The World Socialist Movement is against any war between peoples and has opposed, oppose and always will oppose war. The socialists’ role  is to carry on proclaiming that there is but one war of emancipation: the one waged in every country by the oppressed against the oppressor, by the exploited against the exploiter. Our task is to summon wage-slaves to revolt against their masters. To all soldiers from every country convinced that they are fighting for justice and freedom, we explain that their heroism and their valour serves only to perpetuate hatred, tyranny and misery. 

The World Socialist Movement  reaffirms its allegiance to the principle of internationalism and working-class solidarity the world over, and proclaims its unalterable opposition to all war. Whether they have been wars of aggression or have been represented as wars of “defence,” they have always been made by the ruling classes and fought by working people.  We call upon the workers of all nationa to refuse support to their governments in their wars. 

Wars bring wealth and power to the capitalist and pain and suffering to the worker. Wars breed nationalist unreason and race hatred. In support of the capitalists we will not willingly sacrifice a single life or shed a drop of blood. Modern wars as a rule have been caused by the commercial and financial rivalry and intrigues of the capitalist interest in the different countries. The death and destruction which is now convulsing unfortunate Ukraine was caused by the conflict of capitalist interests. The acute competition between the Western powers and Russia, their distrust of one another and the fear of the others rising power has led to the madness of war. This war is a war of the capitalist class, worldwide.

It is not a war to advance the cause of democracy. Democracy can never be imposed upon any country by a foreign power by force of arms. War is an inevitable product of the capitalist system. No capitalist power can prosper within its own borders atone; it must expand or suffer paralyzing economic crisis; to survive, it must get new markets abroad, new sources of raw materials, new fields of investment, new spheres of influence. When it is blocked from securing or consolidating these objectives by the economic or political power of another nation, it will eventually resort to military means.

It is not enough to point an accusing finger at the politicians who are running the government  or the greedy CEOs. Their individual avarice and lust for power are important factors but not the decisive ones. In the first place, they are not acting on their own; they are the representatives and administrators of their class, the capitalist class. Without the consent of their class they would never dare embark on such a dangerous venture as war. War represents a terrible risk for them yet they are driven to desperate measures for resolving international disputes not merely by some quirk in their individual or collective minds or hearts, but by the very needs of the capitalist system itself. 

If we don’t say it’s a class war, a war of the oppressor against the oppressed, of the exploiters against the exploited, of the capitalists against the workers and oppressed people of the world, then we are not telling the whole truth.

The end of wars will come with the establishment of socialism the world over. In a rational world cooperative there would of course be no war over raw materials, which would be accessible to all and collectively used for the common welfare. But a world dominated by capitalism is not a rational world. It’s a world whose very fate is based on such conflicts as the competition for raw materials. it’s a dog-eat-dog system, where each dog is ready to undergo some suffering himself in order to remain or become the top dog, and where all the dogs are indifferent to the welfare of canines as a whole.

You can’t end war without ending its cause, capitalism. The World Socialist Movement calls upon all workers to join it in its struggle to reach its goal of a new society in which peace, fraternity and harmony will prevail. 

76% of South Koreans believe the nation should develop and deploy its own nuclear weapons to serve as a deterrent.

 Many in the South have been alarmed at the perceived fragility of the security alliance that has tied the US to Seoul since the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950.  Questions have grown about Washington’s commitment to the alliance as trade rivalries have increased. 

While in power, President Donald Trump strong-armed Seoul into sharply increasing the amount it paid to keep US troops in the South by threatening to withdraw US forces from the peninsula.

   The US has taken a firmer stance on imports of South Korean electric vehicles and is shifting away from a long reliance on Korean semiconductor manufacturers. 

 “The fact that the US does not subsidize Korean electric vehicles and tries to compete in the semiconductors industry is creating anxiety for South Korea,” explained politics Professor Hyobin Lee at Chungnam National University. “South Koreans do not trust the nuclear umbrella provided by the US.” She added, “How can we trust someone for protection if they treat us as a competitor?” 

The sense is that if Washington cannot be trusted on trade, then how can Seoul be absolutely certain US forces will be committed in the event of another invasion from the North or a threat to South Korea from China? 

Some are placing their support behind a homegrown nuclear capability. They say it would permit Seoul to rely less heavily on the defensive umbrella provided by the US, enable a drawdown of US military personnel and ensure that South Koreans made decisions for themselves on matters of national security.  The acquisition of nuclear weapons was once a topic for the political fringe but has now become a mainstream element of security discussions.   

Another reason for that support is a concept called “unwanted use theory.”  According to the theory, as the credibility of US power and preparedness to use nuclear weapons from bases in South Korea increases, that paradoxically makes the South more of a target for its regional rivals, either as a pre-emptive strike or in retaliation.  

President Yoon Suk-yeol in January said his nation might need to acquire a nuclear capability or, at the very least, play a more active role in managing US weapons that could be reintroduced to the South, seeking a return of tactical nuclear weapons or nuclear sharing.

if South Korea were to try to create its own nuclear deterrent, it would take less than one year to develop a weapon.  Any such decision would also mean Seoul would be abandoning its commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

South Korea: Why support for nukes is on the rise – DW – 02/17/2023

 The World Food Programme (WFP) said it has been forced to cut food rations for Rohingya refugees by 17% and has warned of “unconscionable” further cuts in April as a result of dwindling international donations. It needs $125m (£104m) urgently to avoid further cuts.

UN officials Tom Andrews and Michael Fakhri explained in a statement, “If these cuts are made, they will be imposed on vulnerable people who are already food insecure. Acute malnutrition levels remain high and chronic malnutrition is pervasive among the Rohingya refugee population in Bangladesh, with more than a third of children stunted and underweight.”

Close to a million Rohingya live in the world’s largest refugee settlement in Bangladesh and are almost completely reliant on food aid as they are not allowed to work or freely travel beyond the camps. Rohingya refugees say the food they receive is already very limited, forcing them to survive on staples such as rice and lentils, which do not provide all the nutrition they need.

Mohammed Zonaid, a Rohingya youth activist, said that the international community’s failure to provide a solution for his people has left them dependent on food aid, as they are unable to return to Myanmar.

“If they were to cut off this support, we would face immense difficulties that are beyond imagination. I implore the global community to step forward and support us in finding a permanent solution to the Rohingya crisis, and to continue providing us with the food assistance that we need until we are able to stand on our own feet.” 

UN warns of ‘unconscionable’ cuts to Rohingya food rations as donations fall | Global development | The Guardian

 The head of UNAids, Winnie Byanyima, has strongly criticised pharmaceutical giants for prioritising profits over saving lives, and warned that “racist” inequalities are undermining progress towards ending Aids, especially in Africa.

“The World Trade Organization rules allow lifesaving medications to be traded in the same way we could trade luxury goods. They allow pharmaceutical companies to set the price wherever they want, hoard their technologies and reap billions at the cost of lives,” she said.

The injectable drug cabotegravir, for instance – administered every two months and considered the most effective form of prevention – is only available in high-income countries like the UK and the US, and even there remains largely unaffordable. Last year, Zimbabwe became the first African country to approve the drug for use, but with the country in economic crisis the drug remains effectively unavailable.

Such policies expose racial inequalities and discrimination in health, she said. “To me, that’s racism, even though people don’t want to call it out: valuing the profit of a few people, who happen to be white, over the lives of black and brown people around the world.”

 “For Africa, the lesson was: you must have the capacity to produce yourself.”

Sub-Saharan Africa accounts for more than half of all new infections, with women and marginalised groups facing higher new infection rates. 

Aids-related illnesses were the leading cause of mortality among African women, and adolescent girls and young women were three times more likely than men to get HIV.

Marginalised groups on the continent, including sex workers, gay men and transgender people, accounted for a large proportion of new infections in 2021. 

Thirty-two African countries have laws criminalising same-sex relations, and this often stops LGBTQ+ people accessing sexual and reproductive health services. Gay men in countries with the most severe anti-LGBTQ+ laws were more than three times less likely to know their HIV status than their counterparts in countries with the least restrictive laws,

Kenya spends up to five times more on debt servicing than it does on health.

Big pharma must value African lives above profits, warns head of UNAids | Global development | The Guardian

 While energy companies have reaped record profits from rising prices, up to 141 million more people around the world have fallen into extreme poverty because of it, a study has found.

The cost of energy for households globally could have increased by between 62.6% and 112.9% since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, according to a modelling study by an international group of scientists published in Nature Energy.  

Researchers estimated that overall household expenditure rose by between 2.7% and 4.8%.  As a result, they estimate that an additional 78–141 million people worldwide could be pushed into extreme poverty.

Yuli Shan, a professor at the University of Birmingham, said: “High energy prices hit household finances in two ways: fuel price rises directly increase household energy bills, while energy inputs needed to produce goods and services push prices up for those products as well, and especially for food, which affects households indirectly. Unaffordable costs of energy and other necessities will push vulnerable populations into energy poverty and even extreme poverty.”

Klaus Hubacek of the University of Groningen, said: “This crisis is worsening energy poverty and extreme poverty worldwide. For poor countries, living costs undermine their hard-won gains in energy access and poverty alleviation. “

Soaring fuel bills may push 141m more into extreme poverty globally – study | Energy | The Guardian

 British Gas owner Centrica’s full-year profits hit £3.3bn for 2022, more than triple the £948m it made the year before.

Centrica said it would extend its share buyback scheme, the money it returns to its shareholders, to £300m and also pay out a full-year dividend of 3p a share.

Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said Centrica had been “coining it in from our massive energy bills while sending bailiffs to prey on vulnerable consumers the length and breadth of the country”.

TUC general secretary Paul Nowak said that the British energy market was “broken” and called for energy retail companies to be brought into public ownership.

Simon Francis, coordinator of the End Fuel Poverty Coalition, added the energy market was “failing consumers and is in desperate need of reform”.

 Millions of parents use formula milk in what has become a multibillion-dollar global industry. But a study published in the BMJ has found most health and nutritional claims about the products appear to be backed by little or no high-quality scientific evidence, prompting calls for stricter marketing rules to be introduced worldwide. The study found that existing marketing curbs on formula milk are failing to stop companies from using controversial claims to promote their products.

“The wide range of health and nutrition claims made by infant formula products are often not backed by scientific references,” said Dr Ka Yan Cheung and Loukia Petrou, the joint first co-authors of the study. “When they are, the evidence is often weak and biased.”

Cheung and Petrou, from Imperial College London, added: “It’s essential that the industry provides accurate and reliable information to consumers, rather than using vague or unsupported claims as marketing tools.”

They concluded: “Despite previous attempts to change the landscape of infant formula marketing … progress in regulating infant formula claims is slow. Transparency is still lacking about health and nutrition claims linked to infant formula. We have identified a high prevalence of claims on infant formula products in multiple countries that seem to have little or no scientific substantiation.”

Most health claims on formula milk ‘not backed by evidence’ | Nutrition | The Guardian

 Class – Paul Bennett, 9th December 2022

Spycatcher – Howard Moss, 16th December 2022

Has the Crypto bubble finally burst? – Paddy Shannon, 13th January 2023

Extinction Rebellion’s plan to overthrow the government – Adam Buick, 20th January 2023

Researchers from the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) and Chatham House, said, the world is at risk of descending into a climate “doom loop”. Its report said that simply coping with the escalating impacts of the climate crisis could draw resources and focus away from the efforts to slash carbon emissions, making the situation even worse.

The damage caused by global heating across the globe is increasingly clear, and recovering from climate disasters is already costing billions of dollars. Furthermore, these disasters can cause cascading problems including water, food and energy crises, as well as increased migration and conflict, all draining countries’ resources.

A current example of the impact of the climate crisis complicating efforts to reduce emissions and other actions was the debate over whether keeping the global temperature rise below 1.5C – the international goal – was still possible. Those arguing 1.5C was still possible risked perpetuating complacency that today’s slow pace of action was sufficient, the researchers said, while those arguing it was not possible risked supporting fatalism that little that could now be done, or “extreme approaches” such as geoengineering.

The report said: “This is a doom loop: the consequences of the climate crisis draw focus and resources from tackling its causes, leading to higher temperatures and ecological loss, which then create more severe consequences, diverting even more attention and resources, and so on.”

Avoiding a doom loop required a more honest acceptance by politicians of the great risks posed by the climate crisis, the researchers said, including the looming prospect of tipping points and of the huge scale of the economic and societal transformation required to end global heating. 

“We’ve entered, sadly, a new chapter in the climate and ecological crisis,” said Laurie Laybourn, an associate fellow at IPPR. “The phoney war is coming to an end and the real consequences now present us with difficult decisions…” 

“The thing I’m most concerned about is that we’re not factoring in the cascading risks to societies,” said Laybourn. “It’s not just the big city-smashing storms we should be concerned about, it’s the consequences that ripple through our globalised systems. For the UK, it may not necessarily be the sheer cost of responding to disasters that’s the biggest distraction. It could be that it has to deal at the same time with a food price shock and resurgent nativism, playing off fears about so-called climate refugees,” he added.

Laybourn said, greener transport was not simply about switching to electric vehicles, but about better public transport and redesigned cities that meant people were closer to the jobs, education and healthcare they needed. 

Unfairness in climate policy could drive the doom loop, Laybourn said, because if people felt unaffordable changes were being forced on them they would reject the need for a green transition. But, he added: “If you have fairness at the heart of things, it can instead be a virtuous circle, if you’re in a situation where people recognise that switching to a heat pump and having better insulation will be better for them regardless of the climate crisis.”

It noted that Africa’s economy was already losing up to 15% of GDP a year to the worsening effects of global heating.

World risks descending into a climate ‘doom loop’, warn thinktanks | Climate crisis | The Guardian