People Before Profit blog

Demand investigation of murder of progressive Cuban-American in 1978

Thu, 08 May 2014 14:59:00 +0000

Demands are being raised for a government investigation of the murder of a progressive young Cuban immigrant in Puerto Rico on April 28, 1979, 35 years ago this past Monday.

Carlos Muñiz Varela was born in the town of Colon, in Matanzas province, Cuba. Just 25 years old at the time of his death, he was a "Peter Pan baby", i.e. a child who was sent out of Cuba by his parents in 1961 when he was 8 years old after the Cuban Revolution triumphed. Settling in Puerto Rico with his family, he became active in left-wing organizations including those working for the independence of Puerto Rico. Like some, but not all, Peter Pan babies, he began to work to improve relations between the land of his birth and the United States, rather than becoming a hard-line anti-communist. He worked with Puerto Rican friends on the progressive Cuba-themed magazine Areito starting in 1973 and visited Cuba on journalistic missions. All these things incurred the rabid hatred of the right wing Cuban exiles.

He was shot execution style as he drove through the town of Guaynabo, on the North coast of Puerto Rico east of the capital, San Juan, and died two days later, on April 30. Nobody has ever been arrested, let alone prosecuted, for this atrocious murder. However, he had received threats from a person who identified himself as "Zeta" (the letter "z" in Spanish) and claimed to be representing the Omega 7 organization. Omega 7 was an organization of violent anti-Castro exiles, said to be based in Newark, New Jersey, and financially supported by Cuban exile businessmen there, which carried out numerous bombing and shooting attacks during this period, resulting in several deaths of progressive Cuban-Americans and a Cuban diplomat. In 1980 Omega 7 attempted but failed to assassinate Ramon Sanchez Parodi, at that time the head of the Cuban Interests Section in Washington D.C. Eventually, in 1984, Eduardo Arocena, the head of Omega 7 was convicted of 32 bombing and shooting attacks, but not for the Muñiz incident.

Muñiz' family and friends have repeatedly asked for a Justice Department investigation of his death, but have received no response. When President Obama was sworn in in 2009, the request was repeated to him and to Attorney General Eric Holder. Now it is being requested again, by Carlos Muñiz son, Carlos Muñiz Perez, and other relatives and friends, in an open appeal to Obama and Holder.

They have also asked for a full investigation of the murder in 1976 of Santiago Mari Pesquera, the son of Juan Mari Bras, at that time the leader of the pro-independence Puerto Rican Socialist Party (PSP).

They accuse U.S. and Puerto Rican authorities of a cover up, for not long after the murder the names of the right-wing exiles suspected of the murder began to circulate thanks to comments by some Puerto Rican police officers.

The former president of the Cuban "People's Power" parliament, Ricardo Alarcon de Quesada, has now added his voice to the demands for an investigation and an end to the cover up. Alarcon writes that the FBI has been covering up knowledge of who murdered Muñiz, and also Santiago Mari. "In 2008 the person who was then head of the FBI in Puerto Rico communicated to the then Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Roberto Sanchez Ramos, that his agency had proof that would allow clarification of who were the authors of the murder.....Before being installed in the White House President Obama received an open letter from the governor of Puerto Rico [at that time], Anibal Acevedo Vila, which requested that the FBI turn over to Puerto Rican courts the information that it had about the death of Carlos and also relating to the murder of Santiago Mari Pesquera...."

Alarcon concludes by calling for the questioning of three noted Cuban extremists now living in the United States: Jose Dionisio Suarez Esquivel, convicted for his part in the murder of former Chilean Foreign Minister Orlando Letelier and his U.S. assistant Ronnie Moffitt, in the middle of Embassy Row in Washington D.C. in 1976, Pedro Crispin Remon Rodriguez, and Reynol Rodriguez Gonzalez.

At this time of writing there has been no response yet from the U.S. authorities.

Photo: Blogspot

U.S. Office of Cuba Broadcasting pays foreign journalists to defame Cuba

Thu, 08 May 2014 13:02:00 +0000

U.S. journalist Tracy Eaton recently documented that the U.S. Office of Cuba Broadcasting (OCB) paid almost $700,000 over eight years to journalists and other opinion molders in Europe, the Middle East, and Latin America in return for their dissemination of anti-Cuban propaganda. The object, he suggests, has been an "attempt to shape international opinion." Eaton's report garnered considerable attention in Cuba.

Taking data from the Federal Procurement Data System, Eaton reports that the taxpayer-funded OCB project paid out $122,435 in 2008, nothing over the next two years, $41,890 in 2011, $198,477 in 2012, $189,055 in 2013, and $112,985 so far in 2014. He notes that, "Average payments [to individuals] jumped from $866.71 in 2012 to $1,643.96 in 2013. They have continued to rise in 2014, averaging $2,054.27 so far this year."

Earlier Eaton had shown that the OCB paid "$6,781,861.30 to writers, artists, journalists, analysts and others from Jan. 15, 2001, to Nov. 21, 2012." That money was funneled to Cuba through "venders" mostly in Southern Florida. "I suspect," he added, "that only a tiny fraction of this money reaches journalists and others in Cuba."

That OCB provides the names of recipients is an approach, Eaton says, that differs from that of the Agency for International Development which does not identify anti-Cuban agents in its employ. He indicates that "the OCB is an important and growing force" among U.S. agencies carrying out anti-Cuban activities.

The OCB has paid Florida based journalists to disseminate anti-Cuban material in that state, thus "violating the law against domestic dissemination of U.S. propaganda," according to one critic. OCB-funded prejudicial newspaper reports and television presentations flooded the Miami-area media market during the trial of the Cuban Five anti-terrorist agents that ended in 2001. That became the central issue in the late stages of appeals on behalf of those political prisoners.

The Office of Cuba Broadcasting (OCB), based in Miami, operates Radio and Television Marti, charged with broadcasting U.S. propaganda messaging to Cuba. Cuba successfully blocks such transmissions, although they reach southeastern United States and many parts of Latin America. The OCB budget for 2014 was $27 million.

In February Eaton, using data from FedsDataCenter.com, noted that, "the Office of Cuba Broadcasting has lavished big salaries on its employees in Miami. Its 119 employees earned an average of $99,275 in 2012. Their salaries totaled $11,813,725, which was 42 percent of the OCB's $27.9 million budget." He adds: "Salaries for the advisory board alone totaled $728,505. Appointments are for three years and members may serve multiple terms."

The list of OCB employees appearing on Eaton's report includes Feliciano M. Foyo who received $145,701 in 2012. Foyo, an accountant, was one of five employees with a "Job Category" calling for "Miscellaneous Administration and Program." Luis Posada-Carriles, implicated in deadly terror attacks against Cuba, "has said Foyo was one of his financial backers," according to Eaton.

As their names signify, almost all OCB employees are of Hispanic heritage. That they work in Miami, epicenter of Cuban resettlement in the United States, suggest Cuban national origins. Asked for his reaction to what looks like U.S funding for an exclusively Cuban-American counter-revolutionary project, Steve Burke of the Maine Cuba solidarity group Let Cuba Live suggested looking for answers in Washington. "Taxpayer money is being used to malign and to undermine a sovereign state. Cuba incurred the wrath of the U.S. government by maintaining a steadfast commitment to the health and well being of the Cuban people."

Photo: The CIA paid journalists to defame Cuban leaders like Raul Castro (pictured). AP

Ruling party ousted in Panama elections

Mon, 05 May 2014 13:33:00 +0000

On Sunday, voters in Panama upset the predictions of pollsters by electing dissident Vice President Juan Carlos Varela, of the Panameñista Party, as their new president.

Varela got 39.12 percent of the approximately 1,700,000 votes cast in this country of 3,700,000 inhabitants. But Panama does not have a runoff system, so Varela will be the new president, to be sworn in on July 1.

Former Housing Minister Jose Domingo Arias, of right-wing incumbent president Ricardo Martinelli's Democratic Change Party, got 31.70 percent, while Juan Carlos Navarro of the centrist Democratic Revolutionary Party, a former mayor of Panama City, got 27.84 percent.

The main left wing candidate, labor union leader Genaro Lopez of the Broad Front, trailed badly with only .59 percent of the vote.

Up until election day most polls had shown Arias slightly ahead. However, it appears that Arias' choice of President Martinelli's wife, Marta Linares, as his vice presidential candidate raised the suspicion among some voters that the incumbent president would seek to continue to run the country from behind the scenes during an Arias presidency. Although by some measure the economy is booming, entrenched poverty affects at least a quarter of the population, and corruption is also a big problem. Martinelli's government has clashed with workers over its efforts to restrict labor rights. Efforts to upgrade the Panama Canal have been delayed by labor actions, including one on election weekend.

In votes for the unicameral National Assembly, preliminary results show that the Democratic Change Party of Martinelli and Arias appears to be headed for a plurality but not a majority of the 71 seats.

Varela, whose family owns a major liquor business, is seen as being on the right. The previous Panameñista (then called Arnulfista) president, Mireya Moscoso, was a U.S. ally notorious for her freeing of a group of terrorists who had been convicted for a 2000 plot to blow up the University of Panama when then Cuban President Fidel Castro was scheduled to speak there.

Martinelli's government has also been ferociously anti-Cuba and anti-Venezuela. With regards to Venezuela, Martinelli's government was the only one in Latin America to line up with the United States and Canada in the Organization of American States in denunciations of the left-wing government in Caracas. This led Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro to sever diplomatic relations with Venezuela on Mar. 5. However, Varela has told the media that one of his priorities is to restore relations with Venezuela, and Maduro was one of the first foreign leaders to congratulate him on his election.

The presence of the Panama Canal gives this small country a geopolitical importance far beyond its size, and is a factor in plans for the Transpacific Partnership.

Photo: A woman signs a paper after casting her vote near Panama City. Tito Herrera/AP

U.S. says Cuba still a “State Sponsor of Terrorism”

Mon, 05 May 2014 13:06:00 +0000

According to the State Department, "U.S. law requires the Secretary of State to provide Congress, by Apr. 30 of each year, a full and complete report on terrorism with regard to those countries and groups meeting criteria set forth in the legislation." Beginning in 1982 the list has included Cuba as a "State Sponsor of Terrorism." Others this year are Iran, Sudan, and Syria.

The 2013 "Country Reports on Terrorism" specifies that "a wide range of sanctions" be applied to targeted countries. (http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/225045.pdf) They include prohibition of U.S. arms exports and economic assistance, "controls" over exports and services with potential military or terrorist use, and "[i]mposition of miscellaneous financial and other restrictions." The last category serves to authorize U.S. government harassment of Cuba through economic blockade, travel restrictions, and restrictions placed upon Cuba-related transactions by international banks and lending agencies.

The Report charges that, "Cuba has long provided safe haven to members of Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA) and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)." And, it adds, "The Cuban government continued to harbor fugitives wanted in the United States."

Activist Assata Shakur, who escaped from a New Jersey prison in 1979 and arrived in Cuba in 1984, is the most well-known fugitive. On May 2, 2013 the FBI placed her on "its list of most wanted terrorists" and increased the reward for information leading to her capture to the current $2 million.

The Report's Cuba section continues with mitigating considerations. "Throughout 2013, the Government of Cuba supported and hosted negotiations between the FARC and the Government of Colombia aimed at brokering a peace agreement between the two." And, "Cuba's ties to ETA have become more distant," and that about eight of the two dozen ETA members in Cuba "were relocated with the cooperation of the Spanish government." Furthermore, "There was no indication that the Cuban government provided weapons or paramilitary training to terrorist groups."

Cuba's Foreign Ministry responded by denouncing "manipulation of an issue as sensitive as international terrorism, in order to advance a policy against Cuba." Additionally, "Cuba reaffirms that our national territory has never been utilized, nor will it be utilized, to shelter terrorists of any nationality... Moreover, our government rejects and unequivocally condemns all acts of terrorism."

And: "Cuba is one of the countries which, for defending its independence and dignity, has suffered over decades the consequences of terrorist acts, organized, financed and executed from U.S. territory, acts which have caused 3,478 deaths and 2,099 debilitating injuries." The Foreign Ministry condemned U.S. hypocrisy evident in "long, unjust prison sentences" imposed on Gerardo Hernández, Ramón Labañino and Antonio Guerrero. They had "struggled against terrorism."

The Ministry pointed out that no U.S. fugitive was accused of terrorism."[O]thers who committed crimes in the United States, were duly tried and sentenced, and chose to reside in Cuba after the completion of their sentences."

Other critics of the Report accuse the United States itself of carrying out terrorism in the form of drone attacks, torture, illegal wars, and violence used in overthrowing foreign governments.

One tiny example from Colombia provides clear insight into contradictions posed by the U.S. approach to terrorism. The Report, which exonerates Colombia as a terrorist nation, seems to pass off Colombian paramilitaries as members of the terrorist "United Self Defense Forces of Colombia" (AUC). Lauding Colombian government initiatives, the Report notes that "the group's activities decreased ...The AUC did not carry out any terrorist attacks in 2013. It has been demobilized for seven years."

In truth, Colombian paramilitaries are now officially known as "Bacrims." That's the Spanish-language abbreviation of "criminal bands." Meanwhile paramilitaries, or Bacrims, remain true to their decades - long record of having murdered or "disappeared" tens of thousands of Colombians. The Colombian military, benefitting from U.S. funding and assistance, superintends their murderous work which began in 1964. A visiting U.S. military advisory team that year recommended paramilitary capabilities being developed as a tool for ridding Colombia of the newly-formed FARC communist insurgency.

The recent 318-page State Department Report applies to all nations in the world and contains more than 159,000 words. The section on Canada, no terrorist nation, consumed 2233 words. Yet the rationale for Cuba being an offender nation - no small matter - required only 176 words. And many are friendly words. Why then is Cuba regarded as a terrorist-sponsoring nation? Maybe it's just because the U.S. government says so. Or else it's because of Assata Shakur.

Photo: Latin American Working Group

Partial victory won in preventing voter suppression in Canada

Thu, 01 May 2014 16:19:00 +0000

VANCOUVER - Bowing to widespread opposition and criticism, the Conservative party government of Stephen Harper has agreed to modify legislation that critics charge is designed to help the Conservatives steal the 2015 elections.

The proposed changes to Bill C-23 include:

While all voters will still need ID to prove who they are before voting, a voter whose ID doesn't list an address can sign a written oath of residency. Another voter, with full ID, would have to co-sign the oath. Previously, a voter would have been barred from voting without ID proving identity and residence.

Eliminating a provision that would have exempted the cost of mail and phone calls to past donors asking for campaign donations from the election spending cap.

Allow the Chief Electoral Officer to communicate with the public on any issue. Previously, he could not say anything, other than tell people where to vote.

Permit Elections Canada (the agency responsible for organizing and running election) to offer programs explaining voting to elementary and secondary students. Previously, the agency was barred from running any sort of campaigns to encourage voter turnout.

Elections Canada will continue to appoint supervisors to run polling stations. Previously, the winning party would be allowed to propose names for supervisors.

Communication companies and call centers have to keep audio records and scripts for 3 years rather than 1 year.

However, the Conservatives will still scrap vouching, which allows one voter to vouch for another voter who has a government issued voting card but lacks ID proving name and residence. The most controversial of the proposed changes, critics charge that it will disenfranchise tens of thousands of non-conservative voters. The new Commissioner of Elections will still have no power to investigate fraud, such as compelling witness testimony.

Democratic Reform Minister Pierre Poilievre said the amendments have been submitted to the Parliamentary Committee studying Bill C-23, dubbed the "Fair Elections Act" by the Conservatives.

Opposition parties and groups called the changes a partial victory but have vowed to continue efforts to scrap Bill C-23. The Liberal Party, which is running neck and neck with the Conservatives in the polls, have promised to do away with the legislation if elected government in the 2015 elections.

At a press conference held by small federally registered parties in Ottawa, the Communist Party demanded not only that Parliament reject Bill C-23 but "open a wide, open and transparent discussion across the country on genuine electoral reform, including the convocation of public hearings and citizen meetings in both large and smaller urban centers, as well as rural areas."

"If the Conservatives had any real commitment to improving the current electoral system, they would open broad public discussion around genuine reforms to enhance democratic participation in the country, including consideration of proportional (or mixed proportional) representation in Parliament, further restrictions on campaign spending, a return to full voter enumeration before every election, greater and more equitable access to media for all political parties, not just the large, entrenched parties", party leader Miguel Figueroa told reporters.

Photo: Wikipedia

Venezuelan opposition attacks Cuban health workers

Tue, 29 Apr 2014 13:32:00 +0000

Cuban doctors working in Venezuela since 2003 epitomize Cuba-Venezuelan mutual solidarity. Joined there by 20,000 other Cuban health workers, 11,000 doctors are caring for patients and teaching medical students.

Longstanding objections from Venezuela's medical establishment are minor irritants in the face of recent violent assaults against Cuban health workers. They occur as part of anti-government protests that since early February have taken lives and damaged infrastructure.

Speaking recently on the 11^th anniversary of Venezuela's primary health care initiative Barrio Adentro, Vice President Jorge Arreaza reported that 162 Cuban health care personnel had been attacked. Two suffered serious burns. José Manzaneda, coordinator of Cuba Information TV, blames "a gigantic campaign against Cuba created in the private Venezuelan media, [and] amplified by the international media." As a result, "[M]any people firmly believe either that the Cuban government makes big political decisions in Venezuela or that Cuban health workers are really agents or spies."

A Spanish news service, for example, commenting on President Nicolas Maduro's election victory in April 2013, cited the role of "around 46,000 Cuban collaborators who officially live in Venezuela, all with the mission of guaranteeing the Chavez revolution." At the time, defeated opposition forces were engaged in destabilization, and the report served as context for attacks on 25 health centers staffed by Cuban doctors.

According to Ecuador's El Comercio newspaper recently, "[M]ilitary personnel represented the darkest side of that contingent of professionals - teachers, doctors, engineers - involved in the social programs." They are "like gods [in Venezuela]; no one can see them [in] army barracks, government ministries, intelligence offices, and petroleum agencies." Quoted by the BBC, opposition leader María Corina Machado promised, "We are going to liberate Venezuela and liberate the Venezuelan army from the humiliating presence of Cuban functionaries and Cuban military personnel."

The reality, of course, is otherwise. On March 12 in Caracas President Nicolas Maduro hosted 2,585 young people at the Presidential Palace. They had finished a six-year medical school course that focused on "comprehensive community medicine" at no personal cost and were now receiving medical diplomas. They will be providing free, accessible care for underserved Venezuelans in cities and rural areas throughout the country.

By 2013, over 14,000 such physicians were already on the job in clinics and hospitals. That year 20,000 students were working toward their own graduation. Projections are for 60,000 students to have graduated by 2019. Their program, entirely separate from traditional Venezuelan medical education, involves study and practical experience in the very communities where they live and will eventually serve. Crucially, their teachers are Cuban doctors.

Those doctors also care for patients and have engaged in half a billion patient encounters since 2003. Their presence accounts for doctors in Venezuela rising from 18 per 10,000 inhabitants in 1998 to 58 in 2012. Infant deaths fell from 20 per 1000 live births in 1999 to 13 in 2011.

The program of educating Venezuelan doctors to replace Cuban counterparts resulted from a bi-national agreement in 2005. Under the plan Cuban health care workers serving in Venezuela would receive their regular pay plus bonuses. In return, Venezuela guaranteed a predictable supply of oil for Cuba at reduced prices, at least 70,000 barrels per day.

The fact of Cuban doctors in Venezuela is no anomaly: since 1963, over 130,000 of them have provided health care in 108 countries. In early 2013, 17,000 Cuban doctors were working in 60 countries. Since then 6000 more have undertaken missions in Brazil.

Elsewhere in the world Cuban doctors don't face charges of political interference backed up by physical attacks. And for doctors to be capable of spying while teaching tens of thousands and caring for millions more verges on the superhuman.

Journalist Manzaneda offers perspective on this situation. The Cuban doctors "contribute to the long term construction of systems of public health throughout the global South, health systems that by and large were abandoned or disregarded during decades of neo-liberalism and anti-state policies. That's the basically ideological background for slander campaigns against Cuban solidarity work worldwide."

Joining this battle of ideas, the U.S. government has long bedeviled Cuban doctors working abroad. The U.S. State Department and Department of Homeland Security introduced the U.S. Cuban Medical Professional Parole program in 2006. That program offers incentives for Cuban health workers on international missions to defect and move to the United States. The object, presumably, is to undermine a medical outreach program appreciated throughout the world.

Photo: The Venezuelan government gave a medal to two Cuban doctors who were almost burnt alive during an opposition attack on a medical center (Cuba Informacion).

Today in eco-history: Andropov writes to U.S. 5th grader to ease nuclear fears

Fri, 25 Apr 2014 12:12:00 +0000

(history.com) On this day in 1983, the Soviet Union releases a letter that Russian leader Yuri Andropov wrote to Samantha Smith, an American fifth-grader from Manchester, Maine, inviting her to visit his country. Andropov's letter came in response to a note Smith had sent him in December 1982, asking if the Soviets were planning to start a nuclear war. At the time, the United States and Soviet Union were Cold War enemies.

While not seen as an environmental issue at the time, nuclear weapons pose the single biggest threat to the Earth's environment, scientists warned in 2006. The Guardian reported: In a new study of the potential global impacts of nuclear blasts, an American team found even a small-scale war would quickly devastate the world's climate and ecosystems, causing damage that would last for more than a decade.

Coincidentally, at least nine nuclear tests were performed on April 25:

1961 - France performs nuclear test at Reggane Proving Grounds Algeria

1962 - US resumes above ground nuclear testing, at Christmas Island

1971 - USSR performs nuclear test at Eastern Kazakh/Semipalitinsk USSR

1973 - US performs nuclear test at Nevada Test Site

1975 - USSR performs underground nuclear test

1977 - USSR performs nuclear test at Eastern Kazakh/Semipalitinsk USSR

1981 - More than 100 workers are exposed to radiation during repairs of a nuclear power plant in Tsuruga, Japan.

1982 - Great Britain performs nuclear test at Nevada Test Site

1982 - USSR performs nuclear test at Eastern Kazakh/Semipalitinsk USSR

In the early 1980s, nuclear war worries were high. President Ronald Reagan, a passionate anti-communist, had dubbed the Soviet Union the "evil empire" and called for massive increases in U.S. defense spending to meet the perceived Soviet threat. In his public relations duel with Reagan, known as the "Great Communicator," Andropov, who had succeeded longtime Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev in 1982, assumed a folksy, almost grandfatherly approach that was incongruous with the negative image most Americans had of the Soviets.

Andropov's letter said that Russian people wanted to "live in peace, to trade and cooperate with all our neighbors on the globe, no matter how close or far away they are, and, certainly, with such a great country as the United States of America." In response to Smith's question about whether the Soviet Union wished to prevent nuclear war, Andropov declared, "Yes, Samantha, we in the Soviet Union are endeavoring and doing everything so that there will be no war between our two countries, so that there will be no war at all on earth." Andropov also complimented Smith, comparing her to the spunky character Becky Thatcher from "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer" by Mark Twain.

Smith, born June 29, 1972, accepted Andropov's invitation and flew to the Soviet Union with her parents for a visit. Afterward, she became an international celebrity and peace ambassador, making speeches, writing a book and even landing a role on an American television series. In February 1984, Yuri Andropov died from kidney failure and was succeeded by Konstantin Chernenko. The following year, in August 1985, Samantha Smith died tragically in a plane crash at age 13.

Teresa Albano contributed to this article.

Photo: Samantha Smith, center, visits the Soviet Union in 1983 at an Artek Pioneer camp (Wikipedia).

TPP trade talks draw foes on both sides of Pacific

Thu, 24 Apr 2014 15:03:00 +0000

TOKYO - President Obama's trade talks with Japan, part of his bargaining for the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) "free trade" pact, drew opposition on both sides of the Pacific as the president landed in Tokyo on April 23 for talks with Premier Shinzo Abe. The president then visited South Korea, which is also part of the TPP talks.

In the U.S., meanwhile, unions and their allies blasted the secrecy of those talks and the pact's corporate giveaways in letters and op-eds.

Twitter carried pictures of protesting Asian workers and news reports said the Obama-Abe bargaining in Japan would probably not result in approval of the trade pact.

The Malaysian government, one of the other 12 nations in the TPP talks, is having second thoughts, other reports noted.

President Obama has said the TPP is connected to a "pivot" on foreign policy toward Asia and the Pacific. The traditional focus has been on Europe and Latin America.

The TPP, which covers far more than trade - everything from intellectual property to financial deregulation - is a key part of that new strategy. It is seen by unions and many progressives, however, as a giveaway to corporations because it lacks clauses that would protect or guarantee the rights of workers in the countries involved.

Another complaint has been that big business has had plenty of access to policymakers in Washington but that for workers and their unions the TPP negotiations have been a closed-door affair. U.S. "workers know all too well the high price of unfair trade. But while the 20-year-old NAFTA deal is the focus of much of the blame, it is hardly the only reason why millions of U.S. middle-class jobs have evaporated in recent years," Teamsters President James Hoffa said in a recent op-ed.

Hoffa noted the U.S.-Korea free trade pact just passed its two-year anniversary. Backers claimed it would create 70,000 U.S. jobs by that anniversary. Instead, U.S. net exports to Korea have declined by $518 million, the U.S. trade deficit with Korea has risen by 49 percent, and "overall, more than 40,000 Americans are now out of work due to the agreement," according to Hoffa.

That Korea pact "doesn't get the headlines" of NAFTA or the TPP, Hoffa added. "But those losses across the country are real. It is the most recent example of the kind of damage trade deals that don't take workers' interests into consideration can do to America.

"It is because of numbers like these that the Teamsters (and other unions) are wary of future trade deals. No one is against trade per se; we're just against unfair trade. Given the public is being kept in the dark when it comes to the TPP, that's a big reason for concern. If it is such a good deal, as supporters claim, why not release the text so everyone can take a look? What's the big secret?" Hoffa asked.

In Asia, the South China Morning Post reported opposition to the TPP, while Japan's Kyodo News quoted the Japanese economy minister as saying his country still intends to protect agriculture and its auto firms against U.S. goods, meaning there will be no TPP pact while Obama is there. Kyodo also reported the Malaysian government's second thoughts.

"In Malaysia, Prime Minister Najib Razak and his ruling coalition reversed their support for the pact last year," Kyodo reported. Domestic Malaysian businesses, particularly state-owned enterprises - whom the TPP does not regulate despite their subsidies and tax breaks - prompted the reconsideration, the story added.

President Obama also faces opposition in the U.S. to the fast-track trade promotion authority he needs to win final approval for the TPP. Fast-track would let the president shepherd TPP through the approval process without changes, requiring just one up-or-down vote in both the House and the Senate. This would prevent lawmakers who want to insert clauses to protect workers rights, for example, from doing so.

More than three-fourths of the House Democratic Caucus are on record against fast-track, as are 28 Republicans. Influential Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., pronounced fast-track "dead" in an April 21 interview with reporters.

"That is no way to handle a deal that could lead to thousands of hard-working Americans getting a pink slip," said Hoffa. "When the U.S. negotiates a trade agreement, every provision should benefit working families, not big corporations. But that has not been happening. It didn't happen with NAFTA, it isn't happening with" the Korea pact "and it won't happen with TPP. Numbers don't lie. Workers are losing under these trade deals.

Photo: President Obama and Japan Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Carolyn Kaster/AP

Canadian conservative senators back off of voter suppression efforts

Thu, 24 Apr 2014 14:46:00 +0000

VANCOUVER - To calm growing anger, a Senate Committee - composed mostly of Conservatives - has joined the ranks of critics who are demanding that the Conservative government revise Republican-style voter suppression legislation that it is determined to implement.

The Senate Committee - two-thirds of its membership consisting of Conservative Senators - is recommending the following set of changes to Bill C-23 in a report issued to the government: Ensure the Chief Electoral Officer and the Commissioner of Canada Elections can warn the public of problems they find in the electoral system which they are restricted from doing with the new bill; give retirement homes and homeless sheltesr the right to issue letters to clients that can be used as ID at a voting booth as well as allowing electronic correspondence to corroborate ID; requiring robo call firms to keep certain records for three years, rather the proposed one year; loosening restrictions on allowing Election Canada to promote voter turnout; ensure the Chief Electoral Officer and the Commissioner of Canada Elections can share information.

Until now, Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper - whose party controls 54 percent of seats in Parliament - has brushed off criticism of the legislation. He said Bill C-23, dubbed "the Fair Elections Act" by the Conservatives, will " increase the integrity of our elections system" and rejected opposition calls to drop or modify the legislation. Now, the Conservative Minister in charge of promoting Bill C-23, Pierre Poilievre - who has been attacking opponents until now rather than listening to them - said he will read the Senate report and consider the recommended changes.

The Senate Committee's objections to Bill C-23 is the most serious hurdle the Harper government faces in its determination to pass Bill C-23 by June. If the government does not revise the legislation, the Senate could reject the bill and send it back to Parliament.

The Bill is stirring up a hornets nest of opposition in Canada. The most controversial change proposed by the legislation is the abolition of vouching whereby one voter can swear to the identity of another voter who has their voter identification card but no additional ID to verify name and residence, so they can vote. The Conservatives say the change is necessary to prevent vote fraud. Instead of deterring fraud, critics charge that Bill C-23 is designed to disenfranchise thousands of Canadians who don't vote Conservative - the poor, young people and natives. Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand, who heads Elections Canada, (the electoral agency in charge of running elections) has denounced the bill as anti-democratic and said the end of allowing voters to vouch for others and the enactment of mandatory ID requirements will adversely affect more than 100,000 voters. "Many electors still have a challenge producing proper identifications documents at the polls - especially certain groups that come to mind are aboriginals, young people, even seniors that are increasing in terms of population and have increasing difficulty producing proper identification documents," Mayrand said. In 2011, 120,000 people voted through vouching. Elections Canada has found no evidence of widespread voter fraud through vouching.

The bill will also limit the Chief Electoral Officer's right to communicate with the public and bar Elections Canada from encouraging voting and publishing research reports; remove the investigative capacity of Elections Canada to monitor and prevent electoral fraud, placing it instead under the authority of the Director of Public Prosecutions, a Cabinet appointee who is in turn answerable to Cabinet and the Prime Minister, not parliament; increase the role of big money in election campaigns by increasing allowable donations, from $1,200 to $1,500 and $1,200 to $5,000 for candidates to their own campaigns ; exempt fundraising from spending limits which will benefit the large parties with big donors lists; Enable the winning political party to recommend names for supervisors who oversee elections in each polling station.

So far a long list of experts and organizations have spoken out against Bill C-23, among them : the opposition New Democratic Party, Greens, Liberals, Communists, Canadian Federation of Students, Leadnow, Council of Canadians, the Chief Electoral Officer of Ontario Greg Essensa, former right wing Reform Party leader Preston Manning, 150 Political Scientists who signed an open letter, former Auditor General Sheila Fraser and Commissioner of Canadian Elections Yves Cote; an open letter signed by 19 international scholars.

Critics charge the Bill is designed to give the Conservatives, who only received 39.6 % of the vote in 2011, an advantage in the 2015 elections.

Photo: Leadnow.ca.

Tensions high in Ukraine in spite of agreement

Tue, 22 Apr 2014 16:19:00 +0000

Tension remains high in Ukraine, in spite of announcements of a possible agreement on a solution among Russia, Ukraine, the European Union and the United States, reached in Geneva on Thursday. The problem is that there was no involvement of disaffected elements from primarily Russian-speaking communities in Eastern Ukraine in the talks that led to the announcement. Though U.S. government spokespersons talk about the protesters in the East as if they were all puppets of Russian President Vladimir Putin, there is little indication that he can order them to stop their agitation against the Kiev regime.

Over the past several days, there have been militant actions in more communities in the Ukrainian East, many involving the physical seizure of town halls and administrative centers by armed groups. Calling the protesters "terrorists," the interim prime minister in Kiev, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, offered groups which have been occupying city halls a chance to hand over their arms, leave the facilities and accept an amnesty. Otherwise, Yatsenyuk said, the Ukrainian army would move in to oust them by force.

The protesters did not accept this and continue with their occupations. The threatened Ukrainian army intervention turned out to be something short of glorious. In at least one town, Kramatorsk, the Ukrainian troops surrendered to the dissidents, who captured their armored personnel carriers. There were also reports of Ukrainian army troops going over to the dissident side. (In the Crimea, now integrated into Russia, some of the Ukrainian soldiers evidently integrated themselves in the Russian army).

There have been some deaths. On Thursday night a crowd of about 300 dissidents are said to have surrounded a Ukrainian military base in Mariupol, with some throwing homemade bombs at the gate. Troops opened fire on them, killing three. There have been other deaths of both dissidents and pro-Kiev people.

On Thursday, tensions were increased when it was revealed that parties unknown had been passing out a flyer, purportedly from the dissident leadership of Donetsk, which ordered all Jews to register, provide a detailed accounting of all property they own, and pay a $50.00 fee to the dissident government, or risk having their citizenship revoked and being deported. However, local officials denied that this flyer had been issued by the People's Republic of Donetsk leadership, and pointed out several discrepancies in the phrasing. Most observers now think that this was either a provocation designed to make the dissidents in the East look bad, or a money making scheme by criminal elements. Statements by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, however, suggested some credence in the authenticity of the documents.

Ukraine, and Eastern Europe generally, have been hotbeds of anti-Semitism over the years , and Oleh Tyahnybok, a main leader of the ultra-right Svoboda party that participates in the interim government in Kiev, is known for public anti-Semitic statements. The flyers may have been inspired, though, from events in nearby Hungary, where a parliamentarian of the ultra right Jobbik party actually did call for such registration by all Hungarian Jews.

Whoever the authors of the pamphlets and whatever their intentions, this is one more incident which keeps tension high.

Meanwhile, in Kiev, there are indications of tension between Yatsenyuk's government and some of the extreme right-wing groups that brought it to power in February. The Geneva agreement includes the Ukrainian government adopting language guaranteeing official status for the Russian as well as Ukrainian languages, and allows for some administrative decentralization, although not as much as the Russian-speaking easterners want. These items are likely to annoy the ultra rightists in the Svoboda party and the Right Sector.

But a bigger division in the ruling alliance looms with the issue of demands by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that to get financial help, Yatsenyuk's government is going to have to impose extreme austerity measures on its population, in a country that is already the poorest in Europe.

The disturbances that led to the overthrow of the previous president, Victor Yanukovych, were originally protests over his having rejected a deal with the European Union which would have provided credits in exchange for such austerity measures, and accepted an alternate offer from Russia which was much more lenient. The demonstrations that started last December originally backed a demand to accept the European Union agreement. However the ultra right is nationalistic and "anti-Europe," and joined the demonstrations as an opportunity to raise hell and destabilize the country, as well as out of anti-Russian feelings, not because they have any use for the European Union. Actual implementation of the IMF plan will strengthen the resolve of the Russian-speaking protesters in the East not to give in to the Kiev government, while also antagonizing the far right in the rest of the country.

Photo: A soldier from the Ukrainian Army speaks with local residents in the town of Kramatorsk April 16. Pro-Russian insurgents commandeered six Ukrainian armored vehicles along with their crews and hoisted Russian flags over them Wednesday, dampening the interim Kiev government's hopes of re-establishing control over restive eastern Ukraine. (AP Photo/Sergei Grits)

As crisis builds, Ukrainians face May 25 election

Mon, 21 Apr 2014 11:52:00 +0000

The situation in Ukraine remains critical, with standoffs and some violence between security forces of the interim government that seized power in Kiev in February and Russian-speaking activists who oppose the new regime and want closer ties to Russia.

On top of all this, the country has a presidential election coming up on May 25.

This election is shaping up to be largely a contest of oligarchs - powerful politically connected business tycoons who made their fortunes out of the breakup of the old Soviet Union and the privatization of state enterprises that followed.

The two leading contenders, Petro Poroshenko and Yulia Tymoshenko, are themselves oligarchs.

Poroshenko, with 38 percent of the electorate in a recent poll, heads the Rosen Group, with holdings in the domestic chocolates market, auto and bus parts, the Leninska Kuznya shipbuilding and armaments company, and Channel 5, which is based in Kiev and supports the interim government and closer ties with the European Union and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Vitali Klitschko's Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform (UDAR) party is backing Poroshenko.

Klitschko, a former boxing champion, was a participant in the protests in Kiev that resulted in the ousting of the elected Ukrainian government and its replacement by the current interim government.

Yulia Tymoshenko, former president and longtime rival of expelled president Viktor Yanukovych, was a leader of the pro-Western 2004 Orange Revolution. She is an oligarch in her own right in United Energy Systems of Ukraine, the largest importer of Russian natural gas from 1995 to 1997. She represents the interests of the Rivat Group and its head, oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyi, a multibillionaire in primarily export businesses, and the second or third richest man in Ukraine.

Tymoshenko heads the Fatherland Party of interim Prime Minister Arsenyi Yatsenyuk, whom she strongly supports from her base in Dnipropretrovsk. Tymoshenko, like Yatsenyuk, supports the austerity program pushed by the IMF. Tymoshenko was imprisoned for graft while Victor Yanukovych was president.

Oleh Tyahnybok, leader of the fascist Svoboda Party based in Lvov, remains popular in Western and central Ukraine, although his party scored only 11.44 percent of the electorate in the 2012 parliamentary elections. He and Dmytro Yarosh, the head of the neo-Nazi right sector, who received 1.6 percent of the popular vote in a recent poll, but controls 10,000 armed militants in the streets, round out the group of candidates that support the interim government.

In opposition, the candidate of deposed president Victor Yanukovych's Party of Regions, Mykhailo Dobkin, has the support of oligarch Rinat Akhmetov, head of the SCM Group of mainly import businesses. He is, reputedly, Ukraine's richest man with assets of $15.4 billion. Akhmetov supposedly purchased the selection of Dobkin and the expulsion of rival candidates. However, Tsaryov remains a serious contender, a popular defender of Yanukovych and his policies and a member of parliament from the Dnipropetrovsk province.

Petro Symonenko, first secretary and presidential candidate of the Communist Party of Ukraine, has the advantage of opposing both the oligarchal rule of Yanukovych and IMF-fostered austerity which threatens to render Ukraine an economic basket case. He is limited by his party's appeal to 13.2 percent of the electorate in the parliamentary elections of 2012, approximately 14 percent of which vote was obtained in Crimea, now annexed to Russia. However, given his party's earlier historical claim to more than 25 percent of the electorate, his presence in the second round (runoff in case nobody gets a majority of votes on May 25) cannot be ruled out.

Poroshenko and Tymoshenko can be relied upon to support the current government in Kiev and IMF-mandated austerity. Poroshenko has a larger popular following. Tymoshenko cannot be ruled out because of her Fatherland party's strong infrastructure. The situation of the Party of Regions, which is strong in the eastern, more populous section of the country, will largely depend on the strength of Dobkin and the challenge of Tsaryov, the latter running under serious financial and organizational handicaps. All four must be regarded as serious contenders. The presidential hopes of Tyahnybok and Yarosh, both of whom are embroiled in a conflict with current interim Interior Minister Arseiny Avakov, may depend on the extent to which they can use their armed presence abetted by security forces for voter intimidation.

That leaves Symonenko, who may present more of a wild card; if his campaign can mobilize the 38.8 percent of the electorate it achieved in the late 1990s, it will be a potent threat to Poroshenko and Tymoshenko.

Symonenko and the Communist Party call for national unity in a federated framework, with the elimination of the post of president and a transition to a parliamentary system of government. They want the future relations of Ukraine with Russia and Western Europe to be determined by a plebiscite, and also call for special actions to rid the country of corruption and oligarchic control.

The corporate-controlled press in the West has been either ignoring Symonenko's candidacy, or misrepresenting his and his party's positions as being slavish to Russia. Symonenko and other communist activists have been subjected to physical attacks by the extreme right. On Apr. 8, Symonenko was assaulted on the floor of the Ukrainian parliament for sharply criticizing Svoboda. The Communist Party headquarters in Kiev was severely damaged by arson, and there have been other incidents.

Photo: Ukrainian Army soldiers atop combat vehicle were blocked Wednesday by local residents opposed to the interim government in Kiev. The soldiers were sent by that Kiev government to move into the town of Kramatorsk. Efrem Lukatsky/AP

Activists push for release of jailed trade unionist Shahrokh Zamani

Thu, 17 Apr 2014 15:35:00 +0000

Solidarity activists called on the international labor movement today to push for the release of hunger-striking Iranian trade unionist Shahrokh Zamani.

He was arrested in June 2011 and sentenced to 11 years in prison for "acting against national security by establishing or being a member of groups opposed to the system" and "spreading propaganda against the Establishment" - charges widely levelled against trade unionists.

Britain-based Iranian solidarity group Codir said Mr Zamani began his hunger strike on Mar. 8 in support of other political prisoners at Gohar Dasht prison.

Authorities decided to transfer him three days later to Ghezel Hesar prison, with no explanation or justification. Mr Zamani continued his strike in protest.

The Syndicate of Paint Workers activist has lost 37 pounds since starting his hunger strike, Codir said.

International Trade Union Confederation general secretary Sharan Burrow has already written to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani demanding Mr Zamani's freedom.

She expressed concern at his transfer to Ghezel, which holds 20,000 inmates and where there are threats to the safety of political prisoners.

And Codir president Alex Gordon has pushed trade unionists around the world to sign a statement "holding the Islamic Republic of Iran responsible for Mr. Zamani's health and well-being."

Codir assistant general secretary Jamshid Ahmadi said, "Those supporting Iranian trade unions must push to get the Iranian government to positively respond to their demands for better pay and conditions and for trade union rights. We call on the government of Iran to enact International Labor Organization conventions 87 (freedom of association) and 98 (collective bargaining) without delay."

The solidarity campaign is trying to test Mr Rouhani's pro-reform election platform on the domestic front.

"Almost a year after the presidential election in which he was elected on a platform of heralding a new era of respect for human and democratic rights, nothing has changed noticeably for people of Iran," said Codir.

"The economy continues to struggle under the weight of economic sanctions. The regime's economic policy has brought more factory closures, unemployment, unpaid wages, and poverty pay."
Codir has called for protest letters to be sent immediately to Mr Rouhani at rouhani@csr.ir and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei at info@leader.ir

This article was originally posted on Morning Star.

Photo: Shahrokh Zaman, HRANA

Why the U.S. does what it does in Ukraine

Thu, 17 Apr 2014 11:54:00 +0000

If you want to understand why our government is so worked up about Ukraine, a good place to start is with U.S. actions in Yugoslavia some 25 years ago. To begin, read "First Do No Harm: Humanitarian Intervention and the Destruction of Yugoslavia," an eye-opening 2009 book by historian David Gibbs.

Well before the Ukraine crisis broke into the headlines, I had decided I needed to educate myself about what happened in Yugoslavia in the 1990s. The breakup of that country was marked by horrific ethnic strife and bloodshed, and two massive U.S./NATO bombing campaigns hailed by Bill Clinton and others as "good" wars on behalf of human rights. Searching for a balanced look at this history, I came across mention of "First Do No Harm." As the furor over Ukraine erupted, I knew it was time to read Gibbs' book. I suggest you do the same.

Gibbs, a history professor at the University of Arizona, notes in his introduction that he was spurred to write the book to answer the question: Why has the U.S. continued a Cold War foreign policy even though the Cold War ended. He suggests that the U.S. claim of humanitarian intervention in Yugoslavia, immediately after the collapse of the Soviet Union and other socialist states, "helped establish a new rationale - however specious - for militarism."

"The Yugoslav case," he writes, "served to define U.S. intervention as a benevolent and even altruistic activity, and this image has proven useful as a justification for virtually all overseas action."

Yugoslavia at the end of the Cold War was a multi-ethnic socialist-oriented federation of six republics. Gibbs shows how, in 1990-91, Western Europe, in particular Germany, and then the U.S. encouraged and aided the secession of, first, the two wealthiest Yugoslav republics - Croatia and Slovenia. Then they moved on to Bosnia-Hercegovina, where a lengthy battle over secession culminated in a U.S./NATO bombing campaign that ended in the breakup of what was left of Yugoslavia. All these secessions were in violation of the existing Yugoslav constitution.

Kosovo, an autonomous region within Yugoslavia's Serb Republic, had its own secession movement and insurrection, actively backed by the U.S. and NATO. It wound up with a several-month U.S./NATO bombing war in 1999.

Fast forward to 2014, and the U.S. and its western European allies' outraged objection to the secession of Crimea from Ukraine.

I asked Gibbs about this policy switch, which some have called hypocritical. His response:

"Prior to 1991, there was a strongly international norm against secession and breaking up countries. It was generally accepted by almost all countries including the USA and USSR, despite the Cold War. That norm effectively ended however in 1991, with secessions of Slovenia and Croatia from Yugoslavia and then the Baltic States from the USSR ... Basically the international norm against secession was ended in 1991, but the NATO states are (somewhat inconsistently) trying to resurrect it with regard to Crimea. The resurrection of the anti-secession impulse with regard to Ukraine seems more based on realpolitik than international law or principle."

In "First Do No Harm," Gibbs shows how "realpolitik" was a decisive factor in the thinking and actions of the U.S. and Western Europe in regard to the breakup of Yugoslavia. (Russia, in the throes of the breakup of the USSR, was not a significant player.) There were terrible humanitarian crises - massacres, ethnic cleansing. But he carefully documents how U.S./NATO actions actually worsened the bloodshed and delayed diplomatic solutions, because U.S. and western policymakers prioritized their own geopolitical concerns.

What were these concerns?

One: Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S. and Western European countries were competing for power in Eastern Europe. Dominant U.S. foreign policy circles were anxious to establish U.S. hegemony in the region, as well as globally - an outlook that continues to this day.

Two: In the post-Cold-War era, the U.S. and its Western European allies were anxious to find a new reason to justify the existence of their Cold War military alliance, NATO. Moreover, they sought to legitimize NATO action outside its original North Atlantic region. We saw how this "humanitarian intervention" precedent was invoked not long ago in Libya.

Gibbs provides an interesting discussion of the 1992 U.S. intervention in Somalia under President Clinton. Rather than furthering the claimed humanitarian function, he writes, the U.S. action served to remind the public "that the U.S. military remained relevant when its relevance was open to question." Further, "it reaffirmed the importance of U.S. dominance and helped cast this dominance in a benevolent light."

All this sheds a lot of light on today's Ukraine crisis. Notice, for example, that NATO has taken the opportunity to ramp up its involvement in Eastern Europe, along Russia's border.

Yet despite the confrontational posturing, Gibbs sees a significant difference from the Yugoslav situation. "A key development with regard to Ukraine is the unwillingness of the U.S. and NATO to intervene with military force," he told me. "It appears that military force is not even being considered as an option."

In his view, that is due to widespread public opposition to military intervention. "This stands in stark contrast with the situation of the 1990s, when the U.S. clearly did use military force in Bosnia and Kosovo," Gibbs said. "Now, two decades later, the public is simply tired of militarism."

Read the book. I have only skimmed the surface of the wealth of information and insights it contains.

Book information:
"First Do No Harm: Humanitarian Intervention and the Destruction of Yugoslavia"
By David N. Gibbs
2009, Vanderbilt University Press, paperback, 334 pages, $27.95; Kindle $16.79

Equality victory, as India recognizes transgender rights

Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:56:00 +0000

India's top court officially recognized transgender rights April 15 in a landmark ruling.

The Supreme Court directed the federal and state governments to allow people to identify themselves as outside the binary male/female gender definitions.

The estimated three million transgender Indians will have the same access to welfare programs for the poor, including education, healthcare and jobs to help them overcome social and economic challenges.

The court also ordered the government fight the social stigma associated with transgender people through a public awareness campaign.

India's election commission recently allowed voters to register with their gender as "other" in time for ongoing elections.

Around 28,000 people registered themselves in that category.

The court's decision applies to individuals who have acquired the physical characteristics of the opposite sex or present themselves in a way that does not correspond with their sex at birth.

"The spirit of the constitution is to provide equal opportunity to every citizen to grow and attain their potential, irrespective of caste, religion or gender," said the court.

Justice KS Radhakrishnan said that the "recognition of transgender people as a third gender is not a social or medical issue but a human rights issue.

Transgender people "are citizens of this country and are entitled to education and all other rights."

But the court made it clear its ruling didn't apply to gays, lesbians or bisexuals.

India's LGBT communities have been up in arms over the court's support for a colonial-era law banning sodomy. The court said the issue was for parliament to decide.

Reposted from Morning Star

Photo: Transgenders celebrate with a cake after the Supreme Court's verdict recognizing third gender category, in Mumbai, India, April 15. (AP Photo/Rajanish Kakade)

Colombian court turns down political prisoner Liliany Obando's appeal

Tue, 15 Apr 2014 11:47:00 +0000

On April 3, the Colombian Supreme Court announced its rejection of an appeal by Liliany Obando of a conviction and sentence handed down in 2013. Political prisoner Obando's conviction for "rebellion" stands, as does a sentence of five years, eight months of house arrest and a fine of 707 million pesos, ($368,347 USD). Formerly human rights director for FENSUAGRO, Colombia's largest agricultural workers' union, Obando benefits from wide international support.

The Court dropped one charge against her, that of handling "resources related to terrorist activities." Her sentence includes time already served in state custody. Time remaining under house arrest is unclear, probably under two years. In confining Obando to house arrest, the Court was recognizing Obando's status as a head of household with two children, a classification she had long sought.

Arrested on August 8, 2008, Obando had been confined to the Buen Pastor women's prison in Bogotá until her release to house arrest on March 1, 2012. In prison, Obando campaigned to defend prisoner's rights, especially those of women political prisoners. She assumed a leading role with the "Manuela Sáenz Women Political Prisoners Collective," whose work extended to other Colombian prisons and even internationally. On March 8, International Women's Day, she released a since widely disseminated study "Women's exclusion from society and politics and invisibility in Prison."

Obando is a sociologist and documentary filmmaker. A week before her arrest, she issued a report documenting the murders of 1500 FENSUAGRO union members. Working with FENSUAGRO, Obando met with unions and political organizations abroad, informing them about Colombian realities.

Prosecutors accused Obando of belonging to the international commission of the FARC. Their case rested on files taken from computers of FARC leaders seized during the Colombian military's attack on a FARC encampment in Ecuador on March 1, 2008. In 2011 the Colombian Supreme Court invalidated the legal standing of material the computers contained. The appeals court apparently paid little heed to that decision.

Since leaving prison in early 2012, Obando has worked on behalf of political prisoners and for social justice and peace in Colombia. She has contributed both to ongoing educational and action-oriented projects of the "Open and Free Classroom" and to projects of Colombia's "Long Life to Butterflies" campaign dedicated to political prisoners. She has taken on a leading role with the International Network in Solidarity with Colombia's Political Prisoners.

Together with her family, Obando under house arrest has experienced harassment, persecution, and monitoring at the hands of security officials. A new solidarity effort, "I Name You Liberty" (Yo Te Nombro Libertad), is active on her behalf.

Image: INSPP

Rwanda: the long descent to genocide

Mon, 14 Apr 2014 13:46:00 +0000

(Editor's Note: April 7th marked the 20th anniversary of the Rwanda genocide.)

PRETORIA - In 1994, as the nearly 100-days of genocide unfolded that killed about a million people in Rwanda from Apr. 7 to mid-July, press coverage and international reactions to the carnage were very much business as usual.

Rwanda was almost exclusively seen in terms of a grand narrative of African catastrophe. "Hunger and disease take up where a vicious war left off," was Time Magazine's glib take on the immediate aftermath of the genocide, spectacularly failing to pinpoint what had happened and why. The title to the piece "Cry the Forsaken Country" referenced another era of African tragedy, Alan Paton's Cry the Beloved Country about apartheid South Africa.

As with so much media coverage of Africa's problems, the events in Rwanda were wearily depicted by Time as one more tragedy in the endless litany of seemingly inevitable African cataclysms. The subtext throughout was that nothing could be done. In reality, the international community saw only what it wanted to.

World leaders and the UN were irresolute and more concerned to ensure the safe withdrawal of any Western presence in Rwanda. It took the Clinton administration until a month after the highly systematic genocide was in full swing to decry cautiously "acts of genocide".

Twenty years on, accounts of the Rwanda genocide - mainly of members of the Tutsi minority population at the hands of Hutu militants - take better account of why it was that the UN and others failed to act or even say anything much. News media coverage discusses the pros and cons of humanitarian intervention in the form of ramped up peacekeeping. More fingers are retrospectively pointed at governments' and the UN's inability to seize the initiative in crises.

There is however a deeper analysis of why the genocide happened. The Rwandan government program Kwibuka20 (kwibuka means "remember" in Kinyarwanda) stresses the planned nature of the genocide, countering the usual impression that it "just happened".

The effort to wipe out the Tutsi population was concerted, involving government and military leaders, the Catholic Church and top civil society leaders. The UN ignored repeated warnings of the genocide and kept only a minimal peacekeeping presence in Rwanda.

The later French-led humanitarian mission to create a safe passage for Tutsis to Zaire (now Democratic Republic of Congo) allowed thousands of the perpetrators to the genocide to escape. Thousands of Hutus, who did not support Hutu Power (an extreme nationalist ideology) political parties or viewpoint, also perished.

This tends to undercut the media's conventional wisdom view of a purely spontaneous explosion of "inter-ethnic" conflict. But the Rwandan government's marketing of the genocide memorial is as much to do with polishing its own image as it is with remembering the victims.

Unequal Tutsi-Hutu relations have a long history, rooted in part in the position the former acquired as aristocratic overseers of the majority Hutus. This was an inequality consciously fostered by German and, following World War I, Belgian colonialism. In the 17^th century, what is now Rwanda comprised some eight kingdoms under a common communal economy, the most prominent of which was ruled by the Tutsi Nyiginya clan.

Belgian colonial administration was based on established divide-and-rule principles, and in Rwanda it pioneered Tutsi supremacy over the larger Hutu population. Tutsis were put in charge of much colonial management, being responsible for tax collection and administering brutal colonial justice.

Communal agriculture, once equally shared by both groups, was dismantled and converted to cash crop production. The Belgians created a false historical record of Tutsi tribal aristocratic supremacy over the dominated Hutus.

The two groups had to carry identity cards stipulating their "ethnic origin", another invention. Quite arbitrarily, Tutsi's were designated as cattle owners, a class above the Hutus, who were categorised lower down the scale as farmers.

This creation of two antagonistic social classes had a massive impact on Rwandan society, laying the basis for conflict between Tutsis and Hutus that persisted beyond independence in 1962, and degenerated into civil war.

Tens of thousands of Tutsis had been forced to flee the country in the face of sporadic massacres by Hutus. During the '70s and '80s, they launched attacks from neighboring countries on the autocratic Hutu administration headed by Juvénal Habyarimana.

In 1990, the Tutsi-dominated Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) invaded the north of Rwanda, leading to all-out civil war. After a ceasefire was agreed in 1992, Habyarimana was forced into a coalition with the opposition under the Arusha peace accords brokered in 1993 by the U.S. France and the Organization for African Unity (OAU).

Habyarimana was killed when his plane was shot down on April 6, 1994. The next day the pogroms against the Tutsi population started, also targeting Hutus who did not support Hutu Power's ideological groupings or political parties.

Accounts differ over whether Habyarimana was killed by the RPF, which did not want to see him remain in power under the transitional government, or by Hutu Power elements seeking an excuse to eliminate the Tutsis.

But the dire state of relations between Hutus and Tutsi was not only a product of colonial rule that played out through bloody civil conflict in subsequent decades.

It was exacerbated by economic factors driven by Western interests. Chief of these was the collapse of the coffee market at the end of the 1980s, when the International Coffee Agreement, which set quotas from coffee producing countries, unravelled due to pressure from U.S .coffee traders. The price of coffee dropped by over 50 percent devastating Rwanda's economy.

The country became heavily dependent on donor funding, subject to masses of conditions on the running of the country and the economy, which did nothing to address the tattered social-economic fabric, despite being shot through with imported rhetoric and rules about human rights and good governance.

IMF-World Bank lending had been replaced by "structural adjustment" along free market lines that failed to prioritise agricultural development or food production. The IMF also demanded heavy devaluations of the local currency, which drove up the prices of fuel and consumer essentials.

By the eve of April 7, 1994, there had been plenty of warnings that the Hutu administration was planning mass killings of Tutus. Isolated and seemingly uncoordinated massacres had already happened in August 1993.

Between 1992 and early 1994 warnings about Hutu plans to eliminate the Tutsi population came from a variety of sources. They included Belgian law professor Filip Reyntjens in a press conference at the Belgian senate, the Belgian ambassador to Kigali, Human Rights Watch and the International Federation for Human Rights, the UN Special Rapporteur on Summary, Arbitrary, and Extrajudicial Executions, and the commander of the UN Assistance Mission in Rwanda.

Once underway, the genocide was easily coordinated, with orders emanating from the capital through local government structures and using radio stations to issue orders to massacre Tutsi's and their supporters. Most of the roughly million people who were murdered were hacked to death with machetes or bludgeoned with clubs.

The ID cards introduced by the Belgians long before that people had to carry stating their "ethnicity", and which were still in use, came in handy for identifying targets. There was nothing else to distinguish Tutsis from Hutus, who have a common language and have no physical differences to tell them apart.

The RPF started to fight back from its base in the north of the country, but only entered Kigali on July 4. The current RPF government in Rwanda marks this date as the end of the genocide, or 88 days after it began, though it continued for some weeks.

Today, Rwanda is held by some to be the poster child for Africa's dynamic resurgence. Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has lauded Rwanda's comparative stability: "Rwandans are increasingly united. There is a strong patriotism and belief in the government - almost nine in 10 say they 'trust in the leadership of their country'".

But Filip Reyntjens, who in 1992 forewarned about the coming genocide, says that the price of this stability and trust is "structural violence" in Rwandan society.

This comes in the form of the destruction of civil society, ethnic discrimination (this time against Hutus), the concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few, and human rights violations at home and abroad. "In years to come, this may well lead to renewed acute violence", he says, and warns that once again the international community is looking the other way.

Photo: A mural created by Rwandan students symbolizing post-genocide unity. Ben Curtis/AP

South Sudan facing famine crisis

Fri, 11 Apr 2014 15:26:00 +0000

Over 3.7 million people in this new African nation of 11 million are at severe risk of starvation. Conditions in South Sudan now parallel those of Ethiopia in the 1980s when hundreds of thousands died from famine. Toby Lanzer, the UN official coordinating humanitarian aid in South Sudan says "we're in a race against time."

Aside from the urgent immediate need, the civil war currently raging in South Sudan, which was the initial cause of the problems, the planting season is at risk and a lack of crops will further add to the already dire situation. With possibly over 4 million displaced people what is needed is food, water, shelter and protection.

Doctors Without Borders recently criticized the UN for not responding adequately to squalid conditions at the "Juba base, Tomping, where the displaced live in a low-lying area separated by a barbed-wire fence from empty dry space within the compound."

Some 21,000 people live at the camp alone.

President Obama has issued an executive order threatening sanctions against those responsible for the ongoing violence.

South Africa's former president Thabo Mbeki pointing to an inner party crisis in the country's leadership urges political parties close to the South Sudan ruling Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) to work toward resolving the conflict, claiming government's are unable to address the internal issues. A conflict between the country's president and vice-president sparked the current violence in December.

It is a very rough start for one of the world's youngest nations where a very large number of the displaced are children including thousands are orphans .Most of the refugees who have fled South Sudan are in Ethiopia.

Aid organizations that are helping South Sudan refugees:

Photo: Squalid living conditions in camp for displaced South Sudanese. Médecins Sans Frontières.

Greek unions hold 24-hour general strike against austerity

Thu, 10 Apr 2014 14:41:00 +0000

Greek unions launched a 24-hour anti-austerity general strike yesterday, halting trains and ferries, closing state hospitals and shutting down other public services.

Schools and pharmacies were closed, ships remained docked at ports, hospitals operated on emergency staff only and transport in Athens was disrupted due to the walkout.

The union Pame, which is associated with the Greek Communist Party, led a morning demonstration, while private-sector federation GSEE and its public-sector counterpart the Adedy marched through Athens in the afternoon.

The Panhellenic Federation of Railway Workers and the Panhellenic Seamen's Federation also took part in the strike.

At least 8,000 people participated in the Pame demonstration, carrying banners and chanting anti-austerity slogans.

As many again marched in the later rally to parliament, uniting thousands of striking workers, pensioners and the unemployed.

"This is our answer to the dead-end policies that have squeezed workers and made Greek people miserable," GSEE said.

"We are striking to put an end to austerity."

Unions have staged dozens of strikes since Greece's first bailout in 2010, saying the measures prescribed by the European Union and the International Monetary Fund have hit the poor and worsened the country's six-year recession.

Five general strikes were staged last year.

The unions called yesterday's strike to protest against a government's plan to fire at least 11,000 public servants this year.

Nearly 4,000 state workers have already lost their jobs.

Smaller protests took place in Thessaloniki, Patras and the capital of Crete.

"Today's strike is being held for the working class to respond decisively ... to the measures the government is deciding against workers' rights, to the problems of poverty, unemployment, the abolition of collective wage agreements," said Pame member Giorgos Pondikos, who was among the protesters on the earlier march.

The austerity measures, which range from repeated tax rises to salary and pension cuts, have been demanded by creditors in exchange for bailout loans totaling €240 billion ($333.4).

Greeks have lost about a third of their disposable income since the debt crisis started and unemployment has soared, leaving 28 per cent of people without a job.

Reposted from Morning Star

Photo: Protesters chant anti-austerity slogans at a rally in the northern Greek port city of Thessaloniki, April 9. (AP Photo/Nikolas Giakoumidis)

Venezuela crisis is different this time, mostly

Wed, 09 Apr 2014 14:45:00 +0000

Opponents of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro's socialist-inclined government have been in the streets and causing disturbances since earlier February. The course of events differs considerably from earlier campaigns directed at the "Bolivarian" governments of Maduro and President Hugo Chavez, Maduro's predecessor who died last year.

This time an orchestrated campaign of hoarding, price-gouging, and currency manipulation set the stage for the outburst. By contrast, the failed coup attempt against Chavez in April 2002 and the following series of protests and attacks on infrastructure before and after elections seemed to come out of the blue.

The unprecedented nature of the confrontation underway now is readily apparent as the process evolves. Its two-month duration is striking. So too is the toll of victims, 39 dead and over 600 wounded. The most remarkable feature of what's happening, however, is criminality.

Take, for example: burning the Housing Ministry and putting the lives of 200 workers at risk; vandalizing the Public Ministry (the federal prosecutor's office), also in Caracas; cutting down 5,000 trees to make barricades; setting most of the 300 recent forest fires; 60 masked men ransacking the Environmental Ministry in Tachira; destroying Park Service facilities and equipment at the cost of $1.68 million; burning health centers, buses, and electrical substations; charging motorists tolls for bypassing barricades; stringing wire close to barricades that, unseen, injures or kills passing motorcyclists; men marching onto a university campus, brandishing Molotov cocktails and sticks, beating students, and pouring gasoline onto rescue ambulances; and, lastly, the random drive-by shooting death of Nancy Pastora Ruíz de Ortega in Valencia. She was standing in line at a government-subsidized food market. Shooters wounded four others.

The picture is reminiscent of earlier historical junctures when opposition forces, short on unity and unprepared to make good on political programming, turned to chaos. It's the way of fascism.

Likewise in contrast to earlier confrontational situations, Venezuela's government is promoting dialogue. President Maduro since late February has reiterated a call for a "National Peace Conference." Regional peace conferences have taken place. On April 4, Maduro announced plans for a National Council for Human Rights aimed at investigating accusations of human rights abuses. And he proposed to the United States a bi-national commission "to promote peace and respect."

International organizations have weighed in this time. Responding to a Venezuelan government invitation, the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) sent a delegation of foreign ministers on two occasions to evaluate and make recommendations, most recently on April 7-8. The diplomats called for "commitment to respect all human rights," and for peace talks. The United Nations office in Venezuela commended the government's efforts to lessen hostilities. In early March, the Organization of American States, responding to a call from U.S. ally Panama, issued a statement expressing solidarity with the government, condemning violence, and rejecting intervention against Venezuela.

Then there is Venezuela's western frontier: developments there are now playing into the crisis. In fact, anti-Chavez voting patterns have long characterized the western regions of Táchira, Mérida, Carabobo, Nueva Esparta, and Zulia. The first outbreaks of protests in early February took place in Tachira and Merida, in addition to wealthy districts of Caracas.

The region features a history of separatist agitation and past experience of Colombian paramilitaries crossing into Venezuela, usually on drug-trafficking missions or, in past plots to remove President Chavez. Thus on April 3 President Maduro denounced a rightist plan "for separating several states of the Republic from Venezuela." Maduro read from a document which noted that "Fusion with Colombia is not to be rejected."

Colombian paramilitaries reportedly once more are crossing into Venezuela, taking part in "bloody confrontations," cutting down trees for barricades, and planning to destroy an electrical substation in Tachira. Television news commentator José Vicente Rangel, citing military intelligence sources, claimed 200 paramilitaries were waiting in Colombia's Norte de Santander Department to cross.

Zulia is special. That small state in Venezuela's extreme northwest accounts for 9 percent of Venezuela's crude oil reserves, mainly in and around Lake Maracaibo. The potential is for 70 more years of extraction. Separatism has thrived there. The group "Our Own Course" and ex-Governor Manuel Rosales led that cause. Living in exile now, Rosales opposed Chavez in the 2006 presidential elections.

Official U.S. government statements and congressional maneuverings in favor of economic sanctions suggest gratification among U.S. leaders that Venezuela's government is in trouble. Opposition demonstrations verging on the criminal, to which shortages, inflation, and President Hugo Chavez' loss are added, do take on unprecedented seriousness. What is invariable, however, in this scenario and earlier ones is U.S. intervention. That's why for outsiders a big part of the story henceforth must be anti-imperialist resistance from any quarter, especially from within the United States and from the international community - as well as within Venezuela.

Photo: An anti-government protester burns a motorcycle belonging to the Bolivarian National Police in the Altamira neighborhood of Caracas, Venezuela, March 31, 2014. Alejandro Cegarra/AP

Continental drift: a slew of European breakaways

Wed, 09 Apr 2014 12:57:00 +0000

"Happy families are all alike: every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

- Leo Tolstoy, "Anna Karenina"

The opening to Tolstoy's great novel of love and tragedy could be a metaphor for Europe today, where "unhappy families" of Catalans, Scots, Belgians, Ukrainians, and Italians contemplate divorcing the countries they are currently a part of. And in a case where reality mirrors fiction, they are each unhappy in their own way.

While the U.S. and its allies may rail against the recent referendum in the Crimea that broke the peninsula free of Ukraine, Scots will consider a very similar one on Sept. 18, and Catalans would very much like to do the same. So would residents of South Tyrol, and Flemish speakers in northern Belgium.

On the surface, many of these secession movements look like rich regions trying to free themselves from poor ones, but, while there is some truth in that, it is overly simplistic. Wealthier Flemish speakers in northern Belgium would indeed like to separate from the distressed, French speaking south, just as Tyroleans would like to free themselves of poverty-racked southern Italians. But in Scotland much of the fight is over preserving the social contract that conservative Labour and right-wing Tory governments have systematically dismantled. As for Catalonia - well, it's complicated.

Borders in Europe may appear immutable, but of course they are not. Sometimes they are changed by war, economic necessity, or because the powerful draw capricious lines that ignore history and ethnicity. The Crimea, conquered by Catherine the Great in 1783, was arbitrarily given to the Ukraine in 1954. Belgium was the outcome of a congress of European powers in 1830. Impoverished Scotland tied itself to wealthy England in 1707. Catalonia fell to Spanish and French armies in 1714. And South Tyrol was a spoil of World War I.

In all of them, historical grievance, uneven development, and ethnic tensions have been exacerbated by a long-running economic crisis. There is nothing like unemployment and austerity to fuel the fires of secession.

The two most pressing - and the ones most likely to have a profound impact on the rest of Europe - are Scotland and Catalonia.

Both are unhappy in different ways.

Scotland always had a vocal, albeit marginal, nationalist party, but was traditionally dominated by the British Labour Party. The Conservatives hardly exist north of the Tweed. But Tony Blair's "New Labour" Party's record of spending cuts and privatization alienated many Scots, who spend more on their education and health services than the rest of Britain. University tuition, for instance, is still free in Scotland, as are prescription drugs and home health care.

When Conservatives won the British election in 2010, their austerity budget savaged education, health care, housing subsidies, and transportation. Scots, angered at the cuts, voted for the Scottish National Party (SNP) in the 2011 elections for the Scottish parliament.

The SNP immediately proposed a referendum that will ask Scots if they want to dissolve the 1707 Act of Union and once again become be an independent country. If passed, the Scottish government proposes re-nationalizing the postal service and throwing nuclear-armed Trident submarines out of Scotland.

If one takes into account its North Sea oil resources, there is little doubt but that an independent Scotland would be viable. Scotland has a larger GDP per capita than France and, in addition to oil, exports manufactured goods and whisky. Scotland would become one of the world's top 35 exporting countries.

The Conservative government says that, if the Scots vote for independence, they will have to give up the pound as a currency. The Scots respond that, if the British follow through on their currency threat, Scotland will wash its hands of its portion of the British national debt. At this point, there is a standoff.

According to the British - and some leading officials in the European Union (EU) - an independent Scotland will lose its EU membership, but that may be bluster. For one, it would violate past practice. When East and West Germany were united in 1990, some 20 million residents of the former German Democratic Republic were automatically given EU citizenship. If 5.3 million Scots are excluded, it will be the result of pique, not policy. In any case, with the Conservatives planning a referendum in 2017 that might pull Britain out of the EU, London is not exactly holding the high ground on this issue.

If the vote were taken today, the Scots would probably vote to remain in Britain, but sentiment is shifting. The most recent poll indicates that 40 percent will vote for independence, a 3 percent increase. The "no" votes have declined by 2 percent to 45 percent, with 15 percent undecided. All Scottish residents over the age of 16 can vote. Given the formidable campaigning skills of Alex Salmond, Scotland's first minister, and leader of the SNP, those are chilling odds for the London government.

Catalonia, wedged up against France in Spain's northeast, has long been a powerful engine for the Spanish economy, and a region steeped in historical grievance. Conquered by the combined armies of France and Spain in the War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1714), it was also on the losing side of the 1936-'39 Spanish Civil War. In 1940, triumphant fascists suppressed the Catalan language and culture and executed its president, Lluis Companys, an act no Madrid government has ever made amends for.

Following Franco's death in 1975, Spain began its transformation to democracy, a road constructed by burying the deep animosities engendered by the Civil War. But the dead stay buried only so long, and a movement for Catalan independence began to grow.

In 2006 Catalonia won considerable autonomy, which was then overturned by the Supreme Tribunal in 2010 at the behest of the current ruling conservative Popular Party (PP). That 2010 decision fueled the growth of the Catalan independence movement, and in 2012 separatist parties in the province were swept into power.

Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy's PP is pretty much an afterthought - 19 out of 135 seats - in Catalonia where several independence parties dominate the Catalan legislature. The largest of these is Province President Artur Mas's Convergencia i Unio (CiU), but the Esquerra Republicana de Cataluyna (ERC) doubled its representation in the legislature.

That doesn't mean they agree with one another. Mas's party tends to be centrist to conservative, while the ERC is leftist and opposed to the austerity program of the PP, some of which Mas has gone along with. The CiU's centrism is one of the reasons that Mas's party went from 62 seats to 50 in the 2012 election, while the ERC jumped from 10 to 21.

Unemployment in Spain is officially at 25 percent - but far higher among youth and in southern provinces - and the Left has thrown down the gauntlet. Over 100,000 people marched on Madrid last month demanding an end to austerity.

Rajoy - citing the 1976 constitution - refuses to allow an independence referendum, a stubbornness that has only fueled separatist strength. This past January the Catalan parliament voted 87 to 43 to hold a referendum, and polls show a majority in the province will support it. Six months ago, a million and a half Catalans marched in Barcelona for independence.

The PP has been altogether ham-fisted about Catalonia and seems to delight in finding things to provoke Catalans: Catalonia bans bullfighting, so Madrid passes a law making it a national cultural heritage. The Basques get to collect their own taxes, Catalans cannot.

How would the EU react to an independent Catalan? And would the central government in Madrid do anything about it? It is hard to imagine the Spanish army getting involved, although a former minister in the Franco government started Rajoy's party, and the dislike between Madrid and Barcelona is palpable.

There are other fault lines on the continent.

Will Belgium split up? The fissure between the Flemish-speaking north and the French-speaking south is so deep it took 18 months to form a government after the last election. And if Belgium shatters, does it become two countries or get swallowed by France and the Netherlands?

In Italy, the South Tyrol Freedom Party (STFP) is gearing up for an independence referendum and pressing for a merger with Austria, although the tiny province - called Alto Adige in Italy - has little to complain about. It keeps 90 percent of its taxes, and its economy has dodged the worst of the 2008 meltdown. But some of its German-Austrian residents are resentful of any money going to Rome, and there is a deep prejudice against Italians - who make up 25 percent of South Tyrol - particularly among those in the south. In this way the STFP is not very different than the racist, elitist Northern League centered in Italy's Po Valley.

It is instructive to watch the YouYube video on how borders in Europe have changed from 1519 to 2006, a period of less than 500 years. What we think of as eternal is ephemeral. The European continent is once again adrift, pulling apart along fault lines both ancient and modern. How nations like Spain and Britain, and organizations like the EU, react to this process will determine if it will be civilized or painful. But trying to stop it will most certainly cause pain.

This article was originally posted at the author's blog, Dispatches From the Edge.

Photo: More than one million people (from Catalonia's total of 7 million inhabitants) demonstrated in Barcelona demanding national identity and independence from Spain, July 10, 2010. SBA 73/Flickr CC