Another war?

France is to dispatch war frigates to the eastern Mediterranean as a standoff with Turkey over regional energy reserves intensifies  as the feud over exploration rights has deepened following the discovery of natural gas deposits in waters around Cyprus. Ignoring Turkish anger at not being included, the Greek Cypriot government has been commissioning international energy companies, including the French multinational Total and Italy’s Eni, to explore allocated blocs off the island for underwater resources. Turkey has been sending its own drill ships to the region’s disputed waters in retaliation. Turkey has called for a fair and equal distribution of the energy resources discovered off Cyprus, insisting that they are attempting to exclude and alienate Turkey by striking their own deal without the consideration of both the major regional player and the people of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). Therefore, it stresses that the drilling activities that Turkey is carrying out are legal and within territorial waters.



Greece’s defence minister, Nikos Panagiotopoulos, recently went as far as to warn that armed forces were “examining all scenarios, even that of military engagement” in the face of heightened aggression from Ankara. Rejecting Turkish demands that Greece demilitarise 16 Aegean islands, he accused Turkey of displaying unusually provocative behaviour.  It follows a dramatic surge in recent months in the number of violations of Greek airspace by Turkish fighter jets. 



Macron pledged France would strengthen its alliance with Greece, accusing Turkey of not only exacerbating regional tensions but failing to stick to its promised course of action in war-torn Libya.

“I want to express my concerns with regard to the behaviour of Turkey at the moment … we have seen during these last days Turkish warships accompanied by Syrian mercenaries arrive on Libyan soil.”
A maritime border agreement between Turkey and Libya’s U.N.-backed government is “unacceptable,” violates international law and flouts the sovereign rights of other countries,  Luigi Di Maio, the foreign minister of Italy,  said. Turkey says the deal grants its economic rights to a large swath of the east Mediterranean sea and prevents any energy-related projects from moving forward without its consent. Egypt has denounced the Turkey-Libya deal as infringing on waters where they claim economic rights. Officials from Libya’s rival government based in the east of the country have also rejected the agreement.
Saudi Arabia and the UAE also seek to cooperate with Greece against Turkey.
Greece, Cyprus, and Israel agreed to build a pipeline harnessing the reserves of natural gas off the southern shores of the island. This pipeline names EastMed, which is estimated to produce a profit of $9 billion over eighteen 18 of the reserve’s exploitation, would be supplying gas from the Eastern Mediterranean region all the way to countries in Europe.

Another regional war for natural resources?





Why the War?

Some 9.4 million Afghans are in need of basic food and housing this year, up from 6.5 million in 2019.



The United Nations is seeking $730 million in humanitarian aid for Afghanistan this year, an increase on 2019 as poverty surges in a country worn down by war and drought, the U.N.’s deputy special representative for Afghanistan said.



“Afghanistan remains the world’s deadliest conflict, and on top of the lingering effects of the drought in 2018, coupled with growing poverty, the need is up,” Toby Lanzer, the U.N.’s deputy special representative for Afghanistan, told Reuters.



Afghan War – Did you think it was over?

The US dropped more bombs on Afghanistan in 2019 than any other year since the Pentagon began keeping a tally.



According to new figures released by US central command, US warplanes dropped 7,423 bombs and other munitions on Afghanistan, a nearly eightfold increase from 2015.



According to UN data, the US accounted for half the 1,149 civilian deaths attributed to pro-government forces in Afghanistan over the first three-quarters of 2019.







The Taliban and other insurgent groups were responsible for 1,207 civilian deaths.
“This is the US military mistakenly thinking that they’re somehow going to change the political dynamics by dropping more ordnance on Afghanistan,” said Laurel Miller, former US acting special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, who is now director of the International Crisis Group’s Asia programme. “The argument that is made in favor what they’re doing is that this will somehow change the political dynamics and in a way that makes the Taliban more likely to come to favorable terms at the peace table, but I have no expectation that this is going to have that kind of effect. It also poses the considerable risk of of blowback in the sense that inevitably this increase in use of air power results in an increase in civilian casualties.”
“The US side is very explicitly hoping to use the ramped-up strikes to gain leverage in the ongoing talks with the Taliban,” said Frances Brown, who was director for democracy in Barack Obama’s national security council and is now a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “The Taliban side is also using their own ramped-up violence to gain leverage; as a consequence, we saw record levels of overall violence in the third quarter of 2019, as both sides thought they were heading toward a preliminary agreement,” Brown said. “The problem here is that the Trump administration lacks the clear political negotiating strategy,” she added. “The US special envoy made some hard-fought progress over the course of 2019, only to have the rug yanked out from under him by the president, with no apparent rationale. The talks restarted a few weeks ago, but the US has now undermined its own hand.”



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/28/us-afghanistan-war-bombs-2019

Understanding our World

There is a new mood of resistance and solidarity among working people. But we must move from simply anti-capitalism to socialist revolution. We must envision the formation of a truly global movement capable of challenging the most powerful institutions on the planet without succumbing to either Utopianism or reformism.



Famine, AIDS (and now the emerging coronavirus), anti-immigration populism are being hailed as Malthusian “natural” population control to keep in check the high population growth. But what is regarded as a “natural” system is the capitalist system and multinational corporations. There is nothing natural about them other than they currently dominate trade and production, and hence resource use and consumption. Those concerned with environmental destruction must eventually confront the question of the global capitalist market profit system of production.



 Many environmentalists reject traditional politics, since political differences between liberal and conservative have become, for the most part, indistinguishable in practice. The authoritarianism witnessed in the former Soviet Union and its Eastern European satellite countries had discredited socialism. Thus socialist ideas, even eco-socialism, have been marginalised and unable to penetrate the mainstream climate crisis debate. The socialists lack mass influence. The eco-activists have been slow to incorporate Marxist analysis into their views, despite its great potential not only to explain the economic processes leading to environmental destruction, but to change them. A serious critique of capitalism is essential to adequately address the current world environmental crisis. The environmental movement can no longer afford to adapt traditional “liberal” or “conservative” views of the market to its concerns, or ignore the issue altogether by claiming that understanding the market as the central organising principle in modern society is unnecessary. Concepts such as “carrying capacity” clearly must be conceived in their capitalist economic context. The greens must now rethink their vision of a future society. Missing from the eco-activists view of the market is an adequate appraisal of the inherent logic within capitalism that necessitates environmental destruction rather than holding an assumption that the basic system of capitalist production functions more or less efficiently, needing only the enlightened management and regulation by the state to curb its excesses and mitigate its shortcomings. Facing competition from other producers, each firm must minimise or externalise its costs while maximising profit and market share. Like labour, environmental protection appears as a cost in the corporate balance sheet which must be minimised. This fact operates independently of the personal views or ethics of business owners or CEOs. If concerned managers implement costly environmental controls, they either sacrifice profit or lose market share to the competitor who can undersell at a cheaper price in the marketplace. Green tinkering is not enough, nor the best we can hope for. An alternative economic program which serves the interests of the democratic majority is essential.



Socialism’s promises an egalitarian distribution of all the productive wealth capitalism plus a more meaningful democracy, social justice and liberation from alienation. 



The Socialist Party has put forward a convincing ecological future with a credible vision of potential abundance.



 Environmentalists must  ask themselves what kind of a planet they want to live on and what kind of a society they want to do it.



Under the capitalist system, “production of surplus-value is the absolute law of this mode of production” (Marx, Capital). The nature of the capitalist class is to seek fabulous monopoly profits. In exploiting energy resources, the capitalists do not consider the rational use of natural resources but only seek maximum profits.



The current climate crisis while on the surface it may be a question of natural resources, in reality this is absolutely not so. The world’s energy resources, including those of the main capitalist countries, are plentiful. Furthermore, with the development of production and the steady rise of human knowledge, people are discovering and will continue to discover new sources of energy. In essence, the climate crisis gripping the capitalist world is a reflection of the crisis of the capitalist system, an outcome of the sharpening contradictions within the capitalist system, and a result of the capitalists’ ruthless exploitation and plunder of the people.



The decrease and increase of the various energy resources often depend on the amount of profit they give. Capitalism means waste. In the capitalist world, resources are wasted because of anarchy in production and general wastefulness in life. Weapons expansion and war preparations and wars of aggression are bottomless pits in consuming and squandering. They are indeed parasites living on the people of the developing countries. Their wealth comes from their plunder, and the poverty of the developing nations is caused by their exploitation and plunder. The climate crisis is an indication of the great disorder in the world today. It will in turn inevitably make the world situation continue to develop in the direction of upheaval.





Toxic Air

More than one in 19 deaths in Britain’s largest towns and cities are linked to air pollution – with people living in urban areas in south-east England more likely to die from exposure to toxic air, according to a new study. Air pollution was the UK’s largest environmental risk to public health, it said, producing the equivalent of 40,000 deaths a year nationally. It urged the government to introduce stricter legal guidelines on particulate matter emissions to help tackle the problem.



London, Slough, Chatham, Luton and Portsmouth had the highest proportion of deaths attributable to pollution the study found, with around one in 16 in 2017 caused by high levels of harmful particulates in the atmosphere. By contrast, places such as Aberdeen, Dundee, Glasgow and Blackpool attributed one in 30 deaths to air pollution, highlighting what the study’s authors, the Centre for Cities thinktank, called a “south-north” divide in air quality.
Although air pollution was a problem in most big cities and urban areas of the UK, it was especially heavily concentrated in the south-east, including places like Southampton, Reading, Oxford, Cambridge, Basildon and Northampton.



The report also found:

In 19 cities and towns – all but one in the south-east of England – monitored pollution levels around every single A-road and motorway exceeded World Health Organization guidelines, potentially exposing 14 million people to pollution.


In Bournemouth, air quality levels scored four out of 10 or above – the level at which adults and children with heart and lung problems are affected – on 62 days in 2018, the highest in the UK, followed by London (56 days) and Southampton (52).



“Politicians often talk tough on addressing air pollution but we need to see more action. Cities should be at the centre of the fight against toxic air and councils should take the steps needed, including charging people to drive in city centres and banning wood-burning stoves,” said Andrew Carter, chief executive of Centre for Cities.



Responding to the report Zak Bond, policy and public affairs officer at the British Lung Foundation, said: “Whilst it’s shocking that more than one in 19 deaths in UK towns and cities can be linked to air pollution, it doesn’t tell the full story in terms of the millions of people whose lives are affected on a daily basis. Breathing in toxic air is bad for everyone and can lead to a wide range of health conditions including lung disease, stroke and cancer.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/27/one-in-19-deaths-uk-cities-air-pollution

‘The wolf in cashmere’.

French luxury goods magnate Bernard Arnault briefly toppled Amazon’s Jeff Bezos to become the richest person in the world. Now relegated back to second wealthiest in the world, Arnault remains the richest person in Europe. Arnault first dethroned Bezos on December 16, 2019. This triumph lasted even shorter, less than five hours, before Bezos returned to the top. It occurred after LVMH acquired luxury jewelry company Tiffany, causing their stocks to rise.



2019 was a good year for Arnault. The CEO of the LVMH group (Louis Vuitton Moet Hennessy) earned an estimated profit of €35.1 billion over the course of the year. This breaks down as €4,020,307 every hour, or €66,700 a minute. He is one of only three people ever to make it into the exclusive centi-billionaires club, along with Bezos and Bill Gates. 



Arnault’s story is not exactly rags-to-riches. His father Jean Léon Arnault was a manufacturer and the owner of the civil engineering company, Ferret-Savinel.





The top-end luxury goods brands Moet Hennessy and Louis Vuitton  merged to form LVMH. Arnault started investing in this golden egg in 1987. He soon became its biggest shareholder. Then began one of the fiercest battles in French fashion as Arnault fought to oust first the former chairman Henry Racamier and then many of the top executives. He gained a reputation then for ruthlessness, along with the nickname ‘the wolf in cashmere’.

The company’s portfolio now features 75 brands, including fashion houses Christian Lacroix, Celine, Givenchy, Fendi, Marc Jacobs and Dior. It also involves wines and spirits, including champagne brand Dom Pérignon, cognac makers Hennessy, Glenmorangie Scottish whisky and New Zealand winemakers Cloudy Bay. There is jewelry with Bulgari and watches with Tag Heuer, along with beauty chainstore Sephora. The group extends to the famous Hotel Cipriani in Venice, a range of top hotels with Michelin starred restaurants called Cheval Blanc in Courchevel in the French Alps and the historic Paris department store Le Bon Marche. Their latest major acquisition was last November, when they agreed to buy luxury jeweler Tiffany for approximately €14.7 billion.
He himself own properties across the world and a private island in the Bahamas. He also owns art works by Jean-Michel Basquiat, Damien Hirst, Maurizio Cattelan, Andy Warhol and Pablo Picasso.



Arnault is part of French Prime Minister Sarkozy’s inner circle; he had even been a witness at Sarkozy’s wedding in 1996. 

The Madness of War

A retired Salvadoran general on Friday acknowledged for the first time that the armed forces were responsible for a notorious 1981 massacre of more than 1,000 people during the country’s civil war.



Juan Rafael Bustillo, a former commander of the Air Force, told a court the elite Atlacatl Battalion carried out the El Mozote massacre in eastern El Salvador in which unarmed villagers, most of them women and children, were slaughtered. Bustillo testified he had had no part in the operation which he said was conducted at the behest of Colonel Domingo Monterrosa, commander of the feared Atlacatl Battalion.



“War sometimes gives rise to something in the minds of people that attaches no value to the lives of others.” Bustillo then continued “I think it was on his initiative. That’s my reasoning, it was on his initiative that he gave the order to kill the people of El Mozote, and the other surrounding cantons,” the retired general told the court. “I almost feel it was like a moment, some instance of madness on the part of Colonel Monterrosa…”





According to a U.N. report, soldiers tortured and executed over 1,000 residents of El Mozote and surrounding hamlets in the Morazan department, 180 km (110 miles) northeast of San Salvador, as they searched for guerrillas in December 1981.

Hindutvas Demolish Homes



In the major city of Bengaluru, formerly Bangalore, the shanty homes of hundreds of labourers were bulldozed on the pretext that they were housing “suspected illegal immigrants”. The action, taken with police involvement yet seemingly on no official orders, has left hundreds homeless – either forced to share the limited space in those huts that are still standing, or else sleep on the streets. The incident began last Sunday when men in JCB bulldozers, flanked by plainclothes police officers, descended on the 600-home informal settlement of Kariyammana Agrahara, to the east of the city. They declared that all those present were illegal Bangladeshi migrants, and started tearing apart their homes.



It is commonplace in Narendra Modi’s India for senior political figures to speak of Muslim immigrant workers in extremely derogatory terms – usually as “infiltrators”, sometimes as “termites”. The actions has been welcomed by the local branch of Modi’s ruling BJP party, which called it “the right decision”. The incident was particularly concerning because it came just days after the local BJP legislative assembly member (MLA) for the area, Aravind Limbavali, tweeted a video of the settlement, saying it was “without cleanliness … a site of illegal activity” and housing people who “are suspect to be illegal immigrants of Bangladesh”. Only two days after the demolition, the BJP’s most senior official in West Bengal state, Dilip Ghosh, said there were “two crore [20 million] Bangladeshi Muslim infiltrators” who had entered India, adding that “we will not allow any to stay here”.

Residents tried to produce their voter ID cards, biometric registration documents known as Aadhaar, and other evidence that they were in fact born and raised in other states of India. But the police continued regardless, later telling a local newspaper that they have neither the time nor the money to verify such documents with other state authorities. A senior police officer at the station local to Kariyammana Agrahara suggested it was up to the slum residents to provide verification for their own ID documents, adding:  “What is the guarantee that these documents are genuine?”
Even if they were illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, or third- or fourth-generation migrants, neither the municipal authorities nor the local police has the jurisdiction to act in the way it did – that would be a matter for the federal authorities.

Lekha Adavi, a member of the Alternative Law Forum collective, said there was clearly a link between the evictions in Bengaluru and a broader anti-immigrant “sense across India right now”, with the government recently passing a citizenship law for refugees that excludes Muslims, and the exercise of creating a register of legal citizens (NRC) in Assam state.



“It is very clear that these guys are implementing their [the BJP’s] agenda, there is nothing more or less to it. They want to implement their agenda of persecuting Muslims, and Bangladeshi Muslim immigrants happen to be one pawn in that entire agenda,” she said.



https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/india-bengaluru-evictions-demolition-slum-shelters-bangladeshi-modi-a9300511.html

Fighting together for the future

SOCIALISM IS GREEN The Davos economic forum has ended and once again it was the youth of the world such as Greta Thunberg and her frequently over-looked friends and allies who were making the headlines. They were endeavouring to shape the debate that should be taking place, obliging the global elite to follow a green script.



They were making it clear that enough was enough. That the World belongs to the people. But getting to the roots of the environment problem means we must examine how we live.



One commonly held but mistaken belief is that our growing  population is one of the greatest ecological problems. Many are convinced that the amount of land and resources used by humanity have already outstripped the carrying capacity of the planet. For sure, there appears to be some logic to the claim that high birth rates and population density are responsible for the shortages of resources and the impact upon our eco-systems. Yet it is the regions with the highest birth rates which use the least amount of the world’s resources, while those with low birth rates in the “developed” parts of the World use the most. An odd paradox for the over-populationists to reconcile.



The present natural limits do not account for scarcity, poverty and hunger. There is more than enough food produced to sustain the current level of world population, plus more. Yet food somehow manages to miss the mouths of those who can’t afford to pay the price, and instead being fed to livestock to increase profitability. While some overconsume the natural wealth of the planet, the poor get the blame.



We are declaring that the general idea of ecological limits is totally wrong. Population definitely plays an important role in determining the levels of resource use and environmental degradation. But it does not the most important part of the problem. What is ignored is the economic order we live under requires the destruction of the environment. If we expect new environmentally conscious values to make a difference, then we must also change the system. While solutions that focus primarily on individual lifestyles choices of green consumerism, instil a sense of environmental responsibility, they will not stem climate change, and have probably diverted attention away from the causes of global warming and pollution. The solution does not lie with individuals changing their individual consumer habits. If the environmentalists are to be successful, then they must identify the system of society as responsible for the climate crisis. History has demonstrated that individual behaviour have only been effective when part of collective actions.



The Socialist Party envisions a society consistent with our ecology and that is sustainable. It strives to explain  what is wrong with capitalism and why we have no control over our  lives. It explains why in a competitive market economy the minority of people with the political and economic power must pollute and damage the environment in order to survive. The socialist alternative is a desirable society democratically controlled and without a profit-driven economy that necessitates exploitation of nature and the oppression of people. In other words, a democratic form of society that produces what people need, not what gives the elite its power and profits. Such a society would, for the first time permit ecological sustainability which can stay within the limits of the ecological carrying capacity of the earth. Without capitalist corporations or bureaucracies ruling in their interest, we can safeguard the environment. Protecting the environment thus moves from an economic impracticality, a business cost to be minimised to where communities won’t have to fight defensive battles time and again, here and there, putting out forest-fires. If a future socio-economic arrangement is to be sustainable it must socialist.



Socialism is humanistic but not anthropocentric, biocentric but not misanthropic.







“Blue Acceleration” – Another Resource War

“On land, we are already exploiting mineral resources to the full,” says Jean-Baptiste Jouffray, of Stockholm University. “At the same time, the need for rare elements and metals is becoming increasingly important to supply green technologies such as wind and solar power plants. And so industrialists are looking to the seabed where it is now technologically and economically feasible to mine for minerals. Hence the arrival of threats to creatures like the scaly-foot snail.”
German and Chinese industrial groups have revealed plans to explore the seabed around two of the three vents that provide homes for scaly-foot snails. Should they proceed, and mine the seabed’s veins of metals and minerals, a large chunk of the snail’s home base will be destroyed and the existence of this remarkable little creature will be threatened.
 “Blue acceleration”,is the term that is used by Jouffray and his co-authors to describe the recent rapid rise in marine industrialisation, a trend that has brought increasing ocean acidification, marine heating, coral reef destruction, and plastic pollution in its wake. As they state in their paper: “From the shoreline to the deep sea, the blue acceleration is already having major social and ecological consequences”.

Another illustration of blue acceleration is provided by seabed grabbing, state the authors. Article 76 of the UN convention on the law of the sea (UNCLOS) allows countries to claim seabed that lies beyond the 200 miles of a nation’s exclusive economic zone. Since the first claim under Article 76 was made in 2001, 83 countries have made submissions. Put together, these claims account for more than 37 million sq km of seabed, an area more than twice the size of Russia.



Many seabed grabbers include small island states that are trying to become large ocean states in the process. For example, the Cook islands in the South Pacific has claimed an area of seabed that is 1,700 times its land surface. “The extension of the continental shelf is therefore not only transforming the geo-political landscape, it is also substantially shrinking the area designated as the common heritage of humankind,” states the report.



Examples of the conflicts that could ensue because of the blue acceleration include the disruption of key fish stocks by drilling for gas or oil offshore; pipelines that prevent trawl fishing; and offshore wind farms that disturb tourism.



Norway provides a stark demonstration of likely future conflicts. It aims to bring about fivefold rises both in salmon farming and cruise tourism in its waters over coming years while also building more and more offshore wind farms and more and more offshore gas and oil platforms. Seabed mining for minerals is also scheduled to begin. This saturation of ocean space renders Norwegian waters as being highly vulnerable to shocks, states the report.



The South China Sea is another potential flashpoint. It is a key gateway in the region’s network of undersea telecommunication cables; a third of the world’s shipping passes through it; while half the world’s fishing boats operate in its waters – which are disputed variously by China, Malaysia, Vietnam and others. Should armed conflict break out here over any of these issues, there would be a far-reaching impact on the world’s economy.



“The relevance of the ocean for humanity’s future is undisputed,” states the report. “However, addressing the diversity of claims, their impacts and their interactions, will require effective governance.”
To achieve this, the authors call for greater accountability to be imposed on those financing the fundamental changes that are now being made to Earth’s oceans. These include both banks and governments.
In addition, the vulnerability of small island states needs to be addressed, it adds: “Navigating the blue acceleration in a just and sustainable way requires particular emphasis on the implications of increased ocean use across the globe – and how these claims could have an impact on the economic safety and wellbeing of vulnerable communities and social groups”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/25/race-for-seabed-threat-to-oceans