The Dilemma of the American Economy

Elias Akleh

After the destruction of the European as well as many Asian industrial infrastructures and economies due to WWII, the American industry and technology dominated the world. The US became the strongest global economy. Yet, with the rebuilding of European and especially of Asian economy with relatively cheaper labor force, competition against the American economy became tougher. To maintain its unique position the US; since George W. Bush’s administration, started to outsource its industrial and technological infrastructures to cheaper countries.

This outsourcing had eventually devastated the American middle class, who started losing their businesses, their jobs, their homes, and many became homeless. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s report of 2017 gave a conservative number of around 554,000 homeless people. Homelessness has become a national crisis.

With the slogan of “Make America great again” the Trump administration launched a mafia style economic terror wars against the world in order to force other countries to buy American goods. Trump’s administration withdrew from international agreements and imposed trade tariffs and sanctions against other countries including its own European allies.

After becoming president, Trump started pressuring the EU to pay more for NATO complaining that member countries are paying only small fractions of the cost, and that the US should not have to bear the larger financial and military burdens of defending Europe. To raise the threat against Europe, Trump’s administration decided to withdraw from the INF Treaty (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty) that bars US and Russia from having long-range ground-launched cruise missiles. Recently Russia declared it’s willing to do the same. Such withdrawal could jeopardize the START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) and could trigger a new nuclear arms race between the two countries.

Trump had also demanded protection money from Japan, South Korea and Persian Gulf Arab countries; Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar and UAE. Trump claimed that the US is protecting Japan and South Korea from the communist Chinese and North Korean threats. Trump’s administration keeps claiming that the entire South East Asia is under threat from Chinses colonization; overfishing, dredging, island building and clam harvesting. They also claim that North Korean ballistic missile system that could carry nuclear bombs is also a major threat to the region as well as to the US.

Soon after becoming President, Trump kept threatening to withdraw from Iran Nuclear Dear (JCPOA) demanding Iran to renegotiate the deal to include its ballistic missile system. The JCPOA was the result of months of preparations and negotiations after almost 40 year of ineffective sanctions, which serve only to push Iran to develop its own internal independent economy. The American administration also needed to contain Iran, who had helped Syria fight the terrorist groups created by US/Israel/Saudi Arabia to destroy and divide Syria. Iran has been also supporting Lebanese Hezbollah and the Palestinian resistance against Israeli occupation, and Yemeni Houthis against Saudi/Emirati war.

Beginning of May 2018 Trump announced US withdrawal from JCPOA and imposed economic sanctions against Iran aiming to kill off Iran’s oil export. These withdrawal and sanctions violate UN resolution 2231, undermine international organizations, negatively impact global economy especially those of America’s European allies, and increase conflict within the Persian Gulf region. When the US failed to garner international support for its illegal sanctions, false flag attacks against oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman were perpetrated in order to portray Iran as a threat to the critical oil industry in the region.

Under the justification of protecting the region the US has sent more troops, USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group and Patriot missile defense battery to the region, raising the prospect of war. Sale of all kinds of weapons to Saudi Arabia and UAE was also justified. Trump had also demanded more protection money from Saudi Arabia.

All these expenses and the projected threat will raise the price of crude oil even higher than what the market had witnessed lately. The high price of Gulf oil will match, and may even exceed in the future, the price of the expensively produced American shale oil, making it more marketable.

Iranian economy is not the only target of American sanctions. The competing Russian and Chinese economies have also been targets of American sanctions. Chines economy is considered the second global economy after the US. It is expanding and imposing a threat to the American economy. The Chinese Belt and Road Action Plan; a revival and expansion of the old Silk Road, is a land and maritime trade routes from China to Europe passing through Central Asia and the Middle East particularly through Iran. It will allow China to deliver its relatively cheaper goods, compared to American goods, to all these regions. Chinese Huawei 5G technology is faster, more reliable and more secure than the American 4G internet technology. China had also acquired the Russian SU-35 fighter planes and the S-400 defensive missile system making Chinese military a dangerous adversary to the Americans in the South East Sea.

Trump had accused China of unfair trade and of theft of American proprietary technologies. He announced his plans to raise tariffs on Chinese goods by $300 billion a year. He also banned the purchase and spread of Huawei’s technologies within the US and urged European allies to do the same. The American media went even further by falsely claiming that the Chinese 5G network pauses danger to the public and causes cancer among other types of diseases.

On the other side, Russia has been a major cheaper energy (gas and crude oil) supplier to Europe for a long time. Europe is one of the main markets for Russian gas in the form of Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) given its strict regulation for clean energy for domestic and industrial needs. For this reason, Germany has been for many years engaged in the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline, aimed to double the Russian gas from 55 to 110 billion cubic meter per year.

In order to reduce the trade deficit and benefit American companies the Trump’s administration has forced the EU to dump the Russian LNG and to export the gas from American exporters despite the fact that American LNG costs about 20% more than the Russian gas received through pipelines. Besides the 20% extra cost Europe is forced to build expensive offshore re-gasifiers on the Atlantic in order to process the American gas for their own safe usage. The US is also increasing pressure on Germany to derail Nord Stream 2 and to stop the construction of this important energy gas pipeline.

The Russian military industry has recently proved its superiority over the American’s as demonstrated in the Syrian theater. Russian S-400 missile system is highly advanced, capable of engaging a wider array of targets at long ranges and against multiple simultaneous threats. It is generally considered less expensive than the American weapons, and is sold without the expensive extensive maintenance support. American military old customers, such as Turkey, India and even Saudi Arabia are seeking to acquire the Russian S-400 missile system.

Rather than purchasing the American Patriot missile system Turkey made a deal with Russia to acquire its S-400 missile system instead. The US warned Turkey that acquiring the S-400 would force the US to impose sanctions on Turkey, and could prompt a re-evaluation of Turkey’s membership of NATO. The House of Representative passed resolution 372 (Engel & McCaul Resolution) calling on Turkey to cancel its acquisition of the S-400 system. Washington has also threatened to remove Turkey from its F-35 fighter program if the deal is not dropped. Russia is reported to deliver the S-400 missiles to Turkey during this month of July.

India, too, had signed in October 2018 a $5.43 billion deal with Russia buying S-400 missile system, whose delivery will commence on October 2020 and will be completed by April 2023. Trump’s administration is pressuring India to cancel the deal and is offering Lockheed Martin’s THAAD & Raytheon’s Patriot missiles and the fifth-generation F-35 fighter planes for India’s air force and navy instead. It also offered to exempt India on Iranian oil imports. India is not budging.

Saudi Arabia; America’s weapons number one customer, signed in May 2017 a deal with Russia to acquire the S-400 system. Russia and Saudi Arabia are currently negotiating mutually acceptable terms of the deal. A November 2018 CNBC’s report indicated that Saudi Arabia is among 13 other countries such as Qatar, Algeria, Morocco, Egypt, Iraq and Vietnam, who are interested in buying the Russian S-400 missile systems despite the threat of American economic sanctions. In August 2017 President Trump signed the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act to impose economic or political penalties against such countries.

Trump’s economic wars against the world produced only the opposite results. They are pushing other countries to unite and to isolate the US. They are also impacting many American companies. Many American companies, who had built its own infrastructures in China, and whose businesses had been meshed with other Chinese companies, had been negatively impacted by these American sanctions. Many may be forced to close their businesses.

Yet some large American corporations will defy these sanctions and keep doing business with China. Apple Corp is just one example. The company had decided to move its assembly of Mac Pro computers from Austin, Texas to Shanghai, China.

Many other tech companies cannot stand idle while the rest of the world is taking advantage of the 5G network technology. Despite Trump’s sanctions against Huawei and its 5G network, many countries such as Russia, India, Turkey, Japan, South Korea and even the EU are implementing and using 5G network. Many American computing companies such as Ericsson, HPE, Intel, Nokia and QUALCOMM, as well as communication companies such Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint are investing in, and building 5G networks within the US.

The American $300 billion tariffs against Chinese goods, and the Chinese $100 billion counter tariffs against American goods had impacted the global economy and not just the economy of the two countries. This trade war seemed to overshadow other subjects during the G20 summit last week. Many leaders including the European Commission President; Jean-Claude Juncker, Russian President Putin and Indian Prime Minister Modi, expressed great concern and called on Trump and Chinese president Xi Jinping to come to an agreement rather than risk global economic disaster.

Chinese Xi Jinping, Indian Narendra Modi, Russian Vladimir Putin and Iranian Hassan Rowhani seem to cozy their relationship together to counter American trade war and sanctions. During last month’s meeting in Saint Petersburg, Russia, Putin and Xi discussed a new bilateral economic strategy to use local currencies rather than American Dollar for their $108 billion worth trade payments.

Similarly, the deputy Iranian Foreign Minister; Abbas Araqchi, urged the international community to stand up to the American use of the Petrodollar as a weapon against independent countries. Such a strategy is being welcomed by many African, Asian, Latin American, as well as the EU countries besides Russia and China, in order to confront and to nullify the effects of the American economic sanctions, and to end the American hegemony over the global financial order.

Trump’s anti-Russia and anti-Iran hysteria had impacted the economy of America’s EU ally harshly. European countries have now to contribute more money to NATO, have to pay more for American NLG and for the building of regasification ports, and corporations, especially oil companies, who partnered with and invested in Iran’s economy after the signing of the JCPOA in 2015, are losing their investments.

The American sanctions on the EU would not continue without any reaction. Although the EU admits that maintaining Iran’s nuclear deal without the US is difficult and will create economic hardship to European countries, they keep stressing their willingness to maintain the deal. European Council President; Donald Tusk expressed that maintaining Iran’s nuclear deal is in the regional and international security interest, and that the EU is committed to the deal as long as Iran keeps upholding it.

Iran had recently exceeded the limit on the amount of enriched uranium in its stockpile set out in the 2015 nuclear deal to pressure the EU to live up to the agreement. The EU finally had finalized the INSTEX financial tool that will allow Europe to bypass the American Dollar in order to continue trading with Iran. INSTEX (Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges) is a payment system allowing companies to trade with Iran despite harsh American sanctions, through the exchange of goods without requiring direct transfers of money between Iran and EU companies. This instrument bypasses the American Dollar, thus leading to the weakening of the Doller and in turn to American economy.

As for the NATO allies, some are described as free-loaders and delinquents by Trump, the Secretary General; Jens Stoltenberg, contrary to Trump, does not see any threat to any NATO ally from Russia, especially after NATO had increased its presence into the eastern parts of the alliance. He advocates for building better relationships with Russia and spending 2% of the GDP of each member on defense. Yet there is a rumor reported by BBC’s defense correspondent Jonathan Marcus that there has been growing talk among some allies of building a more autonomous European defense system.

It is obvious for the keen observer that the US is faced with possible future threats of economic depression/isolation and the devaluation of its mighty Dollar if Trump keeps up his belligerent rhetoric and economic sanctions against other countries. This explains the relatively softer and compromising demeanor of President Trump during the last week’s G20 summit.

In his meeting with Chinese Xi Jinping Trump declared that the two countries have agreed to resume trade talks, that the US would not add tariffs on $300 billion worth of Chinese imports, and that he decided to allow US companies to continue doing business with the Chinese tech giant Huawei.

Trump’s meeting with Putin did not seem to be that productive. Neither leader elaborated on the meeting. What is known is that the talks included armament reduction, return to the START agreement, and unelaborated discussions about the situations in Iran, Syria, Venezuela and Ukraine. The media concentrated on Trump asking Putin not to interfere in 2020 election, and Trump telling a reporter “none of your business’ when asked what did he talk to Putin about.

Trump had also provided Turkey a justification for acquiring the Russian S-400 blaming Obama’s administration for not selling Patriot missiles to Turkey. Turkish President Erdogan stated that Trump informed him that the US would not impose sanction on Turkey and would deliver US-made F-35 fighter planes in July.

Trump did not have any success talking to Indian Prime Minister Modi, who shrugged him off when he tried to engage him into conversation.

Trump had a successful working breakfast with Saudi Prince MBS though. They both ignored the Khashoggi’s murder, while Trump showered MBS with praise stating it is a great honor to meet him, and he has done a really spectacular job opening up Saudi Arabia who is “a good purchaser of American products.” Trump seems to insist that MBS stands next to him while taking G20 photos.

Trump exhibited a gesture to improve relationship with North Korea by sending a letter to leader Kim Jong Un suggesting to meet him at the demilitarized zone (DMZ) to consider negotiating a nuclear freeze by North Korea, rather than complete denuclearization. Trump became the first sitting American president to set foot into North Korea.

Trump showed his willingness to ease sanctions and to improve relationships with other countries except with Iran. Iran is Israel’s issue and Trump does not dare to cross this red line, for America’s Middle Eastern foreign policy is dictated by Zionists.

Is Idea of ‘New India’ Hunting the Minorities and Secularism?

Zulafqar Ahmed

India has been epitome of pluralism, tolerance, and diversity since ages. Religious, cultural, and ethnic diversity of India has left inerasable imprints all over the world. Varieties of social groups and ideological differences among the communities could not shake the unity of India. The India which was imagined by the Gandhi, Nehru, Ambedkar, Patel, Azad, Ashfaqullah, and Baghat Singh was that India, where love ruled over hatred, mutual-coexistence ruled over exclusion. Diversity, inclusiveness, and tolerance of India remained intact even during the successive governments. Unfortunately, after the rise of BJP in power in 2014, they successfully arrested the idea of ‘Old India’ which was imagined by our forefathers. Narendra Modi led BJP government has given new shift to the Indian politics. This government has made majority to believe that their pride has been hurt and their identity is under threat. Intermittently, saying this lie made people to believe that it is time to reclaim lost pride and identity under the patronage of Narendra Modi. Opposition has almost failed to counter this narrative of Modi led BJP government. They don’t have any clear vision and agenda which can mobilize the masses whereas BJP and RSS have clear vision of making ‘New India’ which would be more centralized, strong, masculine and technocratic.

Demonisation of Minorities

After the emergence of BJP in power, minorities are feeling more vulnerable under this regime than any other regime. They were made first target of vilification in order to project them as fictitious enemy which further unified the majority community. Certainly, there were several fault-lines which were exist in India before the rise of BJP but they hardly erupted into violence.  It was BJP which battered these fault-lines for electoral gains. BJP has invoked hatred, fear, intimidation and extra-judicial methods to suppress minorities. Lynching has become new norm of the day and ‘Jai Shree Ram’ has become national chant to heckle, thrash, and killed Muslims. This has been instilled in social psyche that Muslims are the foreign invaders and they are the real threat for India’s unity. A social consensus and consent is being generated for the performance of this violence against the Muslims, Dalits and Christians. Street violence and lynching is being done with the help of well framed organizational structure that goes by the name ‘Gau rakshaks. They are the vigilante mob, backed by the ruling government to beat and kill the Muslims. The most horrific part of this violence is ‘deliberate silence’ of the top leadership of the ruling party which further encourages lynch mob.

Demise of Nehruvian Left/Liberal Secularism.

Indeed, secularism has been most debatable concept in India and it has created many confusions. But what is true is that Secularism in India was clearly Nehruvian vision. It was essentially about state policy towards all religions. It was meant that state will keep distance from all religions. Nehruvian secularism is social philosophy which has wider canvas. It not only aspires for tolerance but it also seeks mutual-respect among all caste, regional, ethnic and linguistic groups. Nehruvian left/liberal secularism indeed expects generosity of majority community towards the minority community. This narrative to a greater extent remained continue even during successive government. But after the rise of BJP in power, they got succeed in projecting that secularism is ‘Pro-minorities’. It was also argued that progressive/liberal intellectuals are hypocrites; they remained silent on the bigotry of minorities’ community which helped BJP to mobilize the majority community under their patronage. Selective outrage of progressive/ liberals intellectuals made people to believe that secularism is prejudicial.  Regarding Nehruvian Left/Liberal secularism Avijit Pathak rightly agued “Today, we find ourselves in a strange situation. It is a world where there is neither Nehruvian Left-centric secularism nor Gandhian spiritualized religions co-exists.”

In the regime of BJP government, where minorities are under the grave threat and where democratic values like inclusiveness, tolerance, and secularism are on deathbed; onus goes to opposition to counter the narratives which have been created by BJP. It is also high time for opposition to reclaim these democratic values which kept Indian democracy alive for many years. Here, it is also pertinent to mention that if Modi led BJP government is really desperate for making ‘New India’ then they should work for more digitalized, industrialized, tolerant and inclusive India.

Iran And The West: Travelling Back in Time

Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich

This article was written 10 years ago.  Nothing has changed!

It appears President Trump is fond of time travel.  In his July 4th speech he talked about taking over airports in America in 1775.  There was no air travel in 1775.  Facts don’t matter.   Except this time, travelling back in time in our Iran dealings has very dangerous and unforeseen consequences.

More than a year has passed since Washington and European allies failed to uphold their commitment to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) or the Iran Nuclear Deal.  Trump categorically pulled out of the Deal while the Europeans continue to insult Iran by insisting that it abide by a Deal that no longer exits, and tolerate sanctions.  They add insult to their injury by offering the all too tolerant Iranian nation a “food for oil” program, or INSTEX in a fancier terminology.

Moreover, Western media, the mouthpiece of neoconservatives in Washington   is asking: “Why does Iran need enriched uranium?”, or “Why do they need enriched uranium if not for a bomb?”.  The answer is in this article first published 10 years ago when the Lobby was pushing for war as it is today.   Plus ça change!

The Lobby versus Science

Tragic as war is,  it has often led to scientific and medical discoveries.  Today in Washington, the Lobby is using science as a pretext for war — scientific and medical discoveries that may help not only developing nations, but advance healthcare in America and elsewhere.

Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights clearly includes the right to medical care — yet it appears that the pro-Israel lobbyists in Washington have persuaded policy makers that the developing world is excluded from this right, and Iran’s significant scientific achievements are a global threat designed to do ill and not the means to heal.  Dissemination of such misinformation is akin to the very cancer that the Iranian scientists have been attempting to cure and stem out.

In 1972, a joint research project (French-Iranian scholars) on esophageal cancer in the Caspian Littoral of Iran was  released.  The findings indicated that the region had among the highest recorded incidences of esophageal cancer in the world.  The utility of the research was that given its location, it was not unique to Iran and represented the Middle East, China, Afghanistan, and former Soviet  central Asia, parts of Siberia, Mongolia, and northern and western China.

Perhaps it is with this in mind that almost four decades later and with “health diplomacy” in mind, Iran and the United States, with foresight and fortitude by the National Institute of Health’s mission of Science for Health  launched on three areas of cooperation: 1)  Esophageal Cancer; 2) Mustard Gas Exposure and Lung Carcinogenesis; 3) HIV and drug use. It is not without irony that Iran’s research and expertise in mustard gas should be the result of America’s policies during the 8-year Iran-Iraq war when the U.S. decided to arm Saddam Hossein with CBTW (chemical, biological, toxin warfare).

Today, in order to wage another war against Iranians and to ensure that Iran shares Iraq’s fate, the argument presented by the Lobby and trumpeted by the neoconservative-dominated media is why does Iran  not need to enrich uranium.  Before one responds that it is Iran’s right under the NPT, it would be more simple to demand of the  neoconservatives to explain why America and her allies should place such a high demand on radioisotopes?

In 1959, Science reported that radioisotopes have always been a source for “scientific research, and their application to such activities as agriculture, industry, and medicine is now steadily increasing”. Today, there is a dire shortage .  On July 26, 2009, The Houston Chronicle reported that a drug crucial to medical tests was in short supply.  This was due to the loss of the 51-year-old reactor in Ontario, Canada that produces much of this drug, a radioisotope.  In the same issue,  Dr. Einstein mentions the numerous uses of radioisotopes.

In “Blood Weekly”, (July 2, 2009, p603), Cotara R, a radioisotope being developed as a potential new treatment for glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a deadly form of brain cancer.  In October,  Iran announced it had produced two new radio medicines called “Samarion 153” and “Renium 186” which were able to reduce pains of cancer patients.   Furthermore, these medicines could be used for defining of cancer and reducing bone disease.   Iran also informed that the results of a new anti-cancer medicine would be publicly announced in 2010.

However, the Iranian-derived radio medicine differs vastly from the Canadian product.

The U.S. supplies weapon-grade uranium (HEU, 90-percent 235U) to the Canadian radioisotope producers while Iran uses low enriched uranium (LEU, containing less than 20 percent 235U) for its isotopes.   Given the danger of HEU (HEU is capable of making a bomb), the 1992 Schumer Amendment to the U.S. Atomic Energy Act requires that a foreign producer cooperate with the United States in converting to LEU.  These have resisted.  MDS-Nordion of Canada as an example, continues to import bomb-grade uranium thanks to a 2005 lobbying campaign which resulted in the Burr Amendment in the National Energy Policy Act of 2005.

The Department of Energy’s findings indicate not only a coming shortage in medical isotopes, but a promise of new treatments such as ‘ isotopes for cancer therapy and pain control’.   Given the feat of overcoming HEU to LEU conversion — and overcoming the lobby’s influence, Iran’s extraordinary achievement is to be commended, not blasted – literally.   Even in isolation Iran’s remarkable strides in medicine can serve as a bridge, not as a crevice.   Medicine is not the only common threat between the two nations.  Science and engineering has always bonded the two nations (2007).  Seismic Science has its unique and special place in research.

It is incomprehensible that even though Washington has full knowledge that Iran’s pursuit of nuclear program is for civilian purposes, and the two countries have cooperated in medical research, the lobby had demanded that Iran be hauled to the UNSC, and it is now calling for further sanctions to be imposed on Iran.  Is there any doubt that they are pushing for an eventual war?   It is tragic that a benign program that has the potential to cure and alleviate human suffering should be the lobby’s weapon for destruction – at home and abroad.  Perhaps the real tragedy is the realization that Americans are sovereign no more.

Australian police monitoring journalists’ travel and Internet data

Mike Head

Revelations this week point to intensive Australian Federal Police (AFP) surveillance of journalists, aimed at prosecuting journalists, as well as their sources, to stop the publication of leaks about abuses committed by the military-intelligence apparatus.

First came a report that the AFP obtained an Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) journalist’s flight records from Qantas. This was part of a government-ordered investigation of the leak of documents revealing illegal killings and other abuses by Australian Special Forces as part of the US-led invasion and occupation of Afghanistan.

By all indications, this is just the tip of the iceberg, involving vague and sweeping police powers. The revelation came just weeks after AFP raids on the Sydney headquarters of the ABC and the Canberra home of a News Corp political editor, Annika Smethurst. At both locations, police spent hours poring through and seizing material.

This is part of escalating efforts to criminalise exposures about key military and intelligence operations. Significantly, the Special Forces are on the frontline of all Australian military interventions, while Smethhurt reported plans to legalise domestic surveillance by the Australian Signals Directorate, the country’s US-linked electronic spy agency.

Qantas handed over to the AFP the 2016 travel records of ABC reporter Dan Oakes, one of the two journalists involved in the exposure of the Afghanistan war crimes. An AFP statement dated April 1 this year, obtained by Nine Media outlets, was titled “Statement in the matter of R v Daniel Michael Oakes.”

That points to the police pursuing a prosecution of Oakes, contradicting earlier comments by Attorney-General Christian Porter. In an attempt to quell the public outrage over the two police raids, Porter had told the media there was “absolutely no suggestion that any journalist is the subject of the present investigations.”

In response to the AFP request on March 15, a Qantas legal officer accessed the airline’s internal booking system three days later in search of two flights, in June and September 2016.

The AFP request came roughly six months after former military lawyer David McBride was arrested for allegedly leaking the war crimes information to the ABC. That further indicates that Oakes faces prosecution, not just McBride, whose trial is already in its preliminary stages.

By what power the AFP demands access to airline records, apparently frequently, is entirely unclear. A Qantas spokesman said on Sunday: “Like all airlines, Qantas receives numerous requests for information from law enforcement agencies and we comply with these requests in accordance with our legal obligations and privacy legislation.”

Qantas’s privacy policy statement declares it can disclose a customer’s private information to “law enforcement agencies, regulatory authorities and governments around the world and their service providers in connection with their investigations, screening or other functions.”

Nine Media outlets last week revealed that Smethurst also could be prosecuted. In an internal document, the AFP’s “sensitive investigations” unit sent a thank you note to staff after the raid on Smethurst’s home. One staff member wrote back: “Reporting hasn’t caught up on the publishing offence.”

The “publishing offence” refers to legislation, which was expanded by the Liberal-National government last year with the Labor Party’s backing, that means journalists can be jailed for “dealing with” leaked information that might “harm Australia’s interests.”

The AFP documents also revealed that police were armed when they conducted the two raids, and that the AFP had planned a similar raid on News Corp’s Sydney headquarters, then decided not to proceed.

Separately, the AFP released documents showing it obtained two secret “journalist information warrants” in the 2017-18 financial year, and then accessed journalists’ on-line metadata on 58 occasions.

The AFP used 2015 metadata retention laws that force telecommunications companies to store their customers’ phone and internet records for two years. The entire process is shrouded in secrecy. Government agencies can obtain warrants to access journalists’ data without their knowledge. Anyone who even reports the existence of a warrant faces two years in jail.

Significantly, throughout the corporate media coverage of these revelations, there has been no mention of the case that set the global precedent for such assaults on journalists, free speech and basic democratic rights. That is the April 11 arrest of WikiLeaks founder and journalist Julian Assange, who faces extradition to the United States.

By authorising police raids against journalists, Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s government followed the lead of the Trump administration in charging Assange, an Australian citizen, with 17 counts under the US Espionage Act.

Nor has there been a word in the media about why the police raids were conducted. At a media conference, AFP acting commissioner Neil Gaughan declared the raids were necessary to protect the information that the Australian police and intelligence agencies receive from their “Five Eyes” counterparts. This network of surveillance agencies, from the US, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, is central to US-led war planning and operations.

These silences are not accidental. The media proprietors are just as committed as the government to supporting the US military alliance, which underpins the predatory operations of Australian imperialism throughout the Asia-Pacific.

A delegation of six media chiefs made another attempt last week to defuse the public anger over the police raids. Led by ABC managing director David Anderson, Nine chief executive Hugh Marks and News Corp corporate affairs chief Campbell Reid, they met Attorney-General Porter and Communications Minister Paul Fletcher to push their case for minor “reforms” to media laws.

They came away empty handed. Porter and Fletcher refused to guarantee there would be no prosecutions of journalists, and rejected the “reform” plea. Instead, they referred the complaints to the government-controlled joint parliamentary intelligence and security committee. This same committee, headed by former Special Forces officer Andrew Hastie, rubber-stamped all the government’s metadata, “security” and “foreign interference” legislation.

Nevertheless, the media executives agreed to meet with the two ministers again in three months’ time, hoping to wear down the public outrage, including that of media workers.

Both Prime Minister Morrison and Labor Leader Anthony Albanese are closely involved in these efforts to suppress public opposition. In a sign of their mutual concern, they met to discuss the affair last week, during the first week of parliament since the May 18 election. After initially expressing reservations about the credibility of the parliamentary committee inquiry, Albanese accepted it, in keeping with Labor’s long record of bipartisan backing for the US alliance and the ramping up of “security” laws.

Washington approves large arms package to Taiwan

Ben McGrath 

The Pentagon has announced that the US State Department approved an arms sale to Taiwan on Monday worth over $2.2 billion. The deal is broken up into two packages with additional sales likely to come. It is also one of the largest between Washington and Taipei and serves to deepen US preparations for war with China.

The first part of the deal is worth an estimated $2 billion and includes 108 M1A2T Abrams tanks, machine guns, and heavy transport vehicles. The second part includes 250 Block I-92 Stinger missiles valued at an estimated $223.56 million. Taiwan confirmed on June 6 that it had submitted a request for the weaponry. Taiwan’s Defense Ministry also stated at the time that it sought to purchase 1,240 TOW missiles and 409 Javelin anti-tank missiles, which would increase the value of the deal to $2.6 billion.

Taiwanese presidential spokesman Chang Tun-han stated after the deal’s approval, “Taiwan will speed up investment on defence and continue to deepen security ties with the United States and countries with similar ideas.”

The Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) has also notified Congress of the deal, with US lawmakers able to raise objections within 30 days. None is likely to do so, indicating the broad support in US ruling circles for the increased militarization of the Asia-Pacific region and preparation for war with China.

In March, Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen stated that her government hoped to secure tanks and fighter jets from the US, without giving details. A Bloomberg article citing sources in the White House stated that advisors to Trump urged Taipei to submit a request for 66 F-16 fighter jets. Tsai said, “We will keep on strengthening our self-defence capabilities (and we) will also keep on being a contributor to regional peace.”

The statements by Tsai make clear that Taiwan is lined up squarely behind the United States and is prepared to go to war against the Chinese mainland while painting Beijing as the aggressor.

China’s Foreign Ministry pointed to this as it denounced the latest deal and called on Washington to “immediately cancel” it. Spokesman Geng Shuang stated the deal “grossly interferes in China’s internal affairs and undermines China's sovereignty and security interests.”

The US is trying to offset its relative economic decline by encircling China militarily and attempting to force Beijing to accept a trade deal that subordinates it to US interests. Since Trump came to office, his administration has sharply increased pressure on Beijing, with White House sources telling the Wall Street Journal in June that Trump “sees the value in using Taiwan as a bargaining chip in his (trade) talks with China.”

In criticizing the proposed sale as insufficient, the online military magazine made revealing comments about the actual US military plans for the island. The magazine stated the weaponry “would be fine if Taiwan were preparing for a ground war, but the real conflict if China invades will be at sea and in the air. Taiwan should focus on acquiring the most cost-effective methods of stopping a Chinese invading force before it lands.”

In reality, the US is preparing not for a defensive war, but for an aggressive attack on the Chinese mainland, a short distance across the Taiwan Strait. Due to its strategic location, Taiwan would become a base of operations in any US war against China. In the 1950s, US General Douglas MacArthur referred to Taiwan as an unsinkable aircraft carrier—a key asset in any conflict with China.

Washington has tried to conceal this fact. The US Defense Department’s DSCA claimed that this latest weapons sale will not alter the military balance in the region. Even if that were true, the sale is part of a broader military buildup among US allies in the region.

This latest deal with Taiwan is the fourth significant military agreement under the Donald Trump administration. In June 2017, Washington sold Taiwan $1.42 billion worth of missiles and torpedoes. In September 2018, it sold $330 million worth of spare parts for fighter jets, and a deal involving pilot training was completed in April of this year for $500 million.

During a visit to Japan in May, Trump confirmed plans to sell 105 F-35 stealth fighter jets to Tokyo. Washington also intends to sell 70 F-35s to Australia and 40 to South Korea. Zhou Chenming, a Beijing analyst, stated at the time, “This is bound to upset the balance of power in the Asia-Pacific region, given the large quantity of warplanes ordered by Japan.”

These increased sales have been part of Trump’s agenda since coming to office, but they were codified in the Asia Reassurance Initiative Act, which Trump signed into law at the end of last year. It calls for increased transfers of military weaponry to Taiwan and other countries and high-level official visits between Washington and Taipei. The Taiwan Travel Act, also signed last year, similarly ratified high-level contact between the two.

As a result, Beijing is growing increasingly concerned that Washington is in effect violating its adherence to the One China policy, which states that Taiwan is a part of China. In the latest example, the US Defense Department provocatively referred to Taiwan as a “country” in its June 1 “Indo-Pacific Strategy Report.” Since the “1992 Consensus” Beijing and Taipei have agreed to the One China policy, though accept differing interpretations on which is the legitimate ruler of China.

The Trump administration’s stoking of tensions with Beijing is the intensification of the previous Obama administration’s “pivot to Asia.” Washington has enflamed tensions over long-simmering territorial disputes in the South and East China Sea and goaded Beijing by sending warships through the region, including increasingly sending warships through the Taiwan Strait. Beijing has repeatedly stated that it will use military force if Taiwan ever declares independence or if other military red lines are crossed, such as if a US warship were to dock at a Taiwanese port.

These reckless US moves run the risk of a catastrophic war breaking out in the Asia-Pacific, one that would involve two nuclear-armed powers.

FBI and ICE scanning driver’s license photos with facial recognition technology

Kevin Reed

A report in the Washington Post this week revealed that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have been using facial recognition software to secretly scan databases of millions of driver’s license photos—a violation of basic democratic rights. The federal agencies have been engaged in the program for at least eight years.

According to documents made available to the Post by the Georgetown Law Center for Privacy and Technology, the FBI alone has logged more than 390,000 facial recognition searches of federal and state databases since 2011, including the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) digital catalog of driver’s license photos in at least 21 states.

In Utah, according to the article, the “DMV database was the subject of nearly 2,000 facial-recognition searches from outside law enforcement agencies between 2015 and 2017—sometimes dozens of searches a day,” with dozens having returned a “possible match.”

The Post report says that many of the searches are part of the push to find and deport undocumented immigrants, and “that federal investigators have forged daily working relationships with DMV officials.” In states such as Utah, Vermont and Washington, where undocumented immigrants are permitted to obtain full driver’s licenses or limited driving privilege cards, “ICE agents have run facial-recognition searches on those DMV databases.”

According to Jake Laperruque, a senior counsel at the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight, “People think this is something coming way off in the future, but these [facial recognition] searches are happening very frequently today. The FBI alone does 4,000 searches every month, and a lot of them go through state DMVs.”

The latest exposure of widespread use of facial recognition software by federal police agencies is further evidence that the state apparatus is systematically violating basic democratic rights with high-tech surveillance tools. Behind the backs of the public, integrated networks, databases and artificial intelligence technologies are being used to build up a mass of information in the form of digital profiles or dossiers on every citizen. Other recent examples of the increased use of biometric surveillance of the public include:

• A March 9 report by NBC 7 San Diego based on a leaked Customs and Border Protection document showed that dossiers on 59 individuals who were involved in political activity opposed to the Trump administration’s immigration policy were gathered from social media accounts and used by the Department of Homeland Security to put a travel ban on the passports of US citizens.

• A June 17 report by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) called “The Dawn of Robot Intelligence” said that the merger of the security camera infrastructure built up over decades with state surveillance “deep learning” and “neural networks” of artificial intelligence are being used to monitor the public 24/7 across the country.

• A hack and subsequent publication on June 14 of the corporate data of DHS contractor Perceptics revealed that facial recognition technology is being utilized by the US government on roadways and border crossings to monitor the traveling public.

• A Georgetown Law Center for Privacy and Technology report called “America Under Watch” revealed that major US cities such as Detroit have secretly built up a facial recognition infrastructure that is monitoring the public in “parks, schools, immigration centers, gas stations, churches, abortion clinics, hotels, apartments, fast-food restaurants, and addiction treatment centers,” and is connected with “databases containing hundreds of thousands of photos, including mugshots, driver’s licenses, and images scraped from social media.”

Facial recognition technology is the marriage of high-resolution video and photographic images with artificial intelligence software. The images on photo IDs or those captured by security cameras in public places such as airports, parks, roadways or businesses—are scanned by the software to assemble a map of key facial geometric relationships.

Among these relationships are the distance between the eyes, the distance from the forehead to the chin or from the nose to the chin. These “facial landmarks”—some systems measure as many as 97 landmarks—are then assembled into a profile known as the “facial signature.” These facial signatures, which are being collected and stored by the millions in government databases, are unique to each individual and a form of biometric data comparable to fingerprints and human DNA.

However, fingerprints and DNA are ostensibly collected by law enforcement according to procedures based on long-established legal principles of “reasonable suspicion” and “probable cause.” In the mass processing and storage of facial signatures by the FBI and ICE derived from state-issued ID photo databases, all such formalities have been dropped. In many cases, requests for searches are made with nothing more than an email from the police agency to a DMV official. Among the providers of advanced facial recognition systems for the law enforcement agencies is Amazon. According to earlier media reports , Amazon’s Rekognition artificial intelligence software is used by the state of Oregon for the purpose of scanning photo databases and matching facial identities, including locating individuals through photos on their social media accounts.

Other reports said that Amazon met with ICE officials and promised to help “target or identify immigrants.” Also, in one of its facial recognition patent applications, Amazon proposed to develop a “database of suspicious persons” that could be integrated with home security technologies and create a “neighborhood-wide surveillance system.”

That these truly Orwellian biometric data gathering techniques are being developed by the tech giants and utilized increasingly by the state intelligence apparatus is a warning to the working class. These revelations represent an escalation of the surveillance of the public that was exposed in 2013 by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, who leaked documents showing that the US government is electronically storing every phone call and email of the entire population.

The response by congressional Democrats to the facial recognition revelations demonstrates their complicity in what has been going on for many years. Their main criticism is that the use of such methods requires federal government regulation. In fact, the release of the documents by the Georgetown Law center to the Washington Post is part of ongoing hearings in Washington, DC aimed at passing congressional legislation that will make such surveillance legal.

The Democratic chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, Elijah Cummings, glossed over the implications of facial recognition scanning, saying merely, “Law enforcement’s access of state databases is often done in the shadows with no consent.” The same is true for DSA member and Democratic Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, who responded to the exposure of mass video surveillance in Detroit by saying that she would support federal legislation to regulate its use.

Britain: Gang convicted of running “extensive and prolific” modern slavery network

Richard Tyler

Last week, the remaining members of a criminal gang were convicted for modern slavery, trafficking and money laundering following a three-year investigation. The eight gang members, five men and two women all of Polish origin, have received sentences of between 3 and 11 years. The court had heard traumatic evidence of nearly 100 victims, also all from Poland.

The gang’s activities were initially exposed by the charity Hope for Justice, whose co-founder and CEO Ben Cooley said, “This was a vast criminal conspiracy profiting from the misery and manipulation of vulnerable human beings.” The charity believes there could have been up to 400 victims who were exploited by the gang between June 2012 and October 2017, in what Judge Mary Stacey, who presided over the two trials, described as the “most ambitious, extensive and prolific” modern slavery network ever uncovered in Britain.

Victims, men and women from 17 to over 60 years old, were recruited in Poland from among the most vulnerable social layers—the homeless, alcoholics, recently released prisoners, the unemployed and destitute. Promised jobs and a better life, once they arrived in the UK they undertook mainly manual labour including house renovations, painting and decorating, gardening, working in poultry factories and in rubbish recycling centres.

According to an investigation conducted by the Times, fresh produce harvested by slaves was sold by Britain’s leading supermarket chains, including Tesco, Asda, Marks & Spencer and Waitrose. Others made garden sheds and fencing for a supplier to Homebase, Argos, Travis Perkins and Wickes.

One man told reporters he worked on a farm and was forced to wake at 5am to start working at 7am, “It was hard work. We were promised minimum wage—but I didn’t receive a penny.”

In some cases, victims were forced to work up to 13 hours a day. The gang took their pay packets and handed back a pittance—providing the barest minimum by way of food and drink, leading to some victims seeking support from soup kitchens. In other cases, victims were forcibly taken to ATMs and made to withdraw money under threats of violence. Crammed into filthy and unsanitary living conditions, often lacking the most basic amenities, one victim described having to wash in a canal. Another said that “homeless people here in the UK live better than I lived after I arrived.”

Another, recruited immediately after his release from prison, said being locked up in a Polish jail had been better than the conditions he was forced to endure at the hands of the traffickers.

Victims were told they had accrued large debts for accommodation and transport and would have to continue working till these were paid off. Gang members took their ID papers and used these to fraudulently claim welfare benefits, which they pocketed along with the wages. The total proceeds of the exploitation are thought to run into millions and were used to finance the gang’s opulent lifestyle. The court heard how the gang leader drove around in a Bentley and enjoyed using a fleet of other high-performance cars.

Following the verdicts at Birmingham Crown Court, Judge Mary Stacey said, “Any lingering complacency after the 2007 bicentenary celebrations of the abolition of the English Slave Trade Act was misplaced. The hard truth is that the practice continues, here in the UK, often hiding in plain sight.”

A recently published report by the European Union (EU) Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) underscores how widespread are such slave-like conditions. The evidence presented was based on accounts by 237 adult migrant workers, including third country nationals as well as from the EU, who were “severely exploited or worked in sectors at high risk of labour exploitation” in eight member states (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal and the United Kingdom).

It is not just criminal gangs that benefit from human trafficking and the super-exploitation of the most defenceless. According to the report, “Unscrupulous employers use the weak position of migrant workers to force them to work for endless hours with no or little pay, often in dangerous settings, and without the minimum safety equipment required by law.”

Employers used “a number of strategies with varying degrees of coercion to create a fearful and intimidating environment and increase employers’ control of the worker, ultimately preventing workers from exiting labour exploitation.”

Unscrupulous employers went to great lengths to avoid their illegal practices being uncovered, “including requesting workers to hide or not show up during [labour] inspections, to lie about real work conditions or to pretend not to understand the local language.”

Coercive measures included “physical violence, threats of violence, and establishing an inhuman and degrading environment for the workers, including sleep deprivation and poor nutrition/denutrition” and “in a few, extreme, cases” workers were “completely deprived of their freedom of movement.”

The authors were particularly critical of the UK, where they found that “legislative gaps” facilitated the exploitation of migrant labour.

While the prime minister’s residence at 10 Downing Street was lit up in red last year, supposedly to show support for Anti-Slavery Day, the Home Office was detaining over 500 victims of modern slavery in immigration detention centres, rather than placing them in safe accommodation with specialist support and counselling. Using Freedom of Information requests, data mapping project After Exploitation has exposed that almost one fifth of the 2,726 suspected victims of modern slavery identified through the government’s own reporting system were held in centres used to detain immigrants prior to deportation.

The director of After Exploitation, Maya Esslemont, told the press, “The unjustifiable detention of potential trafficking victims shows disturbing failings by the government to protect vulnerable people from prison or prison-like settings under immigration powers.”

In June, the Independent published the result of its investigation into the treatment of victims of trafficking at the hands of Britain’s Home Office, the government department responsible for immigration. The paper found that there were numerous cases where such victims were being sent “back to the address where they were enslaved” following their release from immigration detention.

“In one case,” the investigation found, “a Chinese woman who was exploited as a sex slave for five years in London, was released from Yarl’s Wood immigration removal centre last month and told to make her way to the address in Barking where she had previously been discovered being forced to work in the sex trade.”

Case workers from the Salvation Army, which holds the government contract for providing support to those identified as victims of modern slavery, reported numerous instances where the charity had not had information about such individuals passed on to them.

Shalini Patel from Duncan Lewis Solicitors, who have represented several victims of modern slavery, said that for the Home Office, the safeguarding of detainees “was not a priority.”

“There is clear incompetence and sheer disregard for the safety of these women who have already been subjected to such horrendous sexual abuse and exploitation,” she told the newspaper.

The latest convictions in Britain are part of a global trade in human misery and exploitation.

According to the International Labour Office (ILO), there are 40.3 million people in conditions of modern slavery across the world, including 10 million children. This equates to 5.4 victims of modern slavery for every 1,000 people in the world. While the majority (30.4 million) are found in the Asia-Pacific region, mainly in bonded labour, the ILO records 9.1 million in Africa and 1.5 million in “developed economies.” These barbaric practices generate for 21st century capitalism $150 billion in illegal profits.

Australian retail giant to cut jobs, wages

Eric Ludlow

Woolworths, one of Australia’s two major supermarket chains, announced last month the largest restructure to its store layout and staffing since 2011.

The move will affect thousands of managerial staff at the company’s 1,000 stores across the country. While some stores in the state of New South Wales have adopted the new structure already, the roll-out is expected to be completed by September.

The announcement came amid a protracted slump in retail, reflecting a broader downturn in the Australian economy. In June, the National Australia Bank declared that the sector was “clearly in recession,” and that sales figures were worse than during the 2008-09 global financial crisis.

Citigroup last month warned that Woolworths’ modest earnings forecasts could be downgraded in August, stating that “store profits may fall because store-based sales growth is running below underlying store-based cost growth.” The retail chain is in a cutthroat competition with its rivals such as Coles for markets and profits.

The company has responded to growing pressures by offloading its alcohol and gaming divisions this year, and expanding its focus to online sales. At the same time, it is pressing ahead with the restructure of its supermarket operations.

The main retail, fast food and warehousing trade union in Australia, the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees’ Association (SDA) and the Retail and Fast Food Workers Union (RAFFWU) are seeking to suppress widespread opposition to the job destruction.

The restructure will condense delicatessen, butchery and seafood counters; and dairy, eggs, pre-packaged meat, branded bread and meal solutions into only two departments.

Woolworths has claimed that staff numbers across its stores will not be reduced. It has allocated $10 million to retrain staff for “redeployment” into other roles.

They will likely be moved into part-time or casual employment, however, with significantly lower wages. Workers who do not accept the new roles or cannot be trained for redeployment will be forced into redundancy.

Workers were given just weeks to apply for new roles or for redundancy. In some cases, they were given less than seven days.

The SDA has said that the restructure will force thousands of department managers—who earn $60,000-70,000 a year—to move into an assistant team manager role, resulting in a pay cut of up to $30,000.

Josh Cullinan, secretary of the RAFFWU, says an average of 10 managerial roles will be made redundant in each Woolworths store (or about 10,000 nationally), with about seven or eight new manager roles available for which workers can apply.

Cullinan stated that this will result in “about 2,000 to 3,000” current managers “being only offered effectively a store team member role.”

The unions are doing nothing to oppose the job losses.

The SDA lodged a dispute against Woolworths with the Fair Work Commission (FWC), the federal government’s pro-business industrial tribunal, over the restructure.

At the same time, the SDA has signalled its support for the overhaul, issuing a statement that “encourages all members to apply for a new role. Our priority is to secure ongoing employment for SDA members.”

In an email sent to Victorian members, SDA state secretary Michael Donovan claimed that the backroom dealings of the union with the FWC and Woolworths were aimed at giving workers more time to consider new roles, ensuring that redundancies are voluntary, and wage rates are maintained.

However, in a later email, Donovan revealed that workers would only be given an extra few days to make decisions about taking new roles or redundancies.

The attempts by the unions to force through the restructure are in line with their role as the industrial policemen of company management. The SDA, like its counterparts in other industries, has a lengthy record of slashing wages, conditions and jobs.

In 2012, an enterprise agreement between Woolworths and the SDA resulted in up to 60,000 supermarket employees being underpaid tens of millions of dollars. It has imposed similar sweetheart deals at major fast food outlets and throughout the retail sector.

For its efforts, the union officialdom has been handsomely rewarded by the major corporations. In 2015-16, Woolworths transferred almost $5 million to the Queensland branch of the SDA, to cover union dues.

The unions are also seeking to impose 450 job cuts at the Melbourne head office of Coles, Woolworths’ largest competitor.

A shop floor worker at Woolworths spoke with the WSWS about the restructure. “I am not affected yet. At the moment it seems as if they need us workers on the shop floor,” she said.

“But the issue is that they are setting a precedent—they haven’t said that we won’t be targeted with the same redundancies and wage cuts. Big businesses have the power, the money. They can just get away with it.

“They say it’s about ‘freshness’ and the ‘customer experience.’ It’s just a nice way of saying ‘we want more money.’

“Some managers aren’t very good, but some are really great at what they do. Woolworths are not targeting ones that are performing badly or treat staff badly. They are saying that, no matter who you are or how many years’ experience you have, your job doesn’t exist anymore.

“The union said that they were not told about it. We all know that the unions are in bed with Woolworths and Coles, so we expect that they will make some noise, but then just agree to disagree with Woolworths and it will be business as usual for the corporations. They say that they’re worried about it, but the unions are always saying that.

The worker spoke about the impact of the sackings, stating: “It’s done in such a way that it is thrown at us. It’s not a process. You can’t just dump it on people and expect them to have a new job in one week. I know managers with mortgages, babies, families.”

The role of the unions makes clear that a struggle against Woolworths’ restructure can only proceed through a rebellion against these thoroughly corporatised organisations.

New organisations of struggle, including rank-and-file committees, are required to break the isolation imposed by the unions and to coordinate a political and industrial offensive of all warehouse and retail workers.

Above all, the assault on workers’ jobs and conditions underscores the need for a new political program to fight for a workers’ government and socialist policies that would place the banks and major corporations, including Woolworths and Coles, under public ownership and democratic workers’ control.

Global conflict situations, poverty lead to rise in mental health crises

Alex Johnson

Last month, the World Health Organization (WHO) released an article detailing the prevalence of mental health distress and psychological suffering among people in conflict situations, such as in war-torn countries or regions with high levels of civilian violence. It found the prevalence of mental disorders in conflict zones to be higher than previously thought.

The WHO published their new estimates in the British medical journal the Lancet. It sought to update its previous estimates, which were over a decade old and did not reflect modern data-gathering procedures.

The WHO derived its estimates through a systematic review and meta-analysis of journal articles on the topic between 2000 and 2017 in PubMed and other scholarly databases and supplemented this with data from the “grey literature,” such as government reports, conference proceedings and dissertations.

The study found that one in five people in conflict situations suffer from mental disorders, such as depression, anxiety or bipolar disorder. Nearly 9 percent of these individuals had mental disorders that were moderate or severe.

The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Human Affairs estimates that nearly 132 million people around the world will need humanitarian assistance in 2019. Moreover, 68.5 million people were forcibly displaced by conflict in 2017, an increase above the 59.5 million displaced in 2014.

According to the UN’s 2018 Syria Arab Republic Humanitarian Response Plan, one in five Syrians were at risk for developing moderate mental health problems, while one in three were at risk of developing severe or acute problems.

In Israel, the war crimes committed by the Israel Defense Forces have also led to widespread manifestations of psychological trauma. Following the last major military assault on the Gaza Strip in 2014, the WHO found that 20 percent of Gaza’s population developed mental health problems. A study conducted by Palestinian psychologist Abdelaziz Thabet in 2017 discovered that nearly a third of Gaza’s population suffered from some degree of post-traumatic stress syndrome.

Psychological disorders also go hand in hand with poverty. This can be seen in Latin America, the most unequal region in the world, where residents have very limited access to health care. Five percent of the adult population suffers from depression there, according to another WHO study.

“There is a clear relationship between standard of living and common mental disorders,” said Paulo Rossi Menezes, a professor of medicine at the University of Sao Paulo, in an article published by the World Bank in 2015.

However, less than 2 percent of the governments’ healthcare budgets are dedicated to mental health, according to the WHO.

Similarly, few resources are allocated to mental health services in other poverty-afflicted regions, such as in parts of Africa.

In Kenya, one of the more economically stable countries on the continent, health experts found that approximately one-fourth of the Kenyan population, some 11 million people, suffer from mental disorders. Despite the large population, only 80 psychiatrists and 30 clinical psychologists operate in the country. According to the WHO, the country spends only about 0.05 percent of its health budget on mental health, while 70 percent of its mental health facilities are concentrated in the capital, Nairobi.

In Nigeria, less than 10 percent of the population has access to a psychiatrist (there are only 130 in the entire country) or health worker. The WHO estimates that 40 to 60 million Nigerians suffer from mental health issues out of a total population of 174 million.

Although the WHO’s Lancet study identifies some of the countries experiencing major conflict-induced humanitarian crises—such as in Afghanistan, Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan, Syria and Yemen—it fails to note that it is US imperialism and its allies that bear principal responsibility for these crises.

The US has launched numerous wars in the Middle East and North Africa since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Millions have been displaced by US military interventions and aerial bombardments, starting with the Persian Gulf War of 1990-1992 and continuing with the wars launched against Iraq and Afghanistan in the early 2000s, all the way up to the recent violent confrontations in Somalia, Libya, Syria and Yemen. These wars have laid waste to entire societies, led to the deaths of millions and have created the greatest refugee crisis since World War II.