Russian government cracks down on protesters during regional elections

Clara Weiss 

On Sunday, some 65 million Russians were called upon to vote in 80 different regional elections, including 21 direct gubernatorial elections and 16 local assembly elections.

The Russian government has not yet released an official turnout figure for the entire country, but indicated that it was similar to the turnout at the 2013 regional elections, when only three regions saw voter participation above 50 percent.

In stark contrast to the elections five years ago, United Russia candidates for governor failed to gain an absolute majority in four regional elections. In some regions, the voter turnout was reported to be well below 30 percent. In some elections, United Russia candidates saw their vote reduced by as much as 20 to 30 percent.

In four regions, Khakassia, Vladimir Oblast, Khabarovsk Krai, Primorsky Krai, the United Russia candidates failed to win an absolute majority and will have to run in a second round. In Khakassia and the Primorsky Krai, the United Russia candidates will be competing against candidates of the Stalinist KPRF. In Khakassia, the KPRF’s candidate Valentin Konovalov received 44.81 percent of the votes, as opposed to United Russia’s candidate, Viktor Zimin, who received 32.42 percent.

In the Khabarovsk Krai, and in the Vladimir Oblast, a region northeast of Moscow and one of the most socially devastated in the European part of Russia, United Russia candidates are running against candidates of the fascistic LDPR. A second round in direct gubernatorial elections, which were reintroduced in 2012, has only taken place once before.

In three regions, the Irkutsk Oblast, Khakassia and the Ulyanovsk Oblast, United Russia lost its majority in the regional legislative assemblies to the Stalinist KPRF.

In Moscow, where less than 30 percent of voters cast their ballot, incumbent mayor Sergey Sobyanin was reelected with almost 70 percent of the votes, significantly more than in the last elections. Only five other people had been put on the ballot in Moscow, and no opposition politician participated.

The head of United Russia, Andrei Turchak, announced that the party would “draw organizational and personnel conclusions” in the regions where it had fared poorly. President Vladimir Putin commented very little on the elections, and stated only that the “election campaign as a whole was worthy” and that the elections were among the most honest that had taken place in recent Russian history.

The elections were overshadowed by what is now the overriding issue in Russian politics: the government’s plans to raise the retirement age. The current government bill provides for a raising of the retirement age for women by eight years, from 55 to 63, and for men by five years, from 60 to 65—an age less than two thirds of Russian men actually reach.

Over 90 percent of the population oppose this measure, and 53 percent indicated in a recent Levada poll that they are ready to take to the streets to protest the pension reform. Its announcement in mid-July, at the beginning of the FIFA World Cup, United Russia plummeted some 13 percent in the polls, while Putin’s approval rating slumped to a four-year low of around 67 percent. Ten days before Sunday’s elections, Putin came out in support of the pension reform, proposing only to lower the hike in the retirement age for women from eight to five years.

It has been widely acknowledged by both United Russia politicians and political commentators that the enormous unpopularity of the reform was the central reason for United Russia’s poor performance and the relative success of the KPRF, which has presented itself as the main critic of the reform. However, given the overwhelming opposition to the reform, it is striking that the opposition was able to benefit relatively little from United Russia’s unpopularity.

The Kremlin’s extreme nervousness about the widespread hostility toward the pension reform found an expression in the violent crackdown on protesters demonstrating against it on Sunday, following the call of the right-wing opposition leader Alexei Navalny. A day before the elections, Google had taken down a YouTube video by Navalny on the pension reform following demands by Russian lawmakers, who argued that the dissemination of his video was counter to Russian law which prohibits campaigning during the last 48 hours before polling.

Only about 8,000 people participated in Sunday’s protests, which took place in some 25 towns and cities, reflecting the hostility and suspicion toward Navalny. However, the police cracked down on the protesters with particular ferocity, arresting over 1,000, among them many youth. At least 452 people were arrested in St. Petersburg, Russia’s second largest city. Several people were beaten up by the police. Among those arrested nationwide were 26 out of 46 regional staff coordinators of Navalny.

The police crackdown was aimed not so much directly at the supporters of the jailed Alexei Navalny, a right-wing Russian nationalist and supporter of US imperialism, who represents sections of the Russian oligarchy that are opposed to Putin’s foreign policy and fear that the pension reform will provoke a social explosion that neither section of the ruling class will be able to control.

Above all, the police violence against the protesters was designed to intimidate the millions of Russian workers and youth who neither voted nor went out to protest under Navalny’s banners, but are seething with anger about the pension reform and the Kremlin’s policies. They will have to turn to a socialist program and align themselves with their class brothers and sisters around the world in order to fight against the social onslaught and right-wing politics of all sections of the Russian oligarchy.

UK: Journalists exposing police collusion in Loughinisland massacre arrested

Steve James

Twenty-four years after masked gunmen sprayed automatic gunfire into the Heights Bar, Loughinisland in Northern Ireland, killing six football fans, the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) arrested two journalists who have spent years investigating the atrocity.

The two, Trevor Birney and Barry McCaffrey, were questioned for 14 hours, August 31, before being released on bail. Police also searched two houses and offices where the Detail investigative news site, media company Below The Radar and documentary producer Fine Point Films are based.

Large numbers of phones, computers and documents were seized. At the time of writing, police have been legally prevented from immediately trawling through the seized material.

Birney is a former current affairs editor of Ulster Television, and has produced a number of historical and political biographies and documentaries. He has won media awards and was named Northern Ireland’s broadcaster of the year in 2002.

McCaffrey has spent more than a decade on Loughinisland and has been writing and reporting on Irish current affairs for longer. In 2013, he was named Northern Ireland’s digital journalist of the year.

The raid and arrests came ten months after, and relate directly to, the release last year by Fine Point Films of a powerful documentary by US director Alex Gibney on the killings. No Stone Unturned was produced by Birney and based on research by both Birney and McCaffrey.

The film places the killings in the context of British forces’ countless clandestine operations during the so-called “Troubles” (approximately 1968 to 1998) and notes numerous failings in the police investigation. The film identified for the first time the loyalist Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) killers long suspected of the murders.

Gorman McMullan was named as the getaway driver. McMullan, who had previously been identified by Belfast-based Sunday Life as involved in the killings, once described the notorious loyalist assassination and torture gang, the Shankhill Butchers as a “decent bunch of lads”.

Ronnie Hawthorne, a local businessman, was named as pulling the trigger on the Czech-made VZ58 assault rifle. Hawthorne, who had been arrested in 1994 but never charged, was identified from documents, including a letter from his wife Hilary, held by the Police Ombudsman of Northern Ireland and shown in the film.

Gibney’s film also alleged, via testimony from retired a police officer, Jimmy Binns, that during his arrest, one of Binns’ colleagues attempted to pressure Hawthorne into assassinating a suspected member of the Irish Republican Army (IRA).

A third member of the UVF gang, Alan Taylor, has not been seen for many years.

The film repeated an allegation that one of the attackers, which one is not stated, was a police informer who had told his handlers of the planned assault, but claimed that it had been called off due to vehicle problems. No Stone Unturned also reviewed the extraordinary failings in the police investigation leading to key items of evidence, such as the Triumph Acclaim getaway car, being destroyed without any forensic evidence being collected.

Key records relating to the case, such as those of suspect McMullan’s police interviews, were also destroyed because of alleged and convenient “asbestos contamination”.

In 2016, the current ombudsman, Michael Maguire, produced a devastating but anonymised report on the case on which No Stone Unturned is also based.

In 165 pages, Maguire sketched out British Army and Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) Special Branch oversight of UVF efforts to import huge amounts of weaponry in 1987 and 1988 from South Africa. The serial number on the gun used at Loughinisland, found abandoned in a field near the murder scene, was consecutive with similar weapons found in the South African cache.

Maguire also noted that the Special Branch appeared indifferent to the murderous activities of a UVF gang in its Newcastle subdivision, near Loughinisland. Maguire commented that the UVF unit “may well have been encouraged by the absence of a concerted effort against them.”

Crucially, Maguire noted that Special Branch had a “sound intelligence case” as early as June 19, 1994, one day after the shootings, and a “compelling case for early arrests, enabling the exploitation of a range of forensic and other evidential opportunities, including securing evidence through questioning.”

Despite concluding that “...collusion was a significant feature of the Loughinisland murders”, individuals mentioned in the report were referred to by letters of the alphabet while police officers were referred to by consecutive numbers.

No Stone Unturned, however, named both attackers and one of implicated former police officers. The film quoted from and showed footage of documents held by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland (PONI) allowing Hawthorne and others to be identified.

It is these original documents that are the source of the police campaign against McCaffrey and Birney. The PSNI enlisted Durham Police to investigate an alleged theft from PONI offices which has now been used as a pretext to arrest and question Birney and McCaffrey.

The arrests were immediately condemned.

On his release, McCaffrey denounced the arrests as “an attack on the press, everybody should realise. It’s us today, tomorrow it could be you”.

Alex Gibney, who has also won awards for his documentaries, tweeted “Rather than reopen a purposefully bungled murder investigation, the PSNI moves to arrest those who revealed police corruption and incompetence”.

Relatives of the six men killed in 1994 also protested the arrests, holding a vigil outside the Heights bar. Clare Rogan, whose husband Adrian was one of the men murdered, warned, “Today’s arrests show the lengths of desperation that the British government and state forces are prepared to go to, in order to stifle the truth about what happened in Loughinisland.”

Maguire’s report has been the subject of ferocious legal battles since it was published in 2016.

Late 2017, in a case brought by two retired police officers, Northern Ireland judge Bernard McCloskey ruled that that authors of the 2016 report were “careless, thoughtless and inattentive in the language and structuring of the document” and that the conclusions reached were unsustainable in law.

The former police officers wanted the report quashed. McCloskey, however, declined immediately to do so. Before any further action was taken, however, McCloskey himself was forced to stand aside.

A case brought by the ombudsman and the Loughinisland relatives’ families early in 2018 requested McCloskey recuse himself on the basis that he had, in 2002, been counsel to one of the same police officers during efforts to overturn another PONI report, this time Nuala O’Loan’s report into the 1999 Omagh atrocity.

In March, however, the PONI was forced to alter two paragraphs in the 2016 report to remove criticisms of the role of one of the retired police, an RUC commander also called Ronald Hawthorne, in relation to the storage and destruction of the Triumph Acclaim.

The PONI is also at the centre of another case, this time brought by one of the victims’ relatives. In July, Marie Byrne, whose husband Eamon was killed, launched an action in the Belfast High Court against the PONI, claiming damages for negligence over a 2011 report by Michael Maguire’s predecessor, Al Hutchinson, which, although critical of the police, refused to accept collusion had taken place.

German government plans combat mission against Syria

Johannes Stern

Behind the backs of the German people, the grand coalition of Christian Democrats and Social Democrats is preparing a massive combat mission against the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad. According to a report in the Bild newspaper published on Monday, Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen (Christian Democratic Union—CDU) is examining possible reprisals by the Luftwaffe (Air Force) against Syrian government troops should chemical weapons be used against “rebel”-held areas in Idlib province.

The Bild, which has close connections to military and intelligence circles, describes a “simulation game” being conducted: “If Assad were to attack his own people with poison gas, then, besides the US being joined again by Britain and France (and possibly other new allies), armed Luftwaffe tornadoes could fly missions against military infrastructure (barracks, air bases, command posts, ammunition depots, weapon depots, factories, research centres).”

The newspaper reports that the preparations by the Ministry of Defence are in response to a request from the US government to the federal Chancellery. The Bild writes that two weeks ago, at high-level talks, “various options were discussed in the ministry.”

In subsequent talks, options discussed included “reconnaissance flights and damage analysis following a possible attack (‘Battle Damage Assessment’), as well as possible participation in combat missions in which German tornadoes would drop bombs for the first time since the Balkan War.”

To carry out the mission, parliamentary oversight powers laid down in the Constitution are to be effectively abrogated. “Parliament would be consulted only retrospectively in the event of a rapid intervention, due to time pressure,” the newspaper reports.

In response to questions from the newspaper, the government all but confirmed the plans. The Bild cites a joint statement of the defence ministry and the Social Democratic Party-led foreign ministry declaring that “The situation in Syria gives rise to the highest concerns.”

The statement continues: “Of course, we are in close contact with our American ally and European partners during these times. We constantly exchange information at all levels about the current situational view, possible further crisis scenarios and common options for action. The aim is for the parties to the conflict to avoid an escalation of the already terrible situation for the affected people. This is particularly true in regard to the use of banned chemical weapons, which have previously been used by the Assad regime.”

At a press conference, government spokesman Steffen Seibert hinted at the possibility of German air strikes against Syria. He said: “The situation in Syria, the situation in Idlib in particular, is such that you really have to worry that horrific events in other Syrian battlefields could be repeated, under conditions where hundreds of thousands of people are in grave danger.” Seibert added that the situation was being discussed with allies and partners.

The Christian Democratic parliamentary defence spokesman, Henning Otte, was even clearer, stating: “The pictures and reports reaching us are difficult to bear. Countless people in Idlib are suffering from the terror of Assad’s bombing of his own people. It is therefore important that we examine all options for action. We must, of course, also consider military action. We are in constant contact with all our partners so as to exchange situational information. There is no question that the use of chemical weapons in Syria must be prevented at all costs.”

In the Tagesspiegel, former Defence Minister Volker Rühe (CDU) threatened: “If the Syrian dictator uses poison gas again, the Bundeswehr (armed forces) should participate in attacks on Syrian ammunition depots. This is the point of a common European security policy with France.”

The assertion of Social Democratic Party (SPD) leader Andrea Nahles that her party would “not agree to German participation in the war in Syria” is pure hypocrisy and has nothing to do with pacifism. In fact, while in government, the SPD pushed Germany’s entry into the Syrian war at the end of 2015 and, since the 2014 Munich Security Conference, has been the driving force behind the return of German militarism.

For the SPD, the issue is how to enforce Germany’s own interests—if necessary against the United States—in a possible military offensive against Syria. “It is in our own interests to strengthen the European pillar of the North Atlantic alliance…because we cannot leave things to Washington to the same extent as in the past,” wrote Foreign Minister Heiko Maas (SPD) recently in Handelsblatt .

The so-called opposition parties are participating in the war propaganda and have signalled to the ruling class on which side they stand in the event of an attack on Syria. The Green Party leader in the parliamentary defence committee, Tobias Linder, limited himself to demanding: “If the government plans such a commitment, it must first ask the Bundestag for consent and also explain how, in its view, this is compatible with international law.” He added that Germany had to make use of all avenues provided by the United Nations to prevent a chemical weapons attack by the Syrian regime.

Stefan Liebich, the Left Party parliamentary foreign policy spokesman, who has long beaten the drum for a more aggressive intervention by German imperialism in the Middle East, wrote on Twitter: “Using poison gas would be a terrible war crime. But according to the Constitution, Bundeswehr combat missions are still decided by parliament and not the government!”

In other words, the leaderships of the Left Party and the Greens are not opposed to military intervention in Syria in principle. They merely want to be included in the war planning!

The Sozialistische Gleichheitspartei (Socialist Equality Party—SGP) is the only party that has resolutely condemned military intervention in Syria and opposed the return of German militarism, basing its opposition on an international socialist programme.

When the German Air Force entered the Syrian war in late 2015, under the guise of fighting the Islamic State, the SGP warned: “The deployment of reconnaissance aircraft is just the beginning. If the Bundeswehr is once again involved in war, demands for an increased engagement, including the use of ground troops, will soon follow. Germany is getting involved in a war that, like the Balkan conflicts before the First World War, has become the focal point of irreconcilable international conflicts.”

And this past April, when the German government backed the illegal air strikes by the United States, France and Britain against Damascus, we wrote: “The attack of the imperialist powers on Syria must be condemned in the strongest terms. The military strikes that were carried out by the US, French and British forces on Friday night with the support of the German federal government are a violation of international law that threatens to trigger a conflict with Russia, the world’s second-greatest nuclear power.”

If the imperialist powers are now planning new air strikes against Syria, it is with the aim of saving the “rebels,” led by at least 10,000 Al Qaeda fighters, whom they and their regional allies have built up and financed since the Syrian proxy war began seven years ago. Washington, Paris, London and Berlin are not concerned with human rights, but with enforcing their geo-strategic and economic interests in the Middle East, in alliance with the most reactionary forces, and rolling back the influence of Iran and Russia in Syria and throughout the region.

As for the warnings about a chemical weapons attack in Idlib, these amount to an invitation to Al Qaeda fighters to stage an incident to provide a pretext for air strikes by the imperialist powers. The Syrian government has denied responsibility for alleged poison gas attacks, such as in Douma this year and in Khan Shaykhun in April 2017. Nevertheless, both were used as justification for illegal missile and air strikes. The German government is now enlisting to participate in a new round of such attacks.

Ashden International Awards for Entrepreneurs in Developing Countries 2019

Application Timeline: 6th November, 2018

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: Developing countries

To be taken at (country): London

About the Award: World’s leading green energy awards, seeks to reward innovative enterprises and programmes that deliver, or play a key part in enabling the delivery of sustainable energy systems and through this bring social, economic and environmental benefits. In 2019, we will make ten International Awards. The winners will receive prize funds of up to £20,000 each.

What is Ashden looking for this year?

• Sustainable Cities and Buildings: Organisations working in the built environment to rapidly decarbonise urban buildings and districts, including retrofitting existing buildings, as well as the design and construction of new buildings
• Sustainable Mobility: Innovative enterprises or programmes that are improving access to sustainable transport and mobility services for those who currently have inadequate access, and having a measurable impact on greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution or congestion
• Powering Business: We are looking for enterprises or programmes providing and/or using sustainable energy or energy efficiency in the provision of goods and services to produce income or value
• Clean Cooking: We are seeking organisations accelerating the uptake of cleaner and more efficient cooking solutions which reduce indoor air pollution, improve health and protect the environment
• Sustainable Energy & Healthcare: We are looking for organisations providing and/or using sustainable forms of energy to support the provision of healthcare services, including solutions for mobile, emergency and humanitarian contexts, cold-chain and other eco-system needs
• Cooling for People: We are looking for organisations that are delivering work that alleviates heat stress for those spending time outdoors in hot climates, whether for work or while travelling
• Financial or Business Model Innovation: We are looking for organisations or programmes improving access to energy through innovations in financial mechanisms and business models

Type: Entrepreneurship, Contest

Who can apply for an Ashden International Award?

• Businesses, NGOs, social enterprises and government organisations are all eligible.
• The work must be delivered in at least one of the UN’s developing regions of Africa, Caribbean, Central America, South America, Asia (excluding Japan) and Oceania (excluding Australia and New Zealand) and can be in rural or urban areas. High-income countries in these regions, as defined by the World Bank, are not eligible to apply

What happens if you win an Award As an Ashden Award winner? You will:

• Be invited to London at Ashden’s expense to take part in the Awards Ceremony as well as other events during that week. Winning an Ashden Award is contingent on taking part in Awards Week activities.
• Participate in media interviews that we may be able to arrange.
• Agree with Ashden what you will spend the prize fund on and any business support you may receive.
• Provide and update monitoring data about the progress of your work after one year, two years and three years

Number of Awardees: 10

Value of Contest: 

• The winners will receive prize funds of £20,000 each
• As well as this cash fund, winning an Ashden Award brings many other benefits, such as:
  • Local, national and international publicity, through the work of our specialist media team.
  • Support to grow or replicate your work: this can include professional mentoring, training and introductions to investment and other finance providers.
  • Opportunities to present your work to large and influential audiences at the Ashden Awards Ceremony, International Conference and other Ashden events.
  • Membership of the Ashden Alumni network of Ashden Award-winners, which facilitates opportunities to create productive partnerships and learning.
  • The acclaim of winning a prestigious Ashden Award. Our application and assessment process is known for being rigorous.

How to Apply: Apply here

Visit Contest Webpage for details

Award Provider: Ashden

Government of Canada Francophonie Scholarship Program (CFSP) for Francophonie Developing Countries 2019

Application Deadline: Deadlines vary by country

Eligible Countries: Bénin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodge, Cameroun, Cap-Vert, Comores, Congo (Brazzaville), Congo (Kinshasa),Côte d’Ivoire, Djibouti, Dominique, Égypte, Gabon, Guinée, Guinée équatoriale, Guinée-Bissau,  Haiti, Laos, Liban, Madagascar, Mali, Maroc, Maurice, Mauritanie, Niger
République Centrafricaine, Rwanda, Sainte-Lucie, Sao Tomé-et-Principe, Sénégal, Seychelles, Tchad, Togo, Tunisie, Vanuatu, Vietnam

To be taken at (country): Canada (Quebec, Canada)

Fields of Study: All

About the Award:Funding for this program is entirely within the Government of Canada has entrusted the management consortium Canadian Bureau for International Education (CBIE) and the World University Service of Canada (WUSC).
The long-term goal of the program is to promote the development of recipient countries by giving priority to:

• Training of trainers, particularly in the field of technical and vocational education
• Improving the skills of college and university personnel in the field of education and research
• Increasing and strengthening the skills of specialists and managers in the public and private sectors

Type: Masters and Doctorate

Eligibility: To be eligible for the Canada Francophonie Scholarship Programme:

• Candidates identified and selected may apply for university studies leading to a master’s and doctoral degree, for technical and vocational training, or for short-term internships.
• Institutions targeted by recipient countries conduct internal recruitment campaigns to identify qualified candidates who show the greatest aptitude for helping strengthen their institution’s capacities when they return to their country.
• Clinical training in pharmacy, medicine and dentistry is excluded.

Selection Criteria: Candidates must hold a key position so that the knowledge they acquire will benefit the capacity building of their institution.

Selection Process: 

• Candidates are selected by using a quota system for each recipient country. The quota approach allows recipient countries to define their own priorities for training, as well as the level of training required for the development of their institutions.
• A local advisory committee formed by representatives of various ministries selects candidates in their country. The accredited Canadian diplomatic mission acts as observer to ensure transparency of the selection process.
• The local advisory committee takes into account the candidates’ jobs in the sector or institution to be strengthened and the level of academic excellence as defined by host institutions. An equal number of applications by gender and country is required, and fluency of candidates in spoken and written French is also mandatory.
• Final admission to college or university is the sole responsibility of the relevant institution, and the scholarship becomes effective only when the candidate is admitted to the educational institution.

Number of Awardees: 1500 scholarships

Value of Scholarship: Fully-funded

How to Apply: Apply here

For full information on Canada Francophonie Scholarship Programme eligibility criteria, evaluation procedures, application requirements, funding levels, deadlines, and exclusions, visit the CFSP website (in French).

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Government of Canada

Why the World Should Care About What Happens in Basra

Patrick Cockburn

The current protests in Iraq are the most serious seen in the country for years, and are taking place at the heart of some of the world’s largest oilfields. The Iraqi government headquarters in Basra was set ablaze, as were the offices of those parties and militias blamed by local people for their wretched living conditions. Protesters have blockaded and closed down Iraq’s main sea port at Umm Qasr, through which it imports most of its grain and other supplies. Mortar shells have been fired into the Green Zone in Baghdad for the first time in years. At least 10 people have been shot dead by security forces over the last four days in a failed effort to quell the unrest.

If these demonstrations had been happening in 2011 during the Arab Spring then they would be topping the news agenda around the world. As it is, the protests have so far received very limited coverage in international media, which is focusing on what might happen in the future in Idlib, Syria, rather than on events happening now in Iraq.

Iraq has once again fallen off the media map at the very moment when it is being engulfed by a crisis that could destabilise the whole country. The disinterest of foreign governments and news outlets has ominous parallels with their comatose posture five years ago when they ignored the advance of Isis before it captured Mosul. President Obama even dismissed, in words he came to regret, Isis as resembling a junior basketball team playing out of their league.

The causes of the protests are self-evident: Iraq is ruled by a kleptomaniac political class that operates the Iraqi state apparatus as a looting machine. Other countries are corrupt, notably those rich in oil or other natural resources, and the politically well connected become hugely wealthy. However big the rake-off, something is usually built at the end of the day.

In Iraq it does not happen that way, and among the angriest victims of 15 years of wholesale theft are the two million inhabitants of Basra. Once glorified as the Venice of the Gulf, its canals have turned into open sewers and its water supplies are so polluted as to be actually poisonous.

Protests erupted earlier this year because of the lack of electricity, water, jobs and every other government service. The injustice was all the more flagrant because the oil companies around Basra are exporting more crude than ever before. In August this totalled four million barrels a day, earning the government in Baghdad some $7.7bn over the course of the month.

Few things epitomise the failure of the Iraqi state so starkly as the fact that, despite its vast oil wealth, Basra is now threatened by a cholera outbreak, according to local health officials. Basra hospitals have already treated 17,500 people for chronic diarrhoea and stomach ailments over the past two weeks, after they became ill from drinking polluted water. Salt water is mixing with fresh water, making it brackish and reducing the effectiveness of the chlorine that would otherwise kill the bacteria. There is plenty of bacteria around because the water system has not been updated for 30 years and sewage from broken pipes is mixing with drinking water.

Iraqi governments are not much good at coping with crises like these at the best of times, and this one strikes at a particularly bad moment because the two main political blocs are failing to form a new government in the aftermath of the parliamentary election on 12 May. The new parliament met for the first time this week, failed to elect a speaker and decided to take 10 days off, but is now to meet in emergency session on Saturday to discuss the crisis in Basra.

But even if a new government is formed under the current prime minister Haider al-Abadi, or some other figure, it may not make much difference. The party that unexpectedly polled best in the election was the one following the nationalist populist cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, which was allied to the small Iraqi Communist Party, thereby emphasising its secular, non-sectarian and progressive policies. On the other hand, critics claim that in the past government Sadrist ministers have been just as corrupt as those of the other parties. The problem is not just individual corruption but the political mechanism as a whole: ministries are shared out between the parties which then use them as cash cows and sources of patronage jobs. Mudher Salih, a financial adviser to Abadi, explained to me in Baghdad earlier this year how this works, adding that “unless the political system is changed it is impossible to fight corruption”.

This system of jobs for the boys, regardless of personal merit or professional qualifications, has damaging consequences for ordinary Iraqis. Many of those who have climbed onto the gravy train over the past 15 years would not know how to improve matters even if they wanted to. One former governor of Basra is reported to have handed back a large part of its budget because he said he could not think of anything on which to spend the money.

Why is this happening now? The Iraqi government, backed by the US, Iran and many other allies, won its greatest victory last year when it recaptured Mosul from Isis after a nine month siege. Paradoxically, this success meant many Iraqis were no longer preoccupied by the threat posed by Isis to themselves and their families. They focused instead on the ramshackle state of their country – the lack of roads, bridges, hospitals and schools, as well as the shortage of electricity and water, in a place where summer temperatures reach 50C.

Many Iraqis say they favour radical or even revolutionary change but the status quo will be difficult to uproot, however unsatisfactory it may be. It is not only the elite who plug into the oil revenues. Some 4.5 million Iraqis get salaries from the state and they – and not just crooked billionaires – have an incentive in keeping things as they are, however toxic.

Iraq will most likely continue to be misruled by a weak dysfunctional government, thereby opening the door to various dangers. Isis is down but not entirely out: it could rally its forces, perhaps in a different guise, and escalate attacks. Divisions within the Shiah community are growing deeper and more rancorous as the Sadrists – whose offices, unlike those of the other parties, have not been burned by demonstrators – grow in influence.

A festering political crisis will not be confined to Iraq. The outside world should have learned this lesson from the aftermath of the US-led invasion of 2003. Rival Iraqi parties always seek foreign sponsors whose interests they serve as well as their own. The country is already one of the arenas of the escalating US-Iran confrontation. As with the threat of a cholera epidemic in Basra, Iraqi crises tend to spread swiftly and infect the whole region.

Monsanto-Bayer Merger Hurts Farmers and Consumers

Jim Goodman & Tiffany Finck-Haynes

The U.S. Department of Justice issued a stern warning in its lawsuit against the conditionally-approved mega-merger between Bayer and Monsanto in June.

The anti-competitive price effects of the merger would, according to the DOJ, “likely result in hundreds of millions of dollars per year in harm, raising costs to farmers and consumers.” The Justice Department warned that the combining of Bayer and Monsanto would reduce competition for vegetable seeds, likely driving up prices. Further, farmers might see prices for GMO cotton, canola, corn and soybean seeds increase, as well as price increases for herbicide and seed treatments.

After imposing some limited divestments on Monsanto, the DOJ approved this merger, enabling Monsanto to hide its controversial name brand while giving Bayer anti-competitive control over seeds, pesticides, farmers and consumers worldwide.

But the harm to consumers and farmers will still exist.

The DOJ is on the brink of essentially authorizing a monopoly. This is bad news for nearly everyone on the planet except Bayer and Monsanto executives and shareholders. Aside from a combined Bayer-Monsanto, only three other seed companies will be in the market manufacture and sell these products.

Farmers overwhelmingly object to the merger. Ninety-three percent of farmers expressed concern that the merger will harm independent farmers and farming communities. Farmers’ top three concerns were that Bayer/Monsanto “would use its dominance in one product to push sales of other products;” “control data about farm practices;” and that the merger will create “increased pressure for chemically dependent farming.”

Aside from the overwhelming number of farmers that have already voiced opposition to the merger, the DOJ has received petitions from over 1 million Americans urging the agency to block the merger. This month, thousands of farmers and Americans resubmitted comments urging the agency to reverse its harmful conditional approval. Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller joined a letter with the state attorneys general from California, Massachusetts, Mississippi and Oregon submitted a letter opposing the merger.

Bayer and Monsanto’s merger comes at a moment when powerful companies push farmers into dependence on their products, locking farmers into long-term contracts.  A consolidating food system means less choice for consumers.

“This mega-merger will give the company a stranglehold on the vegetable seed, cottonseed, corn and soy seed markets, which will only increase prices and put farmers’ livelihoods at risk,” noted Ben Burkett, a Mississippi vegetable farmer and past board president of National Family Farm Coalition.

For farmers, the merger will likely push up production costs. Farmers’ concerns are backed up by history, in which mega-mergers have diminished competition and options for both farmers and consumers while promoting more chemical-based farming — in turn harming our environment and health.

As seed and GMO companies have consolidated over the past 20 years. Much of that price increase comes from companies increasing fees for seeds as they genetically modify new traits into our food. The cost of these new technologies has exploded the price of seeds; between 32 and 74 percent of the price of seed for corn, soybeans, cotton and sugar beets in the United States and the European Union was estimated to reflect technology costs or the cost of seed treatments.

Farmers’ net profits continues to shrink. Reduced earnings have forced most farmers to take on second jobs; 82 percent of U.S. farm household income is expected to come from off-farm work this year, up from 53 percent in 1960.

As the Trump administration moves to give another handout to corporate agriculture, family farmers will pay the price.

Farmers aren’t fooled by claims that Monsanto divestments will make this merger beneficial and non-monopolistic. Consumers and policymakers shouldn’t be fooled, either. On our farms, in our soil and on our supermarket shelves, the merger of Bayer and Monsanto means fewer options for a cleaner, healthier and more farmer-friendly food system.

As the Department of Justice moves to make a final decision, they should stop this merger and save farmers and consumers from this new monopoly.

India: Kerala residents face ongoing impact of floods

Arun Kumar 

Millions of residents face an ongoing struggle to survive following the worst floods in the south Indian state of Kerala in nearly a century. According to government estimates, 10,000 kilometres of roads and hundreds of bridges have been destroyed, about 100,000 homes and residential buildings seriously damaged, and millions of hectares agricultural crops lost.

More than one million people remain in over 2,700 relief camps, with no hope of returning to normal life in the near future. Flood survivors are continuing to arrive at the camps. Most had returned to their homes only to find them uninhabitable and they could not afford to repair or rebuild them.

At Kothad, in Ernakulam district, a 68-year-old man committed suicide on seeing his wrecked house and a 19-year-old boy killed himself after seeing his school certificates had been destroyed by the floods. These are just a few immediate indications of the trauma affecting hundreds of thousands people.

The official death toll is now over 480. This could rise further as a result of water-borne diseases, such as cholera, diarrhea, dysentery, typhoid, and leptospirosis, as well as fatal bites from poisonous reptiles. According to state authorities, more than 5,100 people have acute diarrhea.

Leptospirosis, known as rat fever, had reportedly taken 26 lives by September 2 in the Kozhikode, Malappuram, Palakkad and Thiruvananthapuram districts. The health ministry said the number of suspected leptospirosis cases had risen to 800 since mid-August. They are also facing shortages in Kerala of the drugs used to fight leptospirosis and similar diseases.

According to the media, there were at least 60 leptospirosis cases in Kozhikode district, one of the state’s worst-hit areas. The Kozhikode Municipal Corporation is reported to have only about 500,000 preventive tablets in stock.

The corporation’s health officer, R.S. Gopakumar, told the media that the district needs about 3 million tablets in the next two months. In an attempt to downplay the crisis, Kerala’s director of health service, R.L. Saritha said: “Supply shortages are being replenished. Of course, the demand has shot up, but we are monitoring daily.”

Huge losses have been suffered by industries in Kerala. Food processing, timber, plywood, healthcare units, chemical plants, rice mills and plantations, including coffee, rubber, tea, ginger, black pepper, cardamom and nutmeg, are among those most heavily-hit.

Hundreds of thousands of workers attached to mostly small- and medium-scale industries that have been unable to resume production and have lost their jobs. The wage loss in the month of August alone is estimated at 40 billion rupees ($US552 million), with over 3.3 million workers stood down or sacked in Idukki, Ernakulam, Alappuzha, and Kottayam.

Dalit and tribal communities, already the most socially and economically oppressed layers, are severely affected. Assistant Professor T. Abhilash from the Centre for Development Studies in Thiruvananthapuram told the media: “In terms of numbers and data, their losses may not count much, but considering the fact that most of them will have to rely solely on government aid to rebuild devastated houses and property, and given the slow pace with which such funds flow in, they will have to wait for a long time till their life is sorted out.”

Kerala’s ruling Communist Party of India (Marxist)-led Left Democratic Front (LDF) claims it is providing necessary assistance to flood victims. But its meagre 10,000-rupee ($US140) urgent relief grants have been denied to the vast majority of flood victims on the pretext that they have failed to provide bank account details. Tens of thousands of flood victims lost this information in the deluge. Less than 5,000 of the 391,494 families who can claim this relief have received it.

In a clear indictment of the arrogance and indifference of the entire Indian ruling class, including the LDF government in Kerala, authorities failed to address the recommendations of ecological experts for flood prevention in the wake of the disaster to organise urgently needed relief and rehabilitation measures.

Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan covered up for the right-wing Bharatiya Janatha Party (BJP)-led Indian government, which gave just 6 billion rupees in initial financial assistance to the state. The Kerala state government had requested 20 billion rupees.

Vijayan apologised for the BJP administration, telling the Hindu newspaper: “Central aid never comes in one disbursal; it comes in phases. What the Centre has announced is only advance assistance, and it’s a good amount. When the Union home minister visited the state, he announced Rs. 100 crore [1 billion rupees]. Later the prime minister announced Rs. 500 crore [5 billion rupees]. That’s different from normal assistance, and it shows how supportive the Centre has been towards Kerala.”

Duterte deepens economic ties with China

Joseph Santolan

In late August, a team of high level Philippine officials visited Beijing to discuss expanded Chinese infrastructural investment in the country. Among the delegation were Philippine Finance Secretary Carlos Dominguez, Budget Secretary Benjamin Diokno, Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto Pernia, Transportation Secretary Arthur Tugade, Public Works and Highways Secretary Mark Villar, Foreign Affairs Secretary Alan Peter Cayetano, and Philippine Ambassador to China Chito Sta. Romana.

At stake in the negotiations were a range of major projects, which are being funded through Chinese loans provided by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), the Export-Import Bank of China, and the newly created government agency, the China International Development Cooperation Agency (CIDCA).

CIDCA was established in April 2018 as a central organizational apparatus for coordinating the functions of the Ministries of Commerce and Foreign Affairs in keeping with Chinese President Xi Jinping’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI). The Philippine delegation was the first major foreign delegation to meet with CIDCA since its creation.

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has placed the development of infrastructure, particular that of the provinces, at the center of his executive agenda, calling his campaign to construct bridges, dams, expressways, railroad lines, airports, and irrigation projects, “Build Build Build.” Duterte has projected that his Build Build Build program will cost a total of $US155 billion by 2022. Funding for this does not exist within the Philippines and Duterte is looking to secure loans and direct investment, relying above all on Beijing.

At the center of the Duterte construction agenda is the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), headed by Mark Villar, the son of real estate billionaire and former presidential candidate, Manny Villar. In 2017, Duterte increased the budget of the DPWH by 40 percent to $US11 billion.

Duterte’s mammoth drive to create new infrastructure and his crusade of mass murder targeting the poor in the name of the war on drugs are two sides of the same coin. Duterte is seeking to expand foreign investment by transforming the entire archipelago, not simply its handful of Economic Processing Zones (EPZ) located near major cities, into a cheap labor platform. This requires major new infrastructure and a policed and disciplined workforce.

The last Philippine administration to attempt an ambitious development of infrastructure was that of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who, like Duterte, sought to secure Chinese investment to carry out her plans. She did so, however, in a manner far less aggressive than that of the current president. Over the course of eight years, the Arroyo administration’s DPWH bidded out 27,535 civil-works contracts. By contrast, the Duterte administration has bidded out 44,000 in the space of just two years.

Construction is underway on a South Long Haul Manila-Bicol Railway and on a Clark-Subic Railway. Manila has signed a $US76 million loan for the Chico River Pump Irrigation project, which the China CAMC Engineering Co. began work on last month. Another $US75 million loan is being used to build several bridges in Manila.

The Philippine delegation discussed the possible funding of a number of big ticket construction items, including a Mindanao Railway Project, several large new dams, a port in Cagayan, and a series of inter-island bridges. These include the Luzon-Samar (Matnog-Alen) Bridge, Dinagat (Leyte)-Surigao Link Bridge, Camarines Sur-Catanduanes Friendship Bridge, Bohol-Leyte Link Bridge, Cebu-Bohol Link Bridge and the Negros-Cebu Link Bridge.

China’s CIDCA committed over $20 million to fund feasibility studies for the proposals. Finance Secretary Dominguez told the press that projects under the Duterte administration “have already been moving quite fast ahead” with the aid of Chinese funding. He declared on Twitter, “Our visit to Beijing was extremely productive. We are confident we can henceforth move forward at a faster pace on the projects we are implementing in cooperation with China.” Manila and Beijing, he stated, had grown “very close.”

It was announced at the end of the delegation’s visit that Chinese President Xi Jinping would visit the Philippines in November as a “follow up” to the recently concluded discussions.

Upon his election in 2016, Duterte moved to establish close economic and political ties with China. Washington had, under his predecessor Benigno Aquino, been tightening a military and diplomatic noose around Beijing, escalating tensions in the South China Sea and undermining Chinese investment with corruption allegations. Duterte, however, sought to diminish tensions between the two countries, ignoring the freshly passed ruling in The Hague against China’s territorial claim in the South China Sea.

Washington, which had initially sought to secure Duterte’s loyalty by funding his murderous war on drugs, responded angrily, criticizing Duterte for human rights violations, and seeking to pressure him back into the fold of opposition to China. Duterte pushed back and relations have soured between Manila and Washington.

In this context, Xi pledged $US9 billion in overseas development assistance in late 2016. The August 2018 negotiations over infrastructure spending are a part of this commitment.

Under Aquino, Manila had served as the leading voice pushing for anti-China measures during meetings of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN). Under Duterte, the Philippines has been made the ASEAN-China coordinator to promote ASEAN-China Dialogue relations.

Manila, representing ASEAN, and Beijing have drawn up a draft Code of Conduct (COC) for the South China Sea, which includes regular joint military exercises between the various claimants—China, Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei, Taiwan, and the Philippines. It would, however, exclude any country outside the region, notably the US, “unless the parties concerned are notified beforehand and express no objection.”

US Deputy Assistant Secretary State Waler Douglas responded to the news of the draft COC, declaring, “The United States has been part of this region for 200 years. We’re not going to change that. We’re not going away, so what’s important is that our role be recognized that we’re here.”

Washington is closely tied to the opposition in Philippine ruling circles to the Duterte administration that revolves around a host of political figures tied to the Liberal Party, former President Aquino and current Vice President Leni Robredo. The opposition, doubtless with the support of Washington, is seeking to channel mass discontent behind racist, anti-Chinese sentiments.

Over the past half year substantial inflation in the prices of basic commodities, and in particular, the soaring price of the staple rice, has produced an immense level of social anger. In July alone, the price of vegetables rose by 16 percent, corn by 13 and fish by 11. Rice prices have risen so high that the populous Zamboanga City was compelled to declare a state of calamity.

Vicious media rumors began to circulate that round scad (galunggong), a cheap protein consumed by poor families, was expensive because the Chinese were occupying Philippine fisheries, and that the fish in the market were supplied by the Chinese who had poisoned the fish with formaldehyde. In a similar fashion, the high prices of rice were attributed to the hoarding practices of greedy rice dealers—long a trade associated with the Chinese in the Philippines.

The front organizations of the Maoist Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), which until last year had endorsed the Duterte administration and only left his cabinet last month, have played a leading role in the promotion of these lurid claims. Reactionary anti-Chinese racism has long been exploited by the ruling class in the Philippines as a means of dividing the working class and rural masses.

Wonga payday loans collapse shows extent of UK poverty

Dennis Moore

The announcement that Britain’s biggest payday loan company, Wonga, has gone into administration will not be mourned by the thousands of people whose lives have been made a misery by its nefarious practises.

Payday loans are a short-term loan, developed by firms such as Wonga as a way of being able to access money quickly, with a short-term repayment period. They are aimed at the vast numbers of people in low paid work who run out of money before the end of a month, leaving them struggling to pay for essential items. The loans come with extortionate rates of interest.

In a form of “legal loan sharking”, Wonga at one stage was able to charge interest at up to 5,853 percent before rates were capped by legislation in 2015. The new limit was set at a still massive 1,500 percent.

Last week, Wonga stopped taking new loan applications, with the company’s loan book believed to be valued at £400 million owed by more than 220,000 borrowers.

One of the main reasons for Wonga’s crisis was the large increase in the number of compensation claims against it for mis-selling its product. Many people were granted loans by Wonga and other payday firms who were in no financial position to ever pay it back. Under Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) regulations, they are now able to make compensation claims on the basis that payday lenders failed in their duty of care to check that borrowers could afford the repayments.

The UK payday loan industry grew rapidly from 2008-2012, coinciding with the global financial crash and the pauperisation of millions of people in the UK. The numbers of loans issued in this period were 10.2 million per year, with a value of £2.8 billion.

In 2014, after growing public anger at Wonga’s operations, the FCA found its debt collection practices unfair and ordered the company to pay 45,000 customers a total of £2.6 million in compensation. It ruled that fees and interest could in future never exceed the original loan amount.

As a result, the payday loan market retracted by 27 percent between January and September 2014, with four out of the eleven major payday lenders stopping offering loans.

The market has not recovered since the introduction of Price Cap Regulation in January 2015, with more payday lenders going out of business. Wonga’s posted pre-tax profit losses in 2016 of nearly £65 million, after recording huge profits just a few years before.

In its 2014 review of the payday loans industry, the FCA found that the average income of a payday lender was £16,500 a year, far below the UK’s median wage of £26,500 at that time.

In 2017, the Competition Market Authority (CMA) carried out an investigation into payday lending revealing that the average lender takes out as many as six loans every year. The numbers of borrowers who are able to repay their loans in full has decreased over time.

The CMA found most recipients (52 percent) of payday loans have experienced financial problems in the recent past, with 38 percent of all customers having a bad core/credit rating and 10 percent of customers having had a bailiff or debt collector visit to their home. Over half (53 percent) use payday loans to pay for living expenses, food, utility bills—with 7 percent having to use these loans to pay for general shopping such as clothes and household items.

Most payday loans are taken out on a Friday, at the beginning or end of the month, with borrowers experiencing financial pressure and having no access to other credit alternatives.

Many of those taking out loans take them out with multiple companies because of problems not being able to meet previous repayments on loans or making late repayments.

These loans were often advertised to the public as a way of dealing with an emergency expense that has arisen, such as a boiler breaking down, or an unforeseen car repair. The reality, as the CMA investigation found, is that only 52 percent of customers used the loans to pay for an emergency related expense.

The Jubilee Debt Campaign reported that three million households in the UK are now stuck in a debt trap, paying more than a quarter of their income on debt repayments, with poorest families hit hardest.

There are countless stories of people being driven into a spiral of increasing debt.

The practices in the payday loans industry were graphically highlighted in the case of Kane Sparham-Price.

Sparham-Price, an 18-year-old from Ashton-under-Lyne, Greater Manchester committed suicide in February 2013. This took place hours after Wonga took payments for the debts he owed, leaving his bank account empty. He took out loans through Wonga’s website, after turning 18 and leaving local authority care. Sparham-Price had a history of mental health problems.

At the inquest following Kane’s death, it was not suggested that Wonga had acted unlawfully or was aware it had left Sparham-Price penniless. However, a coroner’s report called for a change to payday loans rules to prevent similar deaths.

Austerity measures since 2008 have all but destroyed the social safety net. The roll out of £14 billion of welfare cuts has had a devastating impact on eight million low and middle-income households, and the introduction of Universal Credit will increase the debt crisis for many more of the poorest families.

Since 2008, workers in the UK have suffered the longest period of wage stagnation in two centuries, with one million people in part-time work who want a full-time job, and the number of people on zero hours contracts having increased by 400 percent.

Figures published by the Office for National Statistics showed that British households spent an estimated £900 more on average than they received in income during 2017.

Under conditions of deeper austerity and growing financial insecurity, the collapse of Wonga will not spell the end of the payday lending crisis. Commenting after emergency talks with the firm, the FCA insisted, “Customers should continue to make any outstanding payments in the normal way. All existing agreements remain in place and will not be affected by the proposed administration.”

It is expected that Wonga’s loan book will be taken on by another firm with the Financial Times noting, “It is not unusual for consumer loans to be parcelled up and sold on to privately owned debt-buying companies, many of whom specialise in the subprime sector. They can buy bad debts for as little as 5 pence in the pound, meaning a £1,000 loan where the borrower has defaulted could be purchased for just £50. Then, the new owner of the debt can legally chase the borrower for repayment and may use more aggressive recovery tactics, such as sending in the bailiffs.”

The collapse of Wonga and the larger payday loans firms will see many desperate people turning to local loan sharks, with these thugs routinely exposed for engaging in brutal, criminal practises.

According to estimates by debt charity StepChange, one in seven people borrowed money to meet a household need last year, with an estimated 1.4 million resorting to high cost credit. StepChange head of policy Peter Tutton said the market for payday loans was not “done and dusted” in the wake of Wonga’s collapse. “There is a constant stream of people having to use high cost credit for essentials.”