Sri Lanka’s Misery Continues

 Sri Lanka’s president may have changed, but the dire conditions of the people hasn’t.

6.7 million people are now in urgent need of humanitarian assistance. Families are facing shortages of food, fuel, cooking gas, essential supplies, and medicines as the humanitarian impacts of the economic crisis continue to multiply.

The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent (IFRC) holds particularly grave concerns for 2.4 million people already living below the poverty line who are among the most affected by the loss of livelihoods, food shortages and spiralling cost of essential items.

Sri Lanka Red Cross Secretary General, Mahesh Gunasekara, said: “We need international support now to help millions of people pull their lives back together and avoid the worse. We need to act early to ensure lives can be saved.”

IFRC’s Special advisor for Humanitarian Crises and Emergencies Maryann Horne said: With no income, people are barely able to cope, and are now selling their assets, getting into debt, being forced to cut down on food while many children are not able to go to school. The emergency appeal will allow the most urgent humanitarian needs to be met. It will help prevent those most vulnerable at a time people have no cash, no jobs, and no fuel.”

Sri Lanka on brink of humanitarian crisis – Sri Lanka | ReliefWeb

Say No More War

 



Some of the arguments of the peace movements begin with the plausibly-sounding statement that “war is the most urgent of problems, so it must be solved first.” We claim that the Socialist Party and its companion parties have the only real case against war. This must be thought about by workers not as a cheap bit of self-promotion “pushing the party,” but as a serious statement, which, we think, all the evidence upholds.



When workers hear or read the appeals to end war, their reaction is one which has already been strongly conditioned. Conditioned by the fact that, whatever country they live in, they are taught to think as nationalists. Conditioned by the patriotism of “loyalty to the country.”


Nationally they see their rulers’ interests and their own as one. They are British, American, Russian, and so on. To nationalistic people, leaders (political and religious) flags, armed forces and weapons of all kinds are quite necessary in the interests of the “country.” Seeing no difference between themselves and the boss, they argue ” it’s no use this country disarming if the others don’t,” forgetting that the misguided patriots in the other countries argue in exactly the same way, i.e., not as workers, but as Germans, Americans, Africans, Russians, and so on. Because of their nationalism they all make the same mistake, the mistake the boss teaches them to make, that is, to speak of “we” and “our country.” The all-important fact is, of course, that workers do not possess any country, and the convenient little “we” makes them identify their interests with those who do. To nationalists the world is not divided up into a world-wide working class and a worldwide capitalist class with mutually antagonistic interests; it is divided into “ us” and the “foreigners.” What could be more telling of the futility of the “peace” movements than the fact that they appeal to nationalism and claim to be the real patriots? Thus they directly help to foster the very outlook without which war would be impossible.


It becomes clear that while the majority of workers in each country feel allegiance to its rulers, and through them to the capitalist class which lives on their backs, these governments, politicians and media commentators will be able to prepare the workers for war or do any thing else on the ground of “national interest.” There must then, be something more than just not wanting war to end. There must be understanding by the majority of a really workable alternative. It is precisely this which is lacking among the peace movement, all of whom accept capitalism (consciously or otherwise), but seek to avoid its normal consequences.


The alternative for anyone who has thought about what they have just read is implied in what has already been said, that is, a world without nationalism, commerce and conflicting trading interests. A world no longer divided either into nations or classes of rulers and ruled, but a world community, the whole planet being run to satisfy the needs of its population and no longer for profits. With the industrial and natural resources bring held in common by all, mankind would cooperate to produce and freely distribute the things they need. Because the very basis for international conflicts will have gone, wars cannot arise. From that it follows as a matter of course that there will be no bombs to ban, society will not be making them nor any other instrument of destruction. Armed forces will not exist under socialism because their function will have gone when capitalism goes.


Our opponents say, “yes, it is a nice dream but how and when will it come about?”


The answer to this has been given by the Socialist Party since its inception. It will come about when working people cease to think that solutions to working class problems can be found within capitalism. Stop calling socialism a dream when you are stuck with the nightmare of capitalism. When a majority of the world’s workers (all suffering the same problems under the same system) have come to the conclusion, after making the tour of the blind alleys, that socialism is necessary, the “how” will be fairly easy. They will no longer vote for and support the parties of capitalism. They will use their votes to send Socialist delegates forward in each country for the object of stripping the capitalist class of the thing which makes them a capitalist class, that is, ownership (State or private) of land, factories, mines, machinery and railways, etc. With this done and the means of production in the hands of the community and democratically controlled, society will begin anew.


The Socialist Party consists of individuals who have come together for one purpose: to assist in the urgent task of establishing worldwide socialism.


We define socialism as a society in which all the resources of the world are used in common to meet all the needs of all the people of the world, without any distinction whatsoever, including the distinction of so-called national identity. It follows, then, that we do not concern ourselves with either the elimination or the creation of territorial borders within capitalism. This is a policy that we have upheld from our formation in 1904. During that time, we have, of course, been admonished to recognise the seemingly vital need to defend this national group against that one; to support the imposition of this border or the dissolution of that one.


The world is today so integrated that no country can be genuinely independent in how it acts. Usually, it can’t even independently decide how it behaves within its own ‘borders’, for fear of criticism or censure from international bodies, or, more usually, powerful outside interests. World capitalism always has been, is now, and always will be a confusion of different competing interests along national lines.


Only under capitalism is it necessary to build borders. Socialism, the only universal solution to ‘borders’ will require no such artificial distinctions between the world’s people and will have no frontiers


The working class have no country. By persuading workers that they have a stake in “the nation”, capitalism obtains their support.


Healthcare for Migrants

 Around the world, millions of refugees and migrants in vulnerable situations, such as low-skilled migrant workers, face poorer health outcomes than their host communities, especially where living and working conditions are sub-standard, according to the first WHO World report on the health of refugees and migrants. 

For example, a recent meta-analysis of more than 17 million participants from 16 countries across five WHO regions found that, compared with non-migrant workers, migrant workers were less likely to use health services and more likely to have an occupational injury. Evidence also showed that a significant number of the 169 million migrant workers globally are engaged in dirty, dangerous, and demanding jobs and are at greater risk of occupational accidents, injuries, and work-related health problems than their non-migrant counterparts, conditions exacerbated by their often limited or restricted access to and use of health services.

“Today there are some one billion migrants globally, about one in eight people. The experience of migration is a key determinant of health and wellbeing, and refugees and migrants remain among the most vulnerable and neglected members of many societies,” said Dr Tedros, Director-General World Health Organization. “This report is the first to offer a global review of refugee and migrant health; it calls for urgent and collective action to ensure they can access health care services that are sensitive to their needs. It also illustrates the pressing need to address the root causes of ill health and to radically reorient health systems to respond to a world increasingly in motion.”

“Health does not begin or end at a country’s border. Migratory status should therefore not be a discriminatory factor but a policy driver on which to build and strengthen healthcare and social and financial protection. We must reorient existing health systems into integrated and inclusive health services for refugees and migrants, in line with the principles of primary health care and universal health coverage,” said Dr Santino Severoni, Director of WHO’s Health and Migration Programme.

World report on the health of refugees and migrants – World | ReliefWeb

WHO Report

https://tinyurl.com/3ep89t54

Don’t Forget about HIV

 The World Health Organization estimates that more than two-thirds of people living with HIV are in Africa and that 460,000 people on the continent – 67% of the global total – died from HIV-related causes in 2020.

Approved in the US in December and in the UK the following month, cabotegravir is an injectable, long-acting medicine that needs to be taken only every few months, as opposed to the daily pills that characterise most pre-exposure prophylaxis (PReP) regimes.

It is proving to be one of the most effective methods to prevent HIV transmission and the ease of taking it means it could be a lifeline for so many, including young women who fear of stigma if they are seen taking medication for HIV, gay men and transgender people facing repression and homophobia, and sex workers who need better options.

However, the drug is understood to be too expensive for low- and middle-income countries and funders.

“While many in the global north are getting access to long-acting HIV prevention tools and medicines, Africans are overwhelmingly denied the opportunity,” said Lilian Mworeko, regional coordinator of the International Community of Women Living with HIV Eastern Africa (ICWEA). “It is worse for groups who continue to be left behind like adolescent girls and young women. As long as the price is unaffordably high for our governments and for funders to purchase, we will continue to be locked out from being able to access them. They are vital to preventing new HIV infections and they could become transformational in treatment. Our message is simple: all of our lives matter.”

Leading figures urge drugs firm to lower price of ‘game-changing’ HIV prevention drug | Global health | The Guardian

Covid-19 and Inequality

For many, the threat of Covid-19 has receded and they have moved on. 

For many others, it remains a risk.

 Just one in seven people in low-income countries fully vaccinated. By comparison, nearly three in four people in high-income nations have been vaccinated for around a year.

The international target to vaccinate 70% of the world’s population against Covid by mid-2022 was missed because poorer countries were at the “back of the queue” when vaccines were rolled out.

“Unless we achieve equitable action in addressing this pandemic, it will always remain with us in the world,” said Kavengo Matundu, Africa coordinator for Global Call to Action Against Poverty (GCAP), who has been working with frontline groups on the Covid response. “It has shown that it is capable of mutating into anything, and can become something more dangerous than the original.”

 “As much as there’s all this naive and hopeful talk, when push comes to shove, we cannot count on rich countries to do the right thing,” said Maaza Seyoum, Global South convenor of the People’s Vaccine Alliance.  “The poorest countries in the world have ended up at the back of the queue, creating the sense that some lives matter more than others.”

According to figures as of 10 July, only 15.8% of people in low-income countries were fully vaccinated, compared with 55% in lower-middle income countries, 73.5% in high-income countries and 78.7% in upper-middle income countries. Africa has the lowest number of vaccinated people. Seven of the 10 countries with the world’s lowest rates of full-vaccination are in Africa. The other three countries are Papua New Guinea, Haiti and Yemen. The UK’s booster vaccination rate is already far higher than these countries’ standard vaccination rates.

For the period up to 9 June, shows that Canada, Australia and the UK have bought enough vaccine doses to vaccinate their populations several times over: 11.1, 9.9 and 7.6 doses per person, respectively. In contrast, South Africa was able to buy the equivalent of 0.5 doses per person. The African Union’s purchase of 330m doses of Moderna and Janssen vaccines equated to just 0.2 doses a person across the bloc. Neither AstraZeneca vaccine and Moderna are suitable for countries without decent transport and cold chain infrastructure.

Seyoum said: “Rich countries keep thinking that if they just protect themselves, they’re going to get out of the pandemic, but that is, on a public health front, completely ridiculous. It sounds trite, but as the head of WHO said last year: none of us is safe until we’re all safe.”

Covid vaccine figures lay bare global inequality as global target missed | Global development | The Guardian

Blood Money

 It was reported in 2019 that thousands of Mexicans were crossing the border to donate blood as often as twice a week, earning as much as $400 per month. Selling blood has been illegal in Mexico since 1987. The Mexican nationals selling their blood previously entered the U.S. on what are known as B-1 or B-2 visas, documents that allow visitors to shop, do business or visit tourist sites.

Since the United States blocked Mexicans from entering the country to sell their blood, the two global pharmaceutical companies, Grifols and CSL, that operate the largest number of plasma clinics along the border say they have seen a sharp drop in supply.

The companies acknowledged for the first time the extent to which Mexicans visiting the U.S. on short-term visas contribute to the world’s supply of blood plasma. The companies revealed that up to 10 percent of the blood plasma collected in the U.S. — millions of liters a year — came from Mexicans who crossed the border with visas that allow brief visits for business and tourism.

The drug companies have said in court filings that the sharp reduction in Mexicans selling blood to the border clinics is contributing to a worldwide shortage of plasma and is “precipitating a worldwide public-health crisis that is costing patients dearly.

Many countries place strict limits on blood donations — Germany, for example, allows a maximum of 60 donations per year with intensive checkups before every fifth donation. But the Food and Drug Administration doesn’t require comparable donor checkups and allows people visiting American clinics to sell their blood twice a week, or up to 104 times a year. The limits that other countries set on blood donations have made the U.S. one of the world’s leading exporters of blood. In 2020, U.S. facilities collected 38.2 million liters of plasma for the production of medicine, accounting for approximately 60% of such blood plasma collected worldwide.

A statement from a company executive for Grifols disclosed that at the company’s Texas centers alone, there were “approximately 30,000 Mexican nationals donating and supplying over 600,000 liters of plasma [a year].”

According to Grifols and CSL, the 24 border centers run by Grifols alone account for an “annual economic impact of well over $150 million” and represent approximately 1,000 jobs. Grifols and CSL “have also spent ‘several million dollars in the last several years’ on advertising to encourage Mexican citizens to donate plasma in exchange for payment at the centers located along the border.” The trade organization for the pharmaceutical companies, the Plasma Protein Therapeutics Association, said there are 52 plasma centers in the border zone, and “the average center along the border collects higher than average (31% more) plasma than the average center nationwide.”

 In 2021 the Border Patrol issued internal guidance that barred short-term visa holders from selling blood. On June 14, 2021, CBP sent out “clarifying guidance” that selling plasma on a visitor visa was not allowed. Since then, donations at border centers have dropped dramatically. The pharmaceutical companies told the court that a survey of 12 centers in Texas found a 20 percent to 90 percent decline. “One particularly large center, which normally collects 5000+ donations per week, has decreased to a level closer to 200,” said the plasma association president, Amy Efantis.

Pharma Companies Sue for the Right to Buy Blood From Mexicans Along Border — ProPublica

UK Living Standards Drop

 British workers’ living standards dropped in May at a record rate after pay rises failed to keep pace with inflation.

Earnings growth increased across the private and public sector by 4.3% in the three months to May excluding bonuses, the Office for National Statistics said, but that left pay down by 2.8% year on year – a record fall.

The TUC general secretary, Frances O’Grady, said that “UK workers are suffering the worst pay squeeze in modern history”.

Torsten Bell, the chief executive of the Resolution Foundation, said it was “staggering” that the top 1% of earners – those with pay packets above £170,000 – had secured an 11% pay rise.

UK living standards fall at record rate as inflation soars | UK unemployment and employment statistics | The Guardian

The war to end wars – the class war

 


Crises are not caused by the evil machinations of individuals; they have their root cause in the way a society is organised. Surely, it is not now doubted that wars are born of the fight for spoils between capitalists. Throughout the last hundred years, the economic objects of the various wars have stood out so clearly 


The only way in which mankind can bring about a social change and build a fraternal society, free of war, is to establish socialism. This will come about as the conscious act of a socialist working-class. Modern war arises from the conflicting economic interests of the various national capitalist groups. The competitive nature of capitalist society sets one corporation against another and which, in the world at large, sets one government against another over the capture of markets for exports, over access to raw materials, the control of trade routes and over the occupation of strategic points. These disputes take the form of intricate manoeuvres in the political, diplomatic and military fields over the control of spheres of influence. he important fact is that these disputes are inseparable from capitalism and that they go on all the time. That is why governments maintain armed forces. That is why the long history of international organisations and conferences for disarmament and peace is a history of failure. This is the basic explanation of the global wars of capitalism which have been going on all the time and of the continual state of tension in which capitalism lives. The inevitable result of all this is that military conflict is part of our lives as long as we live under capitalism.


Under such situations, it is futile to take a moral stand against violence in itself. Many peace campaigners have proved their sincerity and courage, but this does not alter the fact that their views are out of touch with reality. The only way in which war can be removed from our lives is to remove capitalism and replace it with socialism. It requires that a socialist working-class democratically gain control of the machinery of government for the purpose of abolishing capitalism and establishing socialism. Wealth will be produced solely for use and not for the profit of a minority.


This will remove the basic cause of war and will therefore remove the apparatus of war—the armed forces and their weapons. The working-class of the world must first understand and want a new socialist society. They must, in other words, free themselves from ideas which at present keep capitalism in being and consciously choose the new world in which men and women can truly live in harmony and build a world fit for human beings.


The Socialist Party advocates for the removal of a system of society which works out to the detriment of the many. The peace campaigners are out for an alteration of government whereby the wars between capitalist countries can be reduced or abolished. Peace propagandists by no means are united in condemning capitalist society, and they are mostly opposed to a real change in the system altogether. The Socialist Party denounces capitalism and  declares in favour of a new system wherein capital and capitalist governments cease to exist.


To reiterate, the Socialist Part’s attitude to war is that war as we know it is produced in the main by the conflict between the interests of capitalists of various nations. It is born of the rivalry between sellers of goods for profit, and it can only die when selling for profit is abolished. In other words, the socialist theory holds and capitalist practice proves that only by ending the entire capitalist system can war with all its attendant horrors cease. 



All sorts of appeals are made to the Socialist Party to join forces with “anti-war” groups, but it is deaf to all such cries. Not because we do not yearn for the cessation of the war. By no means so. The Socialist Party knows full well the horrors that are always following in the wake of war. We know and feel the wreckage of human ties, the break-up of family life, the sorrow and suffering arising from the brutal carnage. But there are two important reasons why we cannot associate with the various “Stop the War” organisations.



Firstly, because we abide by the dictates of the class struggle. Because we stand for socialism and they do not. Because we refuse to associate with those who support the capitalist class during “peace” time and who fight for the subjection of the working class. Therefore we cannot ally ourselves with these pro-capitalists. We refuse to lower the socialist red flag to march with the enemies of socialism. We know that, given the realisation of the whole of the peace programme, the terrors and misery of working-class slavery would be left untouched for the better. The very men who seek our help for “peace” now would be amongst the first to go to “war” against the working class.



The second reason for which we cannot unite with the stop the war movement is that it is impotent for its very object. Even if we held that it was policy to unite to stop the war it would be foolish to join in the programme of these societies. What machinery have they for stopping wars? None. Appeals to capitalists are their general methods. They propose to leave in power the makers of wars, the capitalist class. They intend to continue the profit-making system which itself produces commercial rivalry and inevitably international warfare. If you wish to stop all wars you must stop all commercial rivalry and to do this you must work for socialism.


The Socialist Party is not a specifically pacifist organisation. We are opposed to war on socialist grounds in that wars today are fought over rival capitalist interests concerning sources of raw materials, trade routes, markets and investment outlets and strategic points and areas to protect these. This is why we say that members of the majority class of those obliged to work for a wage for a living have no interests at stake in them and so should refuse to take part in the killing and maiming of their fellow workers from some other country. We also consider that a socialist majority that has won control of political power democratically should reserve the right to use armed force, if necessary, to deal with any armed resistance to the establishment of socialism by some recalcitrant pro-capitalist minority should this occur. 

Quote of the Day

 “This is not ‘the new normal. The climate crisis will continue to escalate and get worse as long as we stick our heads in the sand and prioritize profit and greed over people and planet. We are still sleepwalking towards the edge.” Greta Thunberg

Hunger – history is repeating itself.

 



There is nothing natural about famines in the twenty-first century. While a complex set of factors drove food insecurity, the slide into mass death is man-made, driven by international inaction. This crisis was predictable and preventable. It has been unfolding despite two years of repeated warnings. The lack of action reflects a wider failure of the international system. The global response is failing and major donors waiting for others to step up will cost thousands of lives.

It is already too late to stop people from dying, but there is still a window of opportunity to scale aid efforts to reduce the levels of death and suffering. Yet the international system is sitting in neutral at precisely the moment it needs to be accelerating.

 The International Rescue Committee (IRC) is calling for urgent action in Somalia, Ethiopia, and Kenya, with specific concern for intensifying famine in Somalia that has been dangerously neglected by the international community.  Today, Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somalia make up 2% of the world’s population but are home to 70% of the world’s most extremely food insecure.

By the time a famine is officially declared later this year, it will be too late to save hundreds of thousands of lives. IRC teams on the ground report that people are dying already from starvation. Yet the crisis has struggled to attract the attention and funding it desperately requires.

The number of people going hungry in the region is set to surpass 20 million by September – nearly a doubling compared to late 2021. 

Over three million of these people are already experiencing the most extreme levels of hunger, increasing their risk of death. 

The worst affected is Somalia, which is entering a famine that the IRC expects to be even more severe than the 2011 famine that killed 260,000 people. It is a country hurtling towards a catastrophic famine. Adjusting for total population, that would be on par with 6.5 million deaths in the United States, including more than 3 million children under 5 years old – the equivalent of more than six COVID-19 pandemics.  Presently in Somalia, food aid is only 20% funded, nutrition 18% and health 10%. 

This year, Somalia, Ethiopia and Kenya are in the middle of their longest, most severe drought in decades and have been disproportionately affected by the Ukraine conflict, given they were reliant on Russia and Ukraine for 90% of their wheat imports. Increased global food prices would not have had such a significant impact if drought had not already devastated agriculture. And the worst is yet to come. Reduced access to fertilizers coincided with the region’s main planting season, so the effects will not be fully seen until future harvests later this year and next year.

What we are seeing is a failure of political will to apply lessons and act before it is too late. Promises and pledges are not translating into change for people in the world’s crisis zones. Funding for East Africa is falling far short of previous responses to past famine warnings around the world. Across East Africa today, an emergency appeal for the drought has received only 38% of the funds required for May to December 2022

The generous funding for Ukrainians stands in sharp contrast to severe underfunding in East Africa. While Ukraine represents 5% of the world’s humanitarian needs, it has received 20% of global aid this year and more than four times as much humanitarian funding as Somalia. Donors have provided $56 per Somali in need of aid compared to $121 per Ukrainian in need of aid.

A famine declaration will tell us when it is too late – that people are already dying en masse, not how many lives we can still save. Waiting to respond based on retrospective data to formally declare famine conditions will condemn hundreds of thousands to unnecessary death. Every day of inaction is a matter of life or death.

Watchlist Crisis Alert: Unnatural Disaster in East Africa – Somalia | ReliefWeb

IRC Report

https://tinyurl.com/4a2bktsz PDF