geologists, archaeologists, paleontologists, geochemists: this kind of collaborative work makes us more efficient in the field, and helps us make these kinds of discoveries.”

While today Lee-Adoyta is “a badlands with exposed sediments and a few acacia trees,” DiMaggio said, 2.8 million years ago it was a grassland and savannah marked by trees along changing river margins and lake shores.

DiMaggio and her colleagues found an abundance of grazing herbivores, a few forest-dwelling elephants, and hippo, crocodile and fish fossils from animals that would have lived alongside the ancient hominin. Coarse pebbles in the sedimentary record, wavelike structures in sand, and silty mudstones all suggest that Lee Adoyta was shifting between faster flowing rivers, slow floodplains and lakes margins over hundreds of thousands of years.

“Those changes are consistent with what we observe throughout the Afar depression during this period, but their relevance to the whole of east Africa isn’t clear,” DiMaggio said.

Many animal fossils at the time of LD-350-1, that is, 2.8 Ma, also appear for the first time or have replaced previous and now absent species, suggesting widespread ecological shifts in the region.

DiMaggio described understanding the fault structure of Lee Adoyta as especially challenging and interesting. “The whole area is faulted—with blocks of rock moving up or down—and so it took a lot of footwork, and Argon-Argon dating, to understand those faults.”

Though the geology of the region is complicated by regular rifts and faults, typical of the African Rift Valley overall, the researchers were able to firmly establish LD-350-1’s age through the presence of volcanic material in sediments above and below the fossil.

Early Homo prior to LD-350-1

Prior to LD-350-1’s discovery, the earliest specimens attributed to Homowere found in Kenya and dated to 2.4 Ma, with a host of other specimens found throughout east Africa, including in Ethiopia, shortly thereafter.

Sites along Lake Turkana in northern Kenya show sophisticated tool production techniques, a part of the earliest Oldowan stone tool industry, at this time. Even earlier stone tools have been found alongside butchered animal bones in Gona, Ethiopia, from 2.6 Ma, though the only hominin found nearby has been attributed to A. garhi, which possessed a chimpanzee-sized brain and other anatomical features typical of Australopithecines.

The evolution of A. garhi and H. habilis accompanied the evolution of a host of other hominins between 1.5-2.5 Ma in east and south Africa, including large-jawed species like Paranthropus aethiopicus, P. boisei and P. robustus, commonly called “robust” australopithecines, and other “gracile” specimens like A. africanus or the recently discovered A. sediba.

These species are thought to have evolved from older populations of A. afarensis who lived in east Africa between 3-4 Ma, through proliferating and diversifying with the expansion of African grasslands. A. afarensis are not known to have produced stone tools, though cut-marked bones suggesting stone tool use have been found near Australopithecines in Dikka, Ethiopia at about 3.4 Ma.

Isolated teeth with anatomical features intermediate between Afarensis andHomo have been recovered in sediments aged 2.5-3 Ma throughout east Africa in the past, but LD-350-1 is the first such fossil complete enough to demonstrate similarity to the genus Homo.

Further implications

No tools have been found alongside the fossil, and the absence of cranial bones, or bones from the rest of the skeleton, make speculation about brain size and other anatomical features impossible. While Australopithecines possessed the ability to both walk and climb in trees, and had chimpanzee-sized brains, later H. erectus specimens would evolve tall and slender bodies, larger brains, and trade their ability to climb for the ability to run, throw and manufacture sophisticated stone tools.

Overall, this discovery marks another triumph in the field of paleoanthropology, linking later human-like fossils with older bipeds like Lucy, and filling in the fossil record that connects our own existence to the natural world in which we live, and from which we evolved.

The intermediate character of the fossil also raises the possibility that a number of similar Homo-like lineages might have evolved between 2.5-3 MA, as other hominin species proliferated. Further discoveries almost certainly promise to clarify the relationship between LD-350-1, Australopithecus andHomo, not only from an anatomical but more importantly from a behavioral perspective.

Provocations against Russia dominate Estonian parliamentary elections

Markus Salzmann

The Estonian governing coalition of the Reform Party (RE) and Social Democrats (SDE) will continue to rule despite losing its absolute majority in the March 1 parliamentary elections.

RE, the party of Prime Minister Taavi Roivas, lost three seats, winning 30 of the 101 seats in parliament, followed closely by the pro-Russian Centre Party, which now holds 27 seats after gaining one seat.

The new government will likely be composed of the Reform Party, the Social Democrats and the right-wing Pro Patria and Res Publica Union (IRL). Roivas categorically ruled out a coalition with the pro-Russian Centre Party.

The fact that not a single party that even remotely represents the interests of broad sections of the population contested the elections expressed itself in a massive abstention. Turnout was 63.7 percent, but in several regions of the country was little more than 50 percent. Moreover, two new right-wing parties will enter parliament. In total, there will be six parties in the new parliament.

The crisis in Ukraine and tensions with Russia dominated the election. Foreign and security policies were the only issues discussed by the parties. The government parties conducted a repulsive anti-Russian campaign in country were approximately one quarter of the 1.3 million inhabitants are ethnic Russians.

A few days before the election, the government organized a massive provocation jointly with the US and European imperialist powers just a few hundred metres from the Russian border. On Estonian Independence Day, combat vehicles bearing American flags drove through the city of Narva, which is principally inhabited by ethnic Russians. In addition to the Second US Cavalry Regiment, British, Dutch, Spanish and Latvian soldiers also participated in the parade.

The eastern border town is separated from Russia by the Narva River. Seeking to encourage an atmosphere of panic, both Estonian and US officials have claimed that Russia could try to penetrate in the NATO area at this point.

Over the next five years, Estonia plans to invest €40 million in the development of infrastructure to facilitate a stronger NATO presence. The government confirmed a Defence Ministry plan for the construction of barracks, training facilities and associated roads. NATO has already significantly increased its military presence in the Baltic States, citing Russian support for the separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Painting Russia as the antagonist, Prime Minister Roivas stated, “The situation, however, is that our eastern neighbour has been behaving as the aggressor towards other free countries for quite a few years. Georgia in 2008, at the moment, Ukraine ... This gives us no way to deal with them as if nothing has happened.”

Estonia, as well as Latvia and Lithuania, were all part of the Soviet Union until its dissolution in 1991. After the restoration of capitalism the Baltic States joined both the EU and NATO in 2004. Estonia has also been a member of the European Monetary Union since 2011.

As in Latvia and Lithuania, the Russian minority in Estonia is subjected to discrimination. At least 100,000 Russian-speaking inhabitants of the country have so-called “grey passports”. They are considered stateless and have no right to vote. In recent years, ultra-right-wing groups have been able to openly agitate against the Russian minority without the state intervening to stop them.

The election campaign’s anti-Russia character and the demands for more NATO troops to be stationed in the country were undisputed by all the parties. After some initial hesitation, the Centre Party, whose leader enjoys close relations with Moscow, adopted a clear course of criticism of Putin’s policy regarding Ukraine. This is in contrast to the attitude of many Estonians, who regard the escalation of the conflict with Russia by the government, the US and the EU as a legitimate threat.

The right-wing government in Tallinn is escalating the conflict with Russia without regard to the possible dangers. According to media reports, the government is preparing for an “irregular invasion”. Prime Minister Roivas told reporters that Estonia has taken precautions and “carefully planned its defence.”

Defence Minister Sven Mikser agreed to the largest arms supply contract in the history of the country. In December, Estonia announced a deal that included the purchase of 44 C90 tanks from the Netherlands for $113 million. Neighboring Latvia acquired 123 warships for €48 million in August last year, and in November bought 800 anti-tank systems and 100 trucks.

The recent strengthening of the military Voluntary Association Kaitseliit (Defence League) is also significant. Established in 1917 in the wake of the Russian Revolution, it was composed of the most reactionary forces that rallied to fight against the workers’ government in Russia. With the integration of the country into the Soviet Union in 1940, it was officially disbanded.

Re-established after independence in 1991, Kaitseliit is now managed by the Estonian Ministry of Defence and has 15,000 members. Last year alone, it recruited 900 new members, mostly former military or members of fascist organizations.

In the final analysis, the stoking up of the conflict with Russia serves to divert attention from the extreme social crisis in the country, which every party failed to address in the election.

Estonia faces mass emigration by young, professionally qualified people who see no future there. Prior to the adoption of the euro in 2011, it had been hit hard by the international economic and financial crisis. Economic performance fell by 14 percent in 2009 while the official unemployment rate peaked at more than 18 percent in 2010.

While total state debt was quite low compared other EU states, the government in Tallinn initiated a rigid austerity policy to meet the requirements of Brussels. The resulting cuts were equal to 8 percent of GDP. Wages of state employees were cut by about 30 percent and social benefits massively reduced. In this way, the budget deficit was reduced to just about 1.5 percent of GDP at the expense of the general population.

Real wages have not risen for eight years and unemployment has almost doubled. Estonia is the poorest country in the euro zone. Currently, more than 100,000 people live below the poverty line, unemployment is officially almost 8 percent. While thousands of citizens have already emigrated in search of work recent surveys indicate that nearly 80,000 more will follow them this spring.

US heroin overdose death rates nearly quadrupled since 2000

Evan Blake

A recent report from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) has found that death rates from heroin overdose in the United States have increased dramatically since 2010, nearly quadrupling from 0.7 deaths per 100,000 in 2000 to 2.7 deaths per 100,000 in 2013.

By far, the steepest rise in death rates from heroin overdose occurred between 2010 and 2013, when the rate increased by an average of 37 percent each year, while it had risen on average 6 percent yearly over the previous decade.

While falsely touted by politicians as a period of economic “recovery,” these statistics indicate that many turned to hard drugs as a means to cope with the reality of mass unemployment and declining living standards.

Significantly, the report finds that, from 2010-2013, death rates from heroin overdose increased across all age, sex, race and ethnicity groups, with the largest increases seen among non-Hispanic white persons.

During this time, men have disproportionately died from heroin overdose at a rate four times that of women, but both sexes saw a roughly threefold increase in death rates, with the age-adjusted rate among men increasing from 1.6 to 4.2 per 100,000 for men and from 0.4 to 1.2 per 100,000 for women.

Geographically, the Midwest and Northeast regions have seen a significantly higher upsurge in death rates than the West and South, while all regions have seen a dramatic increase in deaths.

Researchers Holly Hedegaard, M.D., M.S.P.H.; Li-Hui Chen, M.S., Ph.D.; and Margaret Warner, Ph.D. reported that between 2000 and 2013, “the age-adjusted rate for heroin-related drug-poisoning deaths increased nearly 11-fold in the Midwest region (from 0.4 to 4.3 per 100,000), more than fourfold in the Northeast region (from 0.9 to 3.9), more than threefold in the South region (from 0.5 to 1.7), and doubled in the West region (from 0.9 to 1.8).”

In recent years, the notorious Sinaloa cartel in Mexico has monopolized the trade of heroin in the Midwest, and is estimated to supply 70 to 80 percent of the illegal narcotics trade across the entire region.

Also, since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan, that country is estimated to have seen an escalation in cultivated areas of opium production from 8,000 to 209,000 hectares, according to the UN Office for Drug and Crime.

The study also determined that in 2000-2013 the rate for heroin-related overdose deaths was highest among adults aged 25-44. The report states that “from 2010 through 2013, the death rate for adults aged 18-24 increased 2.3-fold from 1.7 to 3.9 per 100,000, for those aged 25-44 the rate increased 2.8-fold from 1.9 to 5.4, and for those aged 45-64 the rate increased 2.7-fold from 1.1 to 3.0.”

The spike in heroin overdose deaths is intimately tied to the more widespread, deepening wave of addiction to legal opioids, including oxycodone (OxyContin, Percocet), hydrocodone (Vicodin, Zohydro), methadone and morphine.

Once a patient has built up a tolerance to these painkillers, or can no longer refill their prescription and is experiencing withdrawal, they increasingly turn to heroin, which has become much cheaper and higher in quality in recent years following the growth in production in Mexico, Afghanistan and other parts of the world.

Another recent study found that 80 percent of heroin users had previously abused prescription opioids. The study also found that in the last 15 years, at least 100,000 people have died from prescription opioid abuse. Like legal opioids, heroin is highly addictive.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) operates in the interests of the giant pharmaceuticals, encouraging overworked doctors to simply prescribe the strongest analgesics, enormously benefiting the profit margins of Big Pharma.

In the fall of 2013, the FDA approved a new painkiller called Zohydro, which contains a pure form of hydrocodone and is up to 10 times as strong an opiate as Vicodin. At the time, the Washington Post revealed that drug companies paid up to $25,000 to attend meetings in which scientists advised the FDA on the safety and effectiveness of painkillers.

The FDA approved Zohydro despite the fact that its own advisory committee voted 12 to 2 against approval, citing the drug’s potential to exacerbate the opioid abuse epidemic.

The findings of the NCHS report serve as a barometer of the current conditions of life in America, and expose one of the many symptoms of the decay of capitalist society more broadly. Heroin, one of the most powerful analgesics, is used as a means to numb oneself from pain and induce a euphoria not present in reality.

Increasingly, broad sections of the population see no future in an economic system driven by corporate greed, and characterized by mass unemployment and poverty. Disillusioned by the anarchic capitalist economy, many are opting out and seek merely to escape, with often deadly ramifications.

National Transportation Safety Board expanding investigation of DC Metro

Joe Williams

In the wake of the January 12 Washington, DC Metro disaster, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), the agency overseeing the federal investigation of the event, recommended that all ventilation systems nationally be evaluated and, if necessary, repaired, as soon as possible.

The catastrophe occurred when a train became stuck on the tracks in a smoke-filled tunnel, resulting in one commuter dying from smoke inhalation and injuring dozens of others. The NTSB took the unusual step of recommending that the Washington Area Metropolitan Transit Authority (WMATA) make immediate changes in its safety protocol, although it has yet to finish its investigation of the January incident.

The decision to expand the recommendation for a safety overhaul to the national level indicates that January’s accident was most likely not an isolated incident resulting from a lax attitude toward safety at the DC Metro. More likely, it was the result of drastic budget cuts that have been inflicted on transit systems across the country. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) estimates that America’s infrastructure receives just over half of the $3.6 billion it requires.

The board is asking the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to complete a four-part audit that would assess the state of repair of exhaust systems, written procedures for handling emergencies, training programs, and compliance with industry best practices at every subway system. The American Public Transportation Association, a national advocacy group for public transportation enterprises, will be given the role of educating its members about the dangers of inadequate safety procedures, and to pressure them to engage in regular training exercises.

In 2013, ASCE issued its “Report Card for America’s Infrastructure,” in which the country’s transit systems received a “grade” of D. It found that repairs and investments totaling $78 billion would be needed to bring America’s transit systems up to a state of good repair. Furthermore, transit companies keep very poor records of rail maintenance and safety, and some keep no such records at all. Nationally, transit systems receive about $25 billion less than they need to operate safely, constituting an investment gap of 40 percent, which is expected to grow to 55 percent by 2040.

The report also identified inadequate public transportation systems as a major factor limiting employment opportunities, particularly in large metropolitan areas, where 90 percent of residents have access to transit services, but are only able to reach 40 percent of the jobs in their area within a reasonable commuting period of 90 minutes. While those with access to public transportation have increased their ridership by 9.1 percent over the last decade, the number of people with access has declined to only 55 percent.

In assessing the emergency response of the DC Metro to the January 12 event, the NTSB’s preliminary findings indicate that exhaust fans designed to clear smoke from the tunnel were activated in reverse, holding the smoke in place directly above the passengers. Documents obtained by the Washington Post revealed that WMATA has known for at least a year that its exhaust system is outdated, but plans to purchase a new computer system to pinpoint sources of smoke and coordinate fan activity were never acted on in any significant way.

In addition, an alarm system designed to alert officials to failures in equipment designed to amplify the signal strength of fire and police radios has never been properly activated. The $2 million system was installed in 2006, but when Metro officials tried to activate it in 2007, they found it did not produce reliable results and was difficult to maintain. When first responders arrived on the scene of the January 12 accident, their radio signals were so weak that they had to resort to using cell phones to communicate. Fire officials argue that had the alarm system been functioning, they could have been prepared to respond properly.

The DC Metro is facing a budget shortfall of over $100 million, largely due to the refusal of local governments to pay for any of the projected increase in operating expenses, which are anticipated to grow from $1.75 billion in 2015 to $1.86 billion in 2016. Furthermore, federal employees saw a reduction in transit benefits from $245 to $130 a month, resulting in an average loss of 6,000 fares per day. WMATA recently rejected an attempt to make up for the shortfall by raising fares and reducing services after an intense public backlash. Such an action would have violated its own policy of not raising prices in consecutive years.

In addition to those fare hikes, riders were subjected to a number of service reductions and disruptions last year. Many of the disruptions were caused by smoke and fire incidents like the one that caused January’s fatality. Cracked rails also caused delays, including one on the Red Line so severe that angry tweets and photos of crowded, chaotic platforms went viral. Over the summer, WMATA announced major reductions of Blue Line service in order to move two of its trains to the Silver Line, which also provoked angry responses from wide swaths of the ridership.

Rather than allocating the funds necessary to repair the infrastructure, the DC political establishment appears poised to use such tragedies to shift the discussion toward a more preferable subject: justifying attacks on the living standards of transit workers.

On the February 13 broadcast of NPR’s “The Kojo Nnamdi Show,” DC City Council Chair Phil Mendelson downplayed the role of budget cuts, arguing that “inefficiency” at WMATA was to blame. He reacted positively when co-panelist Tom Sherwood suggested that the solution for WMATA’s woes was “a Michelle Rhee-type makeover,” referring to the divisive and controversial former DC public schools chancellor, who was appointed by then-mayor Adrian Fenty for the specific purpose of breaking teachers unions and privatizing the school system. Mendelson, a Democrat, said, “I think they’ve grown fat and happy,” in reference to the region’s transit workers.

The transit workers are represented by Amalgamated Transit Union 689. While speaking to Congress on the January 12 incident, ATU Local 689 President Jackie Jeter did not defend workers’ wages or living standards, nor did she demand an end to the budget cuts that preceded WMATA’s safety problems. Instead, she spoke of the need for WMATA to instill a “culture of safety” in workers.

Other plans to exploit the accident were revealed in a February 19 article in the Washington Post, which is also a registered member of the Greater Washington Board of Trade.

The Post article focuses on the response to the accident, framing the incident as a “national security” issue. “The Yellow Line accident on Jan. 12 is the latest example of the Washington region’s continuing struggles with emergency response, despite spending nearly $1 billion in federal homeland security grants since the September 11 attacks in order to be nimble in a crisis,” the Post states.

For its part, WMATA says it has been working since 2012 to install a system of “command posts” to coordinate “emergency response” in its tunnels.

Report shows massive reductions in US workers’ compensation pay

Nick Barrickman

A new investigative report by the non-profit organization ProPublica and National Public Radio details the consequences of the drive to reduce compensation payments to workers injured on the job. The report, titled “Insult to Injury,” shows the consequences of the drive by corporations to shift the cost of employment related disabilities onto the backs of workers and their families, many of whom are plunged into poverty as a result of an injury, in the name of corporate-backed “reforms.”

The attack on workers has been bipartisan. The report notes that “the reforms were mostly driven by the recessions of 2001 and 2007-2009, which pitted states in a seemingly endless competition to lure business with lower costs. Even in states dominated by Democrats, worker advocates have been forced to make major concessions to achieve slight increases in benefits—sometimes just to keep up with inflation.” Employers now pay lower costs for injured workers than at any time since the 1970s, despite the increasing cost of medical care. Similarly, insurance companies have posted record profits as recently as 2013.

Each year, at least 3 million workers throughout the country are seriously injured on their jobs, while thousands more are killed. A recent OSHA report found that employers today pay only 21 percent of all costs relating to workplace injuries, with workers themselves covering the majority of the difference. “Over the past decade, state after state has been dismantling America’s workers’ comp system with disastrous consequences for many of the hundreds of thousands of people who suffer serious injuries at work each year,” the ProPublica/NPR report notes.

Workers’ compensation benefits were won by the working class in the early 20th century, as employers, facing the prospect of militant workers’ struggles and social revolution, enacted policies that provided those injured in the unsafe conditions predominating in American industry a measure of dignity after being taken off the job. These measures were further expanded in the early 1970s under the Nixon administration, which, in addition to passing the Occupational Safety and Health Act that outlined federal safety standards for workplaces, formed a commission that pushed for minimal compensation standards to be enforced nationally.

These included:

• Injury benefits set at two-thirds a worker’s original pay, or at least the average wage prevailing statewide.

• Assistance provided throughout the duration that a person was injured with no arbitrary cutoffs in pay.

• Families would receive death benefits until either the spouses remarried or upon the children’s completion of college.

Since 2003, 33 states have adopted measures limiting payments and individuals’ access to injury compensation, with Florida cutting pay to the states’ most disabled by over 65 percent. In New York, Florida and Tennessee, workers with “permanent partial injuries,” such as chronically debilitating back pain, have seen their compensation cut by 20 percent. In California, North Dakota, West Virginia and Oklahoma, governments have placed arbitrary time limits on compensation for temporary injuries, forcing workers back on the job before they have healed or received needed medical treatments.

The state of Alabama currently provides the lowest benefits to a worker receiving assistance for permanent partial disability, in which they might be able to work at some capacity, but require additional income to compensate for their reduced earning power. The state has capped weekly benefits for such conditions at only $220 per week, a level that has prevailed since 1985, not accounting for rising costs of living.

In Oklahoma, a 2012-2013 reform spearheaded by Hobby Lobby, Unit Corp. and the state Chamber of Commerce allowed employers the right to opt out of paying for disability altogether. The report quotes Oklahoma chamber lobbyist Jonathan Buxton as saying “getting them [workers] healed and back to work is the goal of our system, and it’s better incentivized now.”

The report uses the stories of individuals in an affecting manner, demonstrating the human costs of the various cost-cutting policies that have been enacted. In one such case, a derrick hand afflicted with the loss of an arm while working an oilfield in North Dakota is recommended a prosthetic limb by a physician appointed by the state’s Workforce Safety and Insurance (WSI) agency. The WSI, noting costs, rejects the diagnosis; opting instead for a (much less expensive) metal hook as a replacement.

The authors note that in states such as North Dakota and Texas, the WSI can reject prescriptions found to be too generous; oftentimes relying on a more cost-friendly diagnosis from physicians who are not required to meet with the injured worker whose lives their decisions affect.

The US Labor Department is the main federal agency tasked with overseeing the state-based implementation of workers’ compensation and making sure that states remain in compliance. However, since 2004, budget cuts at the federal level have made it so there is effectively no federal body overseeing how states implement such policies. Today seven US states follow only 15 of the 19 national guidelines on workers’ compensation enacted under the Nixon administration, with four states observing less than half of the regulations.

Though the report focuses on policies enacted mostly by Republican governments on the state level, the drive to eliminate workers’ compensation and other benefits is a bipartisan operation being carried out nationally. Both parties have called for “fixing” the so-called “broken” Social Security pension system in the US, which oversees the federal distribution of disability benefits.

In January, the House of Representatives adopted a rule that would force reductions in benefits given by Social Security Disability Insurance whenever the underfunded body sought a routine funds transfer from SS’s retirement trust fund.

Commenting on this policy at the time, the liberal Center for Budget Policy and Priorities noted that “reallocating some taxes between the retirement and disability trust funds is a historically noncontroversial measure that Congress has taken 11 times, in both directions depending on which trust fund was running short.” The move to decrease the benefits for severely disabled workers is, in turn, a response to increasing numbers of Americans applying for disability as they have been forced to retire later in life due to decreasing access to pension programs and other benefits.

Poverty in Germany reaches a record high

Denis Krassnin

“Poverty in Germany has not only reached a new record high, it has also threatened the country with disintegration into disparate regions.” Thus begins the annual poverty report of the German Federation of Welfare Associations.

Although the economy has grown slightly and unemployment is relatively low, the poverty rate in Germany has increased; it has been rising almost continuously since 2006 and now stands at 15.5 percent. This means that about 12.5 million adults exist on less than €845 per month as unmarried persons or less than €1,873 in a family with two children.

With the exceptions of the three federal states of Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt and Brandenburg, the population has fallen further into poverty throughout the country. Although Hesse, Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg have below-average poverty rates, they were not exempt from this trend.

The Ruhr region, Berlin and the state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, referred to in the last three reports as problem areas, again exhibited significant increases in poverty. In Berlin, the national capital, one person in five is now regarded as poor.

Sharply contrasting rates of poverty are increasingly differentiating and separating the various regions of Germany. While relative wealth inequality between the richest and poorest regions stood at 17.8 percentage points in 2006, it reached 24.8 percent in 2013. This indicates the great disparity in wealth existing between the populations in the Lake Constance-Upper Swabia region on the southern border of Germany and the port city of Bremerhaven, where almost one person in three is classified as poor. Both the degree of variation between these two regions and the rate of poverty in Bremerhaven marked all-time highs.

The extent of growing poverty is as frightening as its pace. In recent years, poverty in the Cologne/Dusseldorf metropolitan area has grown by more than 30 percent, bringing the local poverty rate above the national average. Almost one in three of the five million people in this metropolitan area is hard-pressed to maintain themselves financially.

According in to the charity association’s report, a “new problem area” has come onto the map. The unemployed as well as single parents with children often have to manage on a “subsistence level” income. The majority of the unemployed and almost every second lone parent have to make do with less than €845 a month; the media recently reported that every third child in Berlin is dependent on his or her parents’ miserly Hartz IV unemployment benefits. Even more children in Bremenhaven begin their lives under the same conditions.

Old-age poverty has also “increased to an alarming degree” according to the report. After decades of work and despite paying into pension funds, many elderly people live on incomes below the poverty threshold. Since the implementation of so-called welfare reforms poverty has spread “disproportionately” among the older generation. Due to the conditions laid down in the Hartz pension rates legislation, cuts in pension payments and the growth of the low-wage sector, old-age poverty is set to explode in the coming years. Millions of men and women will spend their lives in abject poverty, even though they have worked for decades.

The report rather tentatively places blame for the situation on the social reforms that bear the name of Peter Hartz, a Social Democrat and trade unionist, as well as his assistants from this milieu. These reforms are said to have contributed to the fact that “overall economic success and increasing overall economic wealth” no longer mean “that poverty in Germany is declining. On the contrary, increasing wealth is being accompanied by the growth of its uneven distribution...”

While the poverty rate has increased since 2006 the unemployment rate and the Hartz IV unemployment support rate have fallen. More and more people are employed, but they are so poorly paid that they are unable to rise above the poverty threshold. The report speaks of a “growing number of people in the low-wage sector, precarious jobs and inadequate part-time employment”.

The minimum wage of €8.50 per hour, which went into effect at the beginning of the year, is totally insufficient to ameliorate the situation in any way. The report calculates that anyone on such a low hourly rate of pay would not earn an income above the poverty threshold, even if he or she were in full-time employment.

The report also makes it clear that “increasing poverty has completely decoupled from economic developments” and the income gap is widening. Social welfare payments protect fewer and fewer people from falling into poverty; basic security benefits in some areas are already no longer sufficient for people to live on, especially those in larger families.

Social and regional deprivation thus continues to mount without hindrance. “Never before has the level of poverty in Germany been so high, and never was regional disunity as sharp as it is today,” stated Ulrich Schneider, managing director of the Federation of Welfare Associations. It is also true that the amount of wealth in Germany has never been so great, and never has social conflict been as widespread as it is today.

As in previous reports, the charity organisaton warned of social unrest and class confrontation, but had little to nothing to offer to fight the growth of poverty. Perfunctory proposals to reduce, rather than eliminate, poverty tagged onto the end of the report read as though the authors knew in advance that their recommendations would not be taken seriously.

German teachers and pre-school workers stage protest strike

WSWS Reporters

Strikes took place in several German states by teachers and preschool workers last Tuesday, March 3. The action was called by the Education and Teaching trade union (GEW).

The rally at the Friedrichstrasse station

Contract bargaining negotiations for public services in the states concluded in Potsdam last Friday without an agreement. The trade union's main demands were a wage increase of 5.5 percent or at least €175 per month, an end to temporary employment and no reduction in care for the elderly funded by employers. The public sector employers refused to make an offer and declared that the demands were “far removed from reality.”

The warning strikes were centred in Berlin, Lower Saxony, North Rhine-Westphalia, Saxony Anhalt and Bremen. The main action was in Berlin, involving over 400 schools, including vocational schools; primary schools; schools with a special pedagogical focus; the Lette association, an institution for the training of education professionals; and the Pestalozzi-Fröbel-Haus, a centre providing care and support to children and youth and training for social services professionals.

In Lower Saxony, social pedagogy practitioners were on strike alongside teachers. Around 50 schools in and around Hanover and other cities took part. In Saxony-Anhalt, strikes took place in Halle and Wanzleben. Trade union spokespersons announced a nationwide day of action for this week.

In Berlin, several hundred teachers and preschool workers gathered in the morning at Dorothea Schlegel Platz close to the Friedrichstrasse railway station to draw attention to the intense workload in schools.

The contrast between the bland phrases of the trade union bureaucrats of GEW and Verdi, who called out for several minutes, “We are heroes and we are the good ones!” and the combative but also exasperated remarks of many demonstrators was very evident.

There is deep mistrust of the trade union leadership, which two years ago abandoned the central demand of equal pay for equal work. In March 2013, GEW negotiators agreed a deal with the public sector state employers that excluded the key demand of a regulated and reasonable wage for teachers.

Conditions in many schools have worsened sharply as a result of this sell-out. In addition there are the austerity measures from the states and municipalities, which are imposing cuts in the education system with devastating consequences due to the state regulated limit on any new budget deficits.

Teachers and preschool workers, who perform an extraordinarily important service to society with considerable personal commitment, were bought off with miserly offers and deceived by state authorities.

They have to put up with unjust and unequal pay, and an increasing burden of work. By contrast, managers and politicians rake in millions when they ruin companies or drive projects to the wall. In many areas, social pedagogy practitioners struggle to provide children with a good start in life in the face of difficult conditions. But the politicians continually throw hurdles in their way by imposing more cuts.

Diana B., Barbara M. and Kathrin G.

“We are short of everything, sometimes we don’t even have paper to work with our pupils,” said Kathrin, who took part in the rally with her colleagues. This time, she said, a reasonable wage increase had to be achieved, and the constant attacks on care for the elderly could no longer be tolerated.

“Divisions take place at all levels. Here in Berlin, we receive less than in other states, and then there is still a difference between East and West Berlin. Even today, after 25 years! One has to remember that.”

Many demonstrators pointed out that there had been no real wage increase for years, while prices had risen and the amount of work had constantly increased.

Meike (right)

Meike came to Berlin two years ago. She explained the daily tensions in the schools produced by the different standards for employees and other professionals. While Berlin’s Senate was reducing the number of certified teachers, there were always students who, after taking their exams in Berlin, were prepared to work as professional tutors in Berlin schools after working several years in Brandenburg or another state. These conditions led to repeated conflicts, because these professionals were often reluctant to participate in important initiatives or changes.

Torsten carried a sign with the slogan, “Equal pay for equal work.” He said, “Yes, it’s a very old demand, but it is yet to be enforced. It appears as if the wage differences are actually increasing. I think this is wrong and unfair.” He also noted that it was horrifying that 25 years after reunification, different wages and pensions were paid in the east and west. “Our politicians speak a lot about unity, but they do exactly the opposite with wages.”

Torsten H.

The warning strike is a reminder of the struggle conducted two years ago and the lessons of that struggle are very important for the current strike. The WSWS drew the lessons at the time in a statement headlined “Teachers confront political questions.”

We wrote at the time, “The attacks on teachers and the entire education system are part of a social decline that characterises capitalism today. Fundamental rights like the right to education and the right to a decent and secure job can no longer be reconciled with the existence of this social order.

“Since the trade unions have long since become part of this social order, they offer no resistance. Their officials live by confining and diverting the opposition of workers. Protests and strikes become purely symbolic rituals, or serve as a cover behind which a further deterioration of conditions is agreed.”

Sharp political infighting in Maldives

Wasantha Rupasinghe

Bitter political infighting is continuing within the ruling elites in Maldives following the arrest of opposition leader and former President Mohamed Nasheed on February 22. The arrest has followed by ongoing protests by Nasheed’s Maldives Democratic Party (MDP) and its allies demanding his release and the resignation of President Abdulla Yameen.

The intense rivalry between the government and opposition is bound up with sharpening geo-political tensions throughout Asia and internationally. Nasheed visited Sri Lanka in January and drew inspiration from the election of President Maithripala Sirisena, who was installed with the backing of the US and India in a bid to undermine Chinese influence in Colombo.

During his visit to Sri Lanka, Nasheed accused President Yameen of “giving more room to China.” On his return to Maldives, Nasheed launched a campaign to “defend the constitution and democracy” against the president’s allegedly autocratic methods.

Nasheed sealed an alliance with the Jamhouree Party, which was part of the ruling coalition until last June. The MDP has also backed former Defence Minister Mohamed Nizam, who was sacked in January and then arrested in February on charges of conspiring against the government.

Nasheed’s arrest on dubious anti-terrorism charges appears to be an attempt by Yameen to pre-empt a mounting regime-change operation against his government. Nasheed has been charged over his decision to order the detention of Chief Justice Abdulla Mohamed in 2012—a move that provoked large protests and eventually forced Nasheed’s resignation.

The MDP claims that Nasheed’s arrest is politically motivated and is aimed at preventing him from contesting the 2018 presidential election. His lawyers withdrew from the case on Monday, saying their client could not receive a fair trial.

The MDP and the Jamhooree Party have been mounting daily protests to demand Nasheed’s release and to push their political agenda. The first major rally on February 27 was joined by an estimated 20,000 people—in a country of just 300,000 people. Last week, another protest of 10,000 on Monday was followed by smaller demonstrations, including a motorcycle parade through the capital Male.

The government’s crisis intensified last week after the Islamist Adhaalath Party, which is a partner in the ruling coalition, called for Nasheed to receive a “fair trial.” Its leader Sheikh Imran Abdulla told a press conference: “We can see the government violating the individual rights of the people. We can see corruption within the government in broad daylight.”

Nasheed and the MDP are clearly making a pitch for the support of the US and India by offering to stem Chinese influence. Interviewed by the Indian-based Economic Times just two days before his arrest, Nasheed accused the Yameen government of “pursuing a ‘Look East’ foreign policy.” He added: “If the new alliance comes to power in Male, it will pursue a different foreign policy where India will get due recognition.”

The Economics Times referred to the election result in Sri Lanka where a US-backed regime-change operation ousted former President Mahinda Rajapakse. Nasheed enthusiastically said: “We believe if all opposition parties can come together, as in Sri Lanka, and form an alliance, they can defeat the ruling dispensation.”

Both the US and India are hostile to Chinese influence in Maldives, an archipelago that is strategically located across key shipping routes in the Indian Ocean.

Last September, Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Male as part of a tour of South Asia. During the visit, the Yameen government supported Beijing’s initiative of a “Maritime Silk Road” across the region. It angered New Delhi by revoking a contract with an Indian company to develop the Male International Airport and re-assigning it to a Chinese corporation.

Last week, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi cancelled a planned visit to Maldives, which was part of an Indian Ocean tour that includes Sri Lanka, Mauritius and Seychelles. An Indian foreign ministry spokesman said: “We are concerned at recent developments in Maldives, including the arrest and manhandling of former President Nasheed.”

An editorial in the Indian-based Hindu last week commented: “Given that India is keen to assert its strategic presence in the Indian Ocean region, it should not worry that this postponement would push Maldives closer to Beijing but convey a strong signal of its concern over the increasing volatility of the situation there.”

The Obama administration has also signaled its support for the opposition in Maldives. Following Nasheed’s arrest last month, US State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki declared that the US was “concerned” by reports of the arrest. Psaki said Assistant Secretary of State Nisha Biswal spoke to the Maldivian foreign minister and urged the government “to restore confidence in their commitment to democracy, judicial independence, and rule of law.”

US pressure on the Yameen government is part of its broader “pivot to Asia,” formally announced in November 2011, which is aimed at undercutting Beijing diplomatically and economically throughout Asia, as well as encircling China militarily.

Following Washington’s lead, Canada, the European Union, the UN and the British Commonwealth all chimed in with expressions of concern. Maldivian Foreign Minister Dhunya Maumoon responded by declaring: “Maldives is an independent, sovereign country. Maldivians don’t want to be under influence of any other country.”

The British High Commissioner for Sri Lanka and Maldives, John Rankin, countered by saying: “Maldives and the United Kingdom are parties to international treaties which guarantee the right to fair trial, to freedom of expression, to freedom of lawful assembly.” Like the US, Britain cynically uses the issue of “human rights” on a selective basis as the pretext for intrigues and interventions to advance its strategic and economic interests.

Rankin’s comments highlight how quickly Colombo has been transformed under President Sirisena into a base for British and American operations in South Asia. During his visit to Sri Lanka, Nasheed met with European diplomats. Following his arrest last month, Maldivian opposition leaders travelled to Colombo, not only to meet with Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe but also to “brief” diplomats in Colombo and seek their support for Nasheed’s release.

Obviously concerned at the mounting campaign against his government, President Yameen lashed out on Sunday at foreign interference. “It’s their own personal problem if it [the government] is unacceptable to people in faraway lands,” he said. “We will not give in an inch of our independence and sovereignty. That’s not something we want.”

Modi visiting Indian Ocean islands in bid to undermine China’s influence

Wasantha Rupasinghe

As part of a broader military-diplomatic thrust aimed at counteracting Chinese influence in the region, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi begins a four-day tour of three Indian Ocean island states—Seychelles, Mauritius, and Sri Lanka.

Modi had also been scheduled to visit Maldives, a strategically important Indian Ocean archipelago. However, this was dropped from the schedule last week, with New Delhi citing the political turmoil in the Maldive’s capital, Male, following the arrest of opposition leader and former president, Mohamed Nasheed, as the reason. 

The military-strategic thrust of Modi’s Indian Ocean island tour has been widely commented on in the international and Indian media. A March 4 Reuters article, “Modi to ramp up help for Indian Ocean Nations to Counter China influence,” said that Modi will offer the Indian Ocean islands “broad range military and civilian assistance. .. in a bid to wrest back some of the influence China has gained by spending billions of dollars in the region.”

The article quoted an Indian Defence Ministry official, asserting that India has a “role as a net security provider in the Indian Ocean region” and boasting that New Delhi is “providing patrol ships, surveillance radars and ocean mapping for the island states.” This, however, has only whetted New Delhi’s ambitions. India is striving to “tie the islands into a closer security embrace,” declared the Indian official.

Much of the oil and raw materials that fuel China’s economy, as well as much of its export trade, pass through the Indian Ocean. Acutely aware that the Pentagon’s war plans call for the US and its allies to impose an economic blockade on China, Beijing is seeking to develop close ties with Indian Ocean states, including the island states, by offering to assist their economic development, especially the development of transportation infrastructure.

India has its own ambitions, hoping to carve out, with US assistance, a leading role in policing the Indian Ocean. This would not only boost India’s claims to “great power status,” it would enable New Delhi to project military-geo-political power toward south-east Asia, the Middle East and Africa—all regions where India has significant and growing economic interests.

While India has long considered fellow SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) members Sri Lanka and Maldives to be within its sphere of influence, its focus on Seychelles and Mauritius—which are both much closer to Africa than South Asia—is of recent vintage. Seychelles is 2,800 kilometers (1,750 miles) from the western coast of India, while Mauritius, which lies to the east of Madagascar, is 5,780 kilometers (3,600 miles) from India.

Modi’s first stop will be Seychelles, an archipelago with a population of 90,000. While there, India’s Prime Minister will hold talks with Seychelles President James Alexis Michel on strengthening bilateral maritime ties. Last November, India gifted a maritime patrol vessel, PS Constant, to Seychelles’ Coast Guard Fleet, and in 2013 it gifted the Seychelles Defence Forces an Indian-made maritime reconnaissance aircraft, the Dornier-228, to patrol the country’s 1.3 million square kilometer Exclusive Economic Zone.

In December 2011, AFP reported that China had been invited to set up a military base in Seychelles, but both the Chinese and Seychelles foreign ministers denied the report, saying they had been misquoted. Last year, the Russian Foreign Minister denied a RIA Novosti website report which suggested that Russia has plans to create a military base in the archipelago. Whatever the real situation, these reports highlight the strategic importance of Seychelles.

Modi’s second stop will be Mauritius (population 1.2 million) where New Delhi already has significant influence. Modi will be the chief guest at the Mauritian National Day celebration on March 12. However, his main focus will be on expanding New Delhi’s military ties with Mauritius. India’s military recently concluded a survey of Mauritius’ defence “needs” and, in line with that, now plans to equip the island state with 13 Indian-built warships to police its territorial waters and Exclusive Economic Zone.

During his visit Modi, will commission the first of these warships, the 1,300-tonne CGS Barracuda. Valued at $58 million (US), the Barracuda is the first warship ever exported by India. According to Commodore Ranjit Rai, a former head of Indian naval intelligence and operations, India has “practically given Mauritius a coastguard”.

The last and most important leg of Modi’s tour is Sri Lanka, where a US-sponsored regime-change operation was recently carried through with New Delhi’s backing, with the aim of harnessing Colombo more tightly to Washington’s drive to strategically isolate and encircle China.

Both the US and India were hostile to the ties that former Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapakse had developed with China. India, which considers Sri Lanka its “backyard,” was incensed when Rajapakse ignored its vigorous complaints over the docking of a Chinese submarine on the island.

Maithripala Sirisena, who ousted Rajapakse in Sri Lanka’s January 8 presidential election, and his prime minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, the leader of the pro-US United National Party (UNP), have lost no time in demonstrating the new government’s allegiance to Washington and New Delhi. Sirisena made India the site of his first foreign trip as president. Four bilateral agreements were signed during his mid-February visit, including a civil nuclear cooperation pact, which was “welcomed” by the Obama administration.

Underscoring the importance Modi attaches to his Sri Lanka visit, he dispatched External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj to Colombo on March 6 to finalize the details. According to Indian officials quoted by Reuters, “Modi is expected to tighten defense and security cooperation and push for final approval for a 500 MW power plant to be built by India’s state-run national Thermal Power Cooperation under a 2012 agreement in Trincomalee, a strategic port in eastern Sri Lanka.”

In the run-up to Modi’s visit, the Sirisena government further underlined Sri Lanka’s shift away from Beijing by announcing the suspension of work on a $1.5 billion Colombo Port City Project being funded and built by Chinese firms. Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera has also pledged to New Delhi that there will be no future Chinese submarine dockings.

Modi’s Indian Ocean island tour take places under conditions where the Obama administration has intensified the US’s decade-long drive to harness New Delhi ever more tightly to its predatory strategic agenda—above all its campaign to thwart China’s “rise”—through a combination of inducements and bullying.

Only last week, the Commander of the US Pacific Fleet, Admiral Harry Harris, provocatively called on India to take a greater role in the South China Sea while on a visit to New Delhi to meet with Admiral R.K. Dhowan, the Chief of the Indian Naval Staff.

The US has been encouraging its allies in the South China Sea, including the Philippines and Vietnam, to press their maritime territorial claims against China. India, which has offshore oil leases from Vietnam in some of the disputed waters, has increasingly parroted the US line that casts Beijing as a grave threat to “freedom of navigation” in the South China Sea. The Obama administration was ecstatic when Modi, a Hindu chauvinist notorious for his hawkish anti-China stance, agreed to the inclusion of US-scripted language concerning the South China Sea in the “Vision” statement he and Obama issued during the US President’s late January trip to India.

Speaking to reporters at the conclusion of his meeting with his Indian counterpart, Admiral Harris launched into a tirade against China, accusing it of “raising tensions in the region,” then urged India to “get in” the South China Sea to assert it interests. “They are international waters” declared the head of the US Pacific Fleet, “and India should be able to operate freely wherever India wants to operate. If that means the South China Sea, then get in there and do that.”

The stated purpose of Harris’ visit was to discuss the 2015 version of the annual Malabar Indo-US naval exercise. As part of its efforts to integrate India into a US-led anti-China quadrilateral alliance involving Japan and Australia, long Washington’s principal allies in the Indo-Pacific region, the US has been encouraging India to transform Malabar into a regular multilateral exercise. Stressing that point, Admiral Harris said, “There is a role for each of our navies to play in building multinational maritime relationships in the Indo-Asia-Pacific.”

In a further comment highlighting the US drive to make India a satrap in its drive for global hegemony, Admiral Harris said that “an enhanced India-US partnership” would help “ensure other nations respect international law and drives our mutual commitment to open access by all nations to the shared global commons of sea, air, space and cyberspace.”

NATO begins military manoeuvres in Black Sea

Johannes Stern

On Monday, NATO’s Standing Maritime Group 2 (SNMG 2) began exercises in the Black Sea, including standard anti-submarine and anti-aircraft exercises, led by the US Navy cruiser USS Vicksburg.

According to NATO sources, other ships taking part include Canadian, Turkish and Romanian frigates, and a German tanker Spessart. A NATO web site describes the SNMG 2 as a “potent NATO maritime force [that] possesses substantial sea-control, anti-submarine and anti-air warfare capabilities.”

Before the exercises began, the group commander, US Rear Admiral Brad Williamson, stated: “The training and exercises we will conduct with our Allies in the Black Sea prepares us to undertake any mission NATO might require to meet its obligations for collective defence.”

The exercise is yet another provocation against Moscow that increases the risk of war between the Western powers and Russia. It is part of a systematic military build-up in Eastern Europe since the Western-backed coup in Kiev and the subsequent integration of Crimea into Russia last year.

The SNMG 2 is part of the NATO Response Force (NRF), a so-called rapid intervention force that was doubled in size to 30,000 soldiers by NATO defence ministers at the beginning of February.

Before the exercise, Russian ships and aircraft were seen in the area close to the NATO warships. However, Williamson noted that they “all abided by international regulations.”

“They (the Russians) are following their plans, and we are following ours,” the rear admiral stated at a press conference aboard the USS Vicksburg in the Bulgarian port of Varna.

According to the Russian defence ministry, around 2,000 Russian soldiers will be involved in air defence exercises until April 10 in southern Russia and the north Caucasus, near the Black Sea. In addition, Russian military bases in Armenia and pro-Russian sections of Georgia will also be included.

The military exercises take place in the context of the shaky Minsk ceasefire agreement in eastern Ukraine and ongoing provocations by the pro-western regime in Kiev and its supporters in Washington and European Union (EU) headquarters in Brussels.

Last Thursday, the Ukrainian parliament adopted a proposal from President Petro Poroshenko which orders an increase of the army deployed against the east Ukrainian population by a third, to 250,000.

Moscow sharply criticised the West’s actions. Reacting to constant threats from the US to supply lethal weapons to Ukraine, a Russian foreign minister spokesperson warned, “Russian-US relations will suffer severe damage if the people in the Donbass are killed by US weapons.”

Russian Deputy Defence Minister Anatoly Antonov accused NATO members of using the Ukraine crisis as a pretext to move closer to Russia’s borders.

In an interview with the Welt am Sonntag over the weekend, EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker called for the founding of a European army, capable of militarily standing up to Russia. According to Juncker, this would allow the EU to credibly respond to a threat to peace in a EU member state or neighbouring states.

“A European army does not exist to be deployed immediately,” said Juncker. “But it would send a clear message to Russia that we are serious about the defence of European Union values.”

Juncker’s demand was based on a strategy paper recently published by the Centre for European Policy Studies think tank in cooperation with the Friedrich Ebert Foundation. The main authors of the paper were former NATO Secretary Generals Javier Solana and Jaap de Hoop Schefer. As a pretext for a joint and autonomous European defence policy in alliance with NATO, the authors repeated the lie that Russia was guilty of aggression against Ukraine and that Moscow poses a threat to the whole of Europe.

The paper stated, “Russia’s infiltrations in Ukraine and provocations against member states’ territorial, water, and air defences have, however, delivered a blow to Europe’s post-Cold War security order and have revived awareness in the EU about the possibility of military attack and occupation in Europe.”

According to Solana and de Hoop Schefer, the establishment of a joint European defence policy and military build-up presents “financial, technological and industrial challenges.” All of the proposals in the paper, including the creation of permanent and special rapid response troops and armed forces for deployment “would entail, for most member states, a sharp rise in military spending, even beyond NATO’s Wales Summit pledge of moving towards 2 percent of GDP by 2014.”

For this reason alone, the combination of the national capacities of the member states’ armies was required, the paper stated.

Juncker’s proposal was welcomed above all by the German government. Through deputy spokeswoman Christiane Wirtz, German Chancellor Angela Merkel (Christian Democratic Union, CDU) called for “intensified military cooperation in Europe.”

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier (Social Democratic Party, SPD) and Defence Minister Ursula Von der Leyen (CDU) spoke out in favour of a European army. “For the SPD, the long-term goal of a European army is an important political issue and has been part of the party programme for many years,” Steinmeier told the Berlin-based Tagesspiegel .

“Confronting the new dangers and threats to our peaceful European order” requires “a rapid adjustment and modernisation of the joint European security strategy,” said Steinmeier. “I am pushing for that. We have brought our ideas to Brussels on this.”

Even if the German government does not express this openly, Berlin sees Juncker’s proposal as an opportunity to achieve military dominance in Europe on top of its economic dominance, and to militarise Germany under the guise of a joint European defence force.

In an interview on Deutschlandfunk, Von der Leyen declared, “This integration of armies with the view one day to even have a European army is in my opinion the future.”

She made clear that German militarisation was intimately bound up with this agenda. She said it was “important that we have a German army in the alliance that is in fact capable of undertaking the tasks that it has to do. That means not only sounding good on paper, but rather fulfills these in its core operations. And that’s why, if one seriously wants security, one has to seriously invest in it. And that’s why these discussions about [defence] budgets are really about the fact that the things that we want also have to be supported with substance.”