Europe ignores international law

 



Informal collaboration between countries has prevented thousands of women, men and children from seeking protection in Europe this year, according to a report released by nine human rights organisations. The Protecting Rights at Borders (Prab) initiative has recorded 2,162 cases of “pushbacks” at different borders in Italy, Greece, Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, North Macedonia and Hungary carried out on the basis of bilateral agreements between countries, which resulted in them circumventing their responsibilities and pushing unwanted groups back outside the EU.

Prab, which includes the Danish Refugee Council (DRC), Italy’s Association for Juridical Studies on Immigration (ASGI) and Diaconia Valdese (DV), the Hungarian Helsinki Committee and others, said that “over a third of pushbacks were accompanied by rights violations (denial of access to asylum procedure, physical abuse and assault, theft, extortion and destruction of property), at the hands of national border police and law enforcement officials”.

Prab said that “chain pushbacks through different EU member states are occurring entirely outside of formally established mechanisms and aim to circumvent their obligations under European and international human rights law”.

Prab said its report was “the tip of the iceberg”, as many rights violations were likely to go unreported.

Charlotte Slente, the DRC secretary general. “It goes without saying that states must stop the violence and these illegal practices, and perpetrators must be held accountable.

The report comes as Greece was also singled out for criticism on Wednesday with Europe’s top human rights watchdog urging a halt to the practice of pushing back migrants at the land and sea borders it shares with Turkey. The Council of Europe’s commissioner for human rights, Dunja Mijatović, said it was incumbent on Athens’ centre-right government to properly investigate the pushbacks. 

“I am deeply concerned that, two and a half years later, allegations of pushbacks persist,” she wrote, referring to an initial visit in which the issue had been raised. The way in which these operations are reportedly carried out would clearly be incompatible with Greece’s human rights obligations.” The commissioner said that, all too often, the official reaction of Greek authorities was to simply dismiss the charges, despite what she described as “the overwhelming body of evidence that has been presented in recent years”.



Comments on the Current Palestinian-Israeli Conflict

 



The World Socialist Movement’s position has always been what happens to the workers anywhere is the business of socialists everywhere. We are not afraid of the charge that we are “poking our noses” into matters that do not concern us.

Once more, we see the Israeli-Palestinian conflict flare up and once again we noticed the skewed use of language by the media in its reporting of it.

The terms ethnic cleansing of East Jerusalem and the apartheid inequality before Israeli law of Palestinian residents is never used by the news outlets. Albeit not legal under international law, Israel has fully annexed East Jerusalem as part of the Israeli state. Yet, it refuses to grant and guarantee the Palestinian residents full citizenship which it gives to Jewish residents of that city.

Media likes to explain Israeli air attacks are in “retaliation” and a “response” to Palestinian rockets. Not that the Palestinians were reacting to the initial Israel aggression of police violence in Jerusalem with their feeble rockets.

But this is typical of the media dis-information.

One thing that the media so frequently asserts is that it is the Palestinians who are being the stubborn obstacle to the peace process. They are totally silent on the 2001 Taba talks:

“We made progress, substantial progress. We are closer than ever to the possibility of striking a final deal,” said Shlomo Ben-Ami, Israel’s negotiator.

Saeb Erekat, Palestinian chief negotiator, said, “My heart aches because I know we were so close. We need six more weeks to conclude the drafting of the agreement.”

It was a new Israeli government which walked away from the negotiating table, refusing to continue the peace talks because they were leading to a fruitful agreement.

But yet the Israeli propaganda message continues to prevail, blaming the Palestinians for a refusal to negotiate.

Hamas has offered Israel a peace deal which while not formally recognising Israel it does so in practice, agreeing to accept the 1967 borders and they stated so in their 2017 Charter. Hamas has advocated a Islamic form of a long-term and renewable armistice, the hudna.

Israel has rebuffed Hamas and will not enter into any direct discussions with them.

It is Israel who put up the hurdles to meaningful peace talks but not if you believe the media news outlets.

Israel is winning the propaganda media war by depicting Palestinians as “extremists”.

We see the same diplomacy tactic playing out against Iran. Who possesses the nuclear weapons – certainly not Iran but they are considered the nuclear threat and America and Europe make no demand for Israel to disarm its nukes, not even seeking access to inspect and monitor them by the IAEA which Iran was fully cooperative in doing.

Unlike the USA which offers the state of Israel unconditional support, refusing to use its substantial aid packages to the country as leverage to pressure it into concessions so to help reach a permanent peace, the World Socialist Movement does not give unconditional solidarity to Hamas despite our sympathy for oppressed fellow-workers resisting repression.

 Hamas (unlike Hezbollah) possesses no military answer to match Israel’s power and the result of their inept rockets merely invites far deadlier counter-attacks from the IDF. Hamas is being counter-productive.

Perhaps that might be the real reason, the creation of innocent victims – martyrs or sacrificial lambs – so to boost Hamas politically as does Netanyahu’s unproportionate use of force, a war crime in itself, to bolster his attempts to form a government coalition.

 What can we can expect for the future? Recurring and intermittent protests by Palestinians for equal treatment and continual Israeli oppression to protect  Jewish Israeli supremacy.

It is not a promising prospect for our fellow-workers in the region. 

Capitalism fails to fix biodiversity loss



 A study of the economics of biodiversity loss sets out how the current model by which money flows from rich, developed nations into schemes to enhance and protect nature in poorer nations can exacerbate the problem. Rich countries “throwing money” at schemes designed to enhance biodiversity is ineffective.

Investment in activities like large-scale agriculture and resource extraction, it points out, continue to drive the destruction of natural habitats.

The gap, the researchers say, “between those who live with the environmental consequences of resource extraction and those who benefit from financing these developments”, is widening.

“In 2019, 50 of the world’s largest banks underwrote more than $2.6 trillion into industries known to be the drivers of biodiversity loss, an amount equivalent to Canada’s gross domestic product,” the report states.

The report calls for “a profound re-organisation of the global post-pandemic economy to prevent further harm to the planet”. It recommends nothing less than a “change in our entire economic model”.

 Market-driven schemes can do more harm than good. One study of a scheme in Costa Rica, which was designed to incentivise tree-planting, revealed that it had subsidised commercial forestry, resulting in more “plantation forests” of a single non-native tree species used in the production of wooden shipping pallets.



Nature: Throwing money at biodiversity schemes is ineffective – BBC News

Sacklers Seek Immunity

 Twenty-four American states are raising objections to a bankruptcy proposal for Sacklers to settle lawsuits by paying $4.3bn but family would keep about $7bn.

 The Sacklers, owners of Purdue Pharma, manufacturer of the powerful prescription painkiller OxyContin, seek to surrender part of their immense fortune in return for immunity from further litigation over their part in a drug epidemic that has claimed more than 500,000 lives. The unusual proposition shields the wealth of individual Sacklers family members, seeking bankruptcy only for their company and not for themselves.

Under the proposals, the Sackler family that own Purdue Pharma would settle more than 3,000 lawsuits against the company by paying $4.3bn. But the Sacklers would keep about $7bn which would be personally protected from legal action over the part played by some family members in the illegal drive to mass market OxyContin for which Purdue has been twice convicted of criminal charges, in 2007 and last year.

Critics have accused the family of seeking to buy its way out of accountability while failing to admit the part played by Purdue Pharma in creating the opioid epidemic with an unprecedented marketing drive to sell OxyContin built on manipulated data and false claims that the drug federal agents called “heroin in a pill” had a low risk of causing addiction. Purdue used its wealth to influence politicians and regulators to keep trading even as the evidence grew of an epidemic in the making.

 Critics say that the billions of dollars retained by the Sacklers under the plan would go a long way to provide social services for children left orphaned or forced into foster homes by their parents opioid addiction, and to offset the financial burden caused by the epidemic on health care and policing.

Documents show that the family is worth about $11bn. The Sacklers assets include nearly $1bn in cash with billions more held in trusts. Their vast holdings also include art and property.

The family’s lawyers say the $4.3bn payment is fair because it is less than the Sacklers made from OxyContin after tax. 

Regret but no remorse. Kathe Sackler, a former member of Purdue’s board, she said that while “my “heart breaks for the parents who have lost their children”, the company was not at fault.

“There’s nothing that I can find that I would have done differently,” she said.

US states oppose ‘unjust’ plan to shield Sackler wealth in opioid settlement | Opioids crisis | The Guardian

China’s Stalled Population Growth

 After some early speculation, the China’s government has finally released their official population figures. The overall population of China average annual rise was of 0.53% to a 2020,  1.41178 billion. China  missed its growth target set in 2016, to reach 1.42 billion people by 2020.  The annual growth rate of 0.53% is the lowest since the early 1960s when China was dealing with the aftermath of tens of millions killed by famine

The proportion of citizens aged over 65 increased from 8.9% in 2010 to 13.5%, while the proportion of children grew by just 1.35% and the working population stayed steady, highlighting China’s rapidly ageing population. As a consequence the country would phase in a raising of the retirement age, which has remained unchanged for four decades at 60 for men and 55 for women.

“The number of women of childbearing age … was declining, and there is a postponement of childbearing and the rising cost of child raising,” said Ning. “All of these are reasons behind the decline on newborns.” Ning Jizhe, deputy head of the census leading group, acknowledged.

China’s central bank, which in April called for an end to all birth limits, to “fully liberalise and encourage childbirth”, and remove difficulties for women.

China’s population growing at slowest rate in generations | China | The Guardian

CEOs – Just Can’t Get Enough

 



Millionaire CEOs in American companies saw an average pay raise of 29% in 2020 while their workers saw a 2% decrease.

The Institute for Policy Studies calculated that the average CEO compensation in 2020 was $15.3m when looking at the 100 companies  with the lowest-paid median wage for workers.

The median worker pay was $28,187. 

This means that CEOs saw a 29% pay raise compared to 2019, while workers saw a 2% decrease. 

Hilton’s CEO, Christopher Nassetta, had a compensation package worth $55.9m in 2020, the highest of the CEOs analyzed in the report, while median pay at the company was $28,608, down from $43,695 in 2019. Since the pandemic affected the company’s expected performance, and thus Nassetta’s expected compensation, the company’s board restructured its stock awards to give its CEO ample pay in 2020.

Chipotle’s board removed the company’s poor financial results from the peak of the shutdown and excluded Covid-related costs when calculating CEO Brian Niccol’s compensation. Niccol received $38m last year, which is 2,898 times more than the company’s median worker pay of $13,127.

David Gibbs, the CEO of Yum Brands, parent company to KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell, ended up with a $1.4m cash bonus and stock grant valued at more than $880,000 after the company changed his performance metrics. The bonus was over twice the $900,000 of his salary Gibbs announced he would forgo to fund one-time $1,000 bonuses to the general managers of his company’s restaurants last March. Gibbs’ 2020 compensation was $14.6m while the company’s median pay was $11,377, according to the report.

US millionaire CEOs saw 29% pay raise while workers’ pay decreased – report | Executive pay and bonuses | The Guardian

The Wealthy of the World

 



The super-rich signify wealth concentration. The rich have become richer and richer. Whatever figures are used, we are dealing with rising inequalities. 

While in 1982 the hundred richest Europeans were worth an average of $230 million each, their average wealth in 2005 was ten times that, namely $2.6 billion. Since 2005, the gap has widened. 

Merrill Lynch’s World Wealth Report tells the story. Its report divides the rich into two groups:

1) High Net Worth Individuals (HNWIs) and the

2) Ultra High Net Worth Individuals (UHNWIs).

By the year 1996, there were about 4.5 million HNWIs with $16 trillion of individual wealth. By 2019, there were five times as many – twenty million – HNWIs with $74 trillion of individual wealth. 

At the same time, the World Bank reports that “more than 40% of the world’s population – almost 3.3 billion people – live below the $5.50 a day poverty line”. 

 In the field of conspicuous consumption, first came  Bentley and Rolls Royce limousines to now the private jet countless “executive” Gulfstream aircraft to about fifty private Boeing 747s and 777s owners, planes that normally carries four hundred passengers. Mega-yachts are experiencing an unprecedented construction boom.

Then there is the art market which also plays a special and especially subtle role in the field of conspicuous consumption. Today, at a Sotheby auction a Picasso can be bought for $95.2 million, or a Monet sold for $5 million.

Taken from here

The Structure of Wealth and the Global Money-Making Apparatus – CounterPunch.org

Our May Day Talk



Here’s the text of the talk that Cde. Bill Martin gave at the virtual May Day Rally on 30 April

 “Comrades, friends, thank you for coming along with us to our Mayday celebration. So, my question is, really, why are we celebrating?  I think the simplest thing to say is: because it is our day.  A day that belongs to the people who work: the so called key workers and non-key workers alike by whose labour wealth is generated and our society is kept running.  But, so what, what if it is our day?  Why is that worth celebrating?

Well, let’s just pause a little and – as with all good science, ask what seems an obvious question: what is a day?  That might seem very straightforward, but I wouldn’t have much of a talk for you if I couldn’t pick it apart, just a little.  

Of course, the answer that’s springing to all your minds is that a day is the time it takes the Earth to complete one rotation around its axis, relative to the sun.  Conventionally, we say that that takes 24 hours – but of course, it does, in reality, vary a little due to the way the Earth spins.  But it’s only a matter of second (of course, seconds add up).  Apparently, the exact scientific definition of a day is 86,400 seconds – I could hit you with more detail, but you’re just as capable of reading the Wikipedia entry for day as I am.

But, my point is this, this is a relatively modern definition of day, one born of an industrialised mind-set that measures everything and wants to standardise everything into neatly defined infinitely reproducible and replaceable commodities.  The idea of a day was around long before that.

As we experience it, a day is defined by sun or absence of sun.  By those hours of daylight in which humans, certainly in the pre-electric light days, could be active and safe in the world, as opposed to night, that time of danger and darkness from which we sheltered in our homes and by light of fires.

Some of us experienced this a little during lockdown.  With the options of brightly lit pubs, restaurants or cinemas to go to of an evening, the short daylight hours confined many of to our homes for much of the day: especially women.  Whereas I could go for a walk, friends of mine reported being reluctant due to the darkness and actual attacks in their areas.  During those days, my active hours of daylight became entirely taken over by my hours of work.

So, a day is something other than an arbitrary measure of time, or some objective aspect of a spinning rock in space.  It is a unit of activity.  We have evolved, uniquely, on that rock, with its spin and alternating passages of light and dark.  And in our bodies we feel the effects of that evolution: we sleep in the night.  We give up about eight hours a day (if we’re lucky) to that sleep.  Days are something hard wired into our bodies.

It’s been recently reported that there was a scientific experiment in France.  A group of people were sequestered in a cave, without communication devices, clocks or other pieces of modern paraphernalia (but with electricity, light and cooking equipment).  They were there for forty days with no means of telling the time, and they were asked to perform tasks like to prepare a presentation in three days time.  This was an experiment in isolation and bodily time sense: it will be interesting to hear the results.  It is interesting people are looking at what happens when we are separated from the day/night cycle.  There are obvious implications for space travel and colonisation, because removed from the Earth we lose the obvious thing that marks days.

It’s also interesting, and telling, that this experiment looked at how people functioned without knowing day nor night.  To get to the meat of this chat: a day is the fundamental unit of human activity.  Our days are defined by what we do, and what we can do is limited by days.  To be able to go on performing tasks efficiently and well, we need to break them up into days and nights with time to sleep, refresh and rest between.

To put this in its basic form: the rough life expectancy of a person in Britain will be about 28,800 days.  I won’t give you that in seconds, because we don’t live life in seconds.  Those twenty eight thousand days are the only ones we will ever have, we never get refunds, we never get do overs, at best we can increase our allotment of days: with a bit of help from medical science.  For someone who works full time, assuming a full career from 18 to 65 working five days a week, they will give over 12,220 of those days to their employers.

OK, that’s just at the raw level of days.  Of course, not every second of each of those days is given over: but usually, the best hours are, the active alert able to perform hours.  Eight hours of each of those days is given over to sleep (preparing for another day of work), another couple of hours each day are spent travelling to and from work, leaving the rest for eating, relaxing or meeting up with friends and family.  But all the other activities are conditioned by being able to turn up to work the next day.

So, here we have the idea of the class struggle.  When we give our time over to our employer, we give it to them to achieve the ends they desire.  In a capitalist society that means producing commodities: good and services, which they can sell with a view to making a profit.  The longer we work for them, the more they can use us, the more we do for the, the more goods and services they can sell for more profit.  Thus, they will want as many days from us as they can get.

But, here’s the thing, the struggle isn’t just over days as such, it is about the very definition of  day: what amounts to a days work?  The number of hours we spend working for them increases how much they can get us to do for them.  The fewer hours we work for them, the more time we have for ourselves, for our friends families and communities.

But it’s not just the length of the day: it can also be about the intensity: working harder during the hours we give over also increases the amount of work and profits we produce for the day buyers.  The harder we work at work, the less we can do in our own time, the more it becomes a time for recovery to return to work.

  Employment contracts are written in the language of abstracted absolute hours, but the reality it is it is what are are capable of doing – or being made to do in a day – that defines what happens to us and our employers.”