People Before Profit blog

Greece: A nation with its back to the wall?

Tue, 31 May 2011 16:54:00 +0000

In an omen of things to come to other poorer countries of Western Europe, the Greek government of George Papandreou, of the center-left Pan Hellenic Socialist Party (PASOK), finds itself trapped between the intransigence of its creditors, to whom it owes an amount estimated at 150 percent of the Greek gross domestic product, and public anger at plummeting living standards.

A Der Spiegel report says that an auditing team of European and international lending agencies has found that Greece has not succeeded in meeting any of the goals set as conditions for a $157 billion bailout last March. Greece is due to receive a major payment on the bailout by June, but if the goals have not been met, this money will not be delivered. The Greek government denies that it has not met the goals.

If the goals are not met, Greece will not be able to raise further credits to pay its bills. Meanwhile, massive demonstrations continue in Syntagma Square, in front of the Parliament in Athens. The demonstrations were initiated by the Greek Communist Party, other left groups and labor unions, but are now getting an extra boost from the kind of youth-focused, social media mobilizations which recently have produced such impressive results in Egypt, Tunisia and Spain. Protesters oppose austerity and privatization measures that the government has been implementing, while also demanding jobs.

Among the demands is for the debt to be paid down by higher taxes on the rich. Participation of Greece in the Euro currency zone is seen as part of the problem by many, because it means that Greece as a sovereign state cannot work its way out of its difficulties by measures such as devaluing its currency, which would attract more tourists and make Greek exports more attractive.

Last week, the Greek government, which has not been able to get either the left- or right-wing opposition to support its austerity program, suggested that a restructuring of the country's debt might be a partial solution. Such a restructuring would mean reducing payments to creditors and stretching them out over a longer period of time.

But the "troika" of international and European institutions that have been pressing Greece to carry out even more drastic austerity and privatization measures, consisting of the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund, appears to be firmly opposed to such restructuring.

A drastic solution would be for Greece to exercise the "Argentine option" of stiffing its creditors and going it alone, perhaps even withdrawing from the Euro currency. Argentina was in worse shape than Greece when the late Nestor Kirchner was elected president in 2001. Kirchner, from the left-wing of the Justicialist (Peronist) Party, allowed his country to default on its international debts in 2003, using the money that would otherwise have gone to pay off foreign banks and speculators to build up the living standards, and purchasing power, of the Argentine people. The result of this policy was a sharp increase in Argentina's economic fortunes, which are still on the upswing. And in the end the IMF had to back down and accept restructuring of the Argentine debt.

In an interesting exchange, Nobel Prize winning economics columnist Paul Krugman and Mark Weisbrot of the Center for Economic and Policy Research have discussed the possibility of Greece taking the Argentine option of defaulting, and also of dropping out of the Euro currency. One objection Krugman raises is that in Argentina in 2003, the national currency was still in circulation, where as the Greek drachma has long since been replaced by the Euro. However, Weisbrot thinks that the fact that Greece is a much wealthier country than Argentina would make up for the difficulty of dumping the Euro and returning to the drachma.

Greece is one of a growing list of poorer European countries whose dream of reaching wealth and stability through integration with their wealthier neighbors is turning into a nightmare. Others include Portugal, Ireland, Italy and Spain, with Iceland, Belgium and Finland perhaps also in trouble. These countries were enticed into joining the European Union and the Euro currency by promises that every effort would be made to raise them to the same level of prosperity as France, Germany and Britain. Now this is breaking down, and the poorer European Union countries may be finding themselves trapped in an unequal relationship in which their sovereign rights are preempted by wealthier countries and by European and international banking elites.

For Greece to thumb its nose at these elites and win would set a precedent for many other nations.

Image: Greek demonstration against austerity measures. Christina Kekka // CC 2.0

Police riot in Barcelona

Tue, 31 May 2011 14:48:00 +0000

On Friday, Mossos d'Escuadra, as the Catalan autonomous regional police are called, broke up a demonstration in Barcelona's beautiful Plaza Catalunya. The action has led to calls for the resignation of the center-right government of Catalonia, and has gained the vocal solidarity of demonstrators in the rest of Spain and beyond.

The May 15 Movement has been carrying out sit-ins in the Plaza del Sol in Madrid and in dozens of other major and minor cities in Spain. The mostly youthful protestors, who coordinate their activities through Twitter and other social media and thus have been able to approach the massive turnouts which led to the fall of the governments of Tunisia and Egypt earlier this year, are protesting austerity measures being imposed by the government of Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero (of the Socialist Workers' Party of Spain, the country's social democrats) as a response to demands from the European Central Bank, the European Union and Spain's own ruling class.

In the case of Catalonia, which under the Spanish constitution has a great deal of autonomy, the protests got the goat of the right wing government of Catalan President Artur Mas and Catalan Interior Minister Felip Puig, both of the center-right Convergencia i Union Party, and other officials.

On Friday, the Mossos d'Escuadra were sent to clear out the Plaza Catalunya where demonstrators had vowed to continue their sit-in encampment against the austerity measures, with the pretext that the space had to be cleaned up for other activities. However, it is clear from video footage of what ensued that the police came expecting a fight, and, finding none, charged into the mostly youthful, and entirely peaceful crowd with batons and rubber bullets.

Rather than picking up rocks and going after the police, the young people tried to appeal to them and clearly showed the peaceful nature of their protest through actions and gestures. Nevertheless, over 120 protesters were injured, though fortunately nobody was killed.

The sight of the riot-gear clad police poking and striking peaceful young demonstrators with their clubs has enraged millions in Catalonia and throughout Spain. More demonstrations are taking place in Barcelona, (where at writing the Plaza Catalunya has been re-occupied by demonstrators) and a huge rally was carried out Friday afternoon in the Puerta del Sol in Madrid.

Unions (including the one that represents the Mossos d'Escuadra) have denounced the attack on the demonstrators, as have organizations of the political left in Catalonia and all of Spain. In a press statement, the Unified Socialist Party of Catalonia (Partit Socialista Unificat de Catalunya-Viu) stated that "the PSU-Viu demands the immediate dismissal of Interior Minister Felip Piug" and called for increased demonstrations.. The Party of Catalan Communists accused the Mossos d'Escuadra of acting with "disproportionate violence" and called for the Catalan and Spanish people to continue their peaceful demonstrations. "We must stop the policy of austerity and budget cuts, as well as the subordination of the public powers to the financial markets'.

Photo: A demonstrator shows his hands covered with blood of a fellow protester as police officers try to remove them during clashes in Barcelona, May 27. Truncheon-wielding police beat protesters at a makeshift camp, one of dozens erected in Spain to protest high unemployment and other economic woes. Emilio Morenatti/AP

World Notes: Venezuela, Somalia, Fiji and more

Fri, 27 May 2011 10:00:00 +0000

Venezuela: U.S. sanctions elicit condemnation

Venezuela reacted angrily to U.S. sanctions imposed May 24 against its PDVSA oil company, aimed at Iran's nuclear energy program. PDVSA recently sent shipments of a gasoline-blending component worth $50 million to Iran. The sanctions will affect U.S. contracts and export financing with PDVSA. New U.S. sanctions against Iran, some announced earlier, also affect companies in the United Arab Emirates, Singapore, Israel, Monaco and China. Protesting "aggression against Venezuela and against OPEC," Venezuelan Oil Minister and PDVSA president Rafael Ramirez promised continued oil supplies for PDVSA's U.S. subsidiary Citgo, but hinted at retaliatory actions against other U.S. customers. PDVSA sends 45 percent of its crude oil to the United States, an amount making up 10 percent of U.S. oil imports.

Somalia: Migration signals humanitarian crisis

As the United Nations considers an air and sea blockade of Somalia to keep foreign fighters out, violence and the worst drought in decades have led to massive cross-border migration. As of mid-May, 348,605 mostly Somali people were living in Kenya at Dadaab, the world's largest refugees complex, now four times over capacity. So far this year, arrivals total 43,001 persons. Sharing space under plastic with others, families find food and especially water in short supply. Women are vulnerable to sexual assaults, reports the IRIN news agency. Camps in Northern Mozambique now shelter tens of thousands of refugees who, heading for South Africa, arrived by sea from Somalia and Ethiopia. Presently 600,000 Somalis are displaced in neighboring countries, 800,000 more within Somalia. International funding for humanitarian needs in Somalia has dropped 41 percent over two years.

Fiji: Repressive regime targets workers

The military government of Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama is preparing to impose its Critical Industries Empowerment Decree 2011. The Australian ACTU labor federation, on its website, indicates the measure would make independent trade unions illegal, end existing union agreements and deny workers' rights to choose union leaders and bargain collectively. On May 19, the ACTU demanded that Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd condemn the crushing of unions in a nation where 40 percent of the population exists on less than $1.25 per day and 40 percent are unemployed. The inspiration for the oppressive legislation, according to fijidemocracynow.org, comes from U.S. citizen David Pflieger, head of Air Pacific. The proposed decree would primarily benefit the sugar industry and airline and air terminal corporations.

Iraq: labor rights under siege

Iraqi oil workers, who are paid less than foreign workers, undertook May 17 to block foreign workers from entering the oil fields of BP and a Chinese corporation in Rumaila, those operated by Royal Dutch Shell in Majnoon and fields in Zubair, developed by Italy's ENI. A week earlier, 300 striking workers at a state-owned field in Basra returned to work after the governor agreed to discuss low pay and managers' corruption. These actions played out despite prohibitions against collective bargaining and strikes affecting most workers, left over from the Saddam Hussein era. The government in April, according to icem.org, fired leaders of the GFIW labor federation, Iraq's largest, as it prepared to take over the federation.

Turkey: Repression mounts for tobacco workers union

Last year, unionists and their supporters demonstrated for three months in support of 12,000 workers who lost jobs after privatization of the state tobacco monopoly. They'd first been offered low-pay jobs at state-owned tobacco warehouses, which never materialized. Then they were fired. Further agitation was put off pending new jobs promised by the state. Impatient, they demonstrated in Ankara on April 1, where they met with severe police repression. This month, the government announced criminal charges carrying up to five years in jail against 111 persons, including leaders of several union federations and non-union social activists. The government, says the IUF website, intends "to cripple the labor movement in Turkey by criminalizing protest action."

Cuba: UN hears denunciation of Cuban Adjustment Law

On May 19, Cuban UN Ambassador Rodolfo Benítez, speaking before a one-day UN General Assembly session on "International Migration and Development," denounced the U.S. Cuban Adjustment Act. That law, enacted in 1966, grants permanent U.S. residence to Cubans arriving without previous authorization. The U.S. purpose, according to rebelion.org, has been to portray revolutionary Cuba as a prison requiring freedom seekers to chance the dangerous sea passage to Florida to escape. National People's Power Assembly President Ricardo Alarcón noted previously, "The United States is the only country with two immigration laws, one for the whole world and one just for Cubans." Recently, the Cuban government announced preparation of measures that would ease its citizens' travel to other countries as tourists.

Left humbled in Indian state elections

Wed, 25 May 2011 16:55:00 +0000

NEW DELHI - Thirty-four years of Left Front state governments in West Bengal ended on May 13, after the Communist-led coalition lost its eighth bid for re-election. The Left Front was first elected in 1977, and re-elected six consecutive times, until this year.

Left leaders said voters had a deep desire for change, and the parties would make a comprehensive analysis of the loss.

The victor is Mamata Banerjee of the Trinamool Congress winning 226 seats out of 294 total. The Left Front won only 62 seats, and its chief minister, Buddhadeb Bhattacharya, lost his district.

Banerjee has been sworn in as West Bengal's chief minister, resigning her post as federal railways minister. While Banerjee broke with the ruling Congress Party and set up an opposition group, she is allied with the Congress at the federal level.

What seemed to anger the voters the most was the inept way the state government attempted to procure land for industrial development. In 2007, the government tried to expropriate land to develop a chemical hub. Opposition developed from legitimate concerns, and anti-Communist forces fueled the issue as well.

Violence seriously escalated when the state government sent in thousands of police to the village of Nandigram in March 2007. Fourteen villagers and one policeman were killed.

Banerjee and other opposition forces, including Maoists, organized around the government's use of force and built a successful anti-Communist movement. A list of about 400 slain Communists from Maoist violence was sent to the federal government.

The ruling Congress party joined with Banerjee to defeat the Left Front, which is led by Communist Party of India - Marxist. India's monopoly capitalists, anxious to get favorable returns on their investments in the fourth largest Indian state, willingly lent a helping hand. The stock market zoomed with news of Banerjee's motley coalition.

(Indian corporate giant, Tata, had planned to develop an industrial site to produce its nano-car, but that scheme failed as well when farmers refused to give up land, despite the government's high compensation offers. Tata took its investment to another state.)

Land reform, establishment of trade union rights, education and literacy programs, and commitment to grassroots democratic participation through local governing councils called panchayats are the hallmark of Left rule in West Bengal. There are no big landowners in the state, and it has one of the lowest infant mortality rates in India.

Despite the accomplishments, voters wanted change, and jobs, as the Indian economy has boomed.

But observers say newly-elected Banerjee will have a harder time governing than campaigning.

"She is an unlikely figure now to persuade farmers they must, after all, give up scarce land to industry," writes The Economist.

And the violence continues post-election, already eight Communist activists have been killed, despite Banerjee's victory and calls for "restraint," writes the conservative UK-based magazine.

Banerjee found common cause with the Maoists, and even admits that "people in the Maoist belts voted for us to restore democracy in their areas." Yet, many say, it is harder to end the violence, than start it. The instability will further turn off possible investors and stymie job creation.

Banerjee's victory may also be a headache for her partners in the Congress Party, since her party won a majority on her own and will not need their seats to form a government.

The bad news for the left didn't stop at West Bengal's borders. In the South Indian state of Kerala, the Communist-led Left Democratic Front also lost re-election, but by a much closer vote than West Bengal.

The main opposition, the Congress-led United Democratic Front, squeaked out a victory over the LDF. The UDF stitched together a majority coalition with the Indian Union Muslim League and a Christian party called Kerala Congress-Mani, putting the new government at 72 seats out of the 140 total.

Since 1957, the Communist-led Front has alternated between winning and losing power. It never had a 34-year consecutive stretch like in West Bengal.

It's to the credit of Kerala's outgoing Communist chief minister, V.S. Achuthanandan, 87, and his extreme popularity that the LDF gave a tight race. Pre-election surveys placed 65% of voters agreeing that his government has done very well in the last five years, and he was called the "best chief minister of any state of India." But opposition managed to eek out a one percent gain in the vote, especially using the "religion card," according to the Left's leaders. Achu will head the LDF opposition.

Not all state election news was bad for Left.

In another southern state, Tamil Nadu, the incumbent government, an ally of Congress Party, was rousted by a coalition that included Communist parties. Voters wanted change there too. The ruling party's leader was ensconced in a huge corruption scandal with the telecoms running in billions of dollars. Popular former actress Jayaram Jayalalitha heads the new government.

Photo: From left to right are the three chief ministers of Kerala, Tripura and West Bengal, attending a 2008 Communist Party of India-Marxist rally in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu. (Teresa Albano/PW)

CORRECTION: In a previous version of the article it mentioned the victory of the Left Front in Tripura. That victory was not during this state election cycle but two years ago.

Colombian court blocks witch-hunts

Wed, 25 May 2011 15:34:00 +0000

Colombia's Supreme Judicial Court issued a writ of prohibition on May 18 in the case of former Congressman Wilson Borja, ending investigation and potential prosecution on allegations he had connections with the leftist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). "After that decision," former prosecutor Alfonso Gómez Méndez told AFP news, "the information from those computers can not be used in any other judicial proceeding." He was referring to files contained in computers belonging to FARC leader Raul Reyes seized by the Colombian military on March 1, 2008, in Ecuador. The so-called "magical computers" withstood a Colombian air and ground attack that killed Reyes, other guerrillas, and visiting Mexican students.

Within months, dozens of government opponents, journalists, unionists, political leaders, and officeholders were being investigated, Borja included. They have been subjected to judicial hearings. Charges they face center on "rebellion" and association with terrorists, specifically leftist insurgencies. Uniformly, the victims have called for a political solution to armed conflict in Colombia. Many, like Borja, work with the left coalition Alternative Democratic Pole (POLO). In the midst of anti-terrorist frenzy, both Borja and peace movement leader Piedad Cordoba lost seats in the Congress and Senate respectively.

What observers refer to as a witch-hunt swept up TeleSUR journalist William Parra, Communist Party newspaper editor Carlos Lozano, POLO Senator Gloria Ramirez (already absolved through court action), and peace protagonist and former presidential candidate Álvaro Leyva Durán. Unionist Liliany Obando and academician Miguel Beltran ended up in jail. The computer revelations led to the Venezuelan and Ecuadorian governments being identified as FARC accomplices.

The Supreme Court based its ruling on the state's inability to establish a judicially competent chain of custody for laptops remaining in military rather than law enforcement hands for three days after their seizure. In 2008, the International Police Organization INTERPOL reasoned similarly in discounting the reliability of the computer-generated evidence. The court made no reference to earlier testimony from Police Captain Ronald Coy that the computer files in question were word documents, not emails, thereby susceptible to manipulation, which Coy admitted to.

The FARC computer files have long held sway in the Colombian media. They allowed El Tiempo, for example, to report on April 25 that "the FARC ambassador in Europe" had arrived in Bogota. It was a reference to journalist Joaquin Perez Becerra, a Colombian-born Swedish citizen, who had arrived in Venezuela from Germany two days earlier. He was seized on order of Venezuela President Hugo Chavez at the request of Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos, who wanted him jailed.

In 1993, when Perez Becerra fled Colombia to save his life, he was serving as a city councilor in Valle del Cauca. He had won election as a candidate of the leftist Patriotic Union (UP) coalition whose members have been slaughtered, then and since, mostly by paramilitaries tolerated by the Colombian state. The toll so far is 5,000 deaths.

As the latest victim of persecution fueled by Raul Reyes' computer files, Perez Becerra now has defenders worldwide, as indicated by Internet traffic, demonstrations on his behalf, and open letters. They invoke press freedom, because in Sweden Perez Becerra edited the leftist ANNCOL (News Agency for the New Colombia) website. They fear for his life because, having survived the UP massacre, he is again in the hands of the Colombian state. But, as reporter Dick Emanuelsson suggests, "If the decision of the Supreme Judicial Court takes effect, the Swedish journalist could soon fly off to Sweden to join up with family and friends."

Meanwhile, Wilson Borja, vindicated, is planning to seek legal satisfaction from ex Attorney General Mario Iguarán, the Colombian state, and the media.

Iran rulers sharpen knives as economy bleeds

Wed, 25 May 2011 14:46:00 +0000

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's six years as president of Iran have been characterized by many things, one of which has been the personal idiosyncrasies of the president himself. In April the president disappeared from office for a full 11 days after his decision to fire intelligence minister Heydar Moslehi was overturned by Ayotollah Khamenei. Having fired Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki in December last year, in spite of Mottaki being a favorite of Khamenei, it is clear that Ahmadinejad thought that he had a free hand in re-shaping his government.

Of course there can be no such freedom under the theocratic system in Iran where the Supreme Religious Leader has the final veto. The extent of presidential power is still reliant on the support of the religious zealots at the heart of Iran's power structures. Undeterred, Ahmadinejad recently attempted to streamline his Cabinet with the merger of eight ministries into four. While the move was formally blocked by Khamenei, assisted by parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani, Ahmadinejad has nevertheless sacked three ministers and taken temporary control of the oil ministry.

Needless to say this move has been unpopular in the Iranian parliament and has meant that Ahmadinejad is on a collision course with both the parliament and the religious establishment.

With the presidential election only two years away, and Ahmadinejad unable to run again, much of the current activity is about positioning for the 2013 vote. It is widely believed that Ahmadinejad's preferred successor is his current chief of staff Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei. However, Mashaei is deeply unpopular with the religious establishment because of his views on the importance of promoting pre-Islamic Persian history as part of the culture of Iran, suggesting that the country should be an "Iranian republic" rather than an "Islamic Republic."

Such talk is seen as the precursor to reducing the role of the clergy in the constitution to a largely symbolic one, with increased powers for the presidency. While on the surface Mashaei's position has the veneer of modernity he is nevertheless a deeply conservative politician. His current positioning is widely seen as an attempt to woo those disaffected by the outcome of the 2009 election, by positioning himself as a modernizing voice within the Iranian system.

Whether Mashaei gets to test his views with the voters remains to be seen however. In recent weeks at least 25 people close to the president and Mashaei have been arrested by the security forces and are facing charges ranging from revolutionary "deviancy" to espionage. To add to his increasing isolation, Ahmadinejad's spiritual mentor Ayotollah Mesbah Yazdi recently distanced himself from the president, suggesting that Ahmadinejad had been "bewitched" by Mashaei. It has even been suggested that the president's power base in the Revolutionary Guard is under threat due to his perceived challenges to the current system.

Given the role that the Revolutionary Guard played in both the rigging of the 2009 election in Ahmadinejad's favor and the subsequent crackdown on demonstrators, it would seriously undermine the president's position if their support were to be withdrawn. Quoted in the Washington Post recently, Suzanne Maloney, an Iranian affairs expert at the Brookings Institute in Washington, said:

"The Revolutionary Guard is interested in the defense of the system rather than the defense of an individual. It would never sacrifice itself or its influence to stand by anyone seen as challenging the system. Ahmadinejad has cast himself in that role."

With parliamentary elections scheduled for early 2012 there will be some opportunity to test the political water before the presidential vote. Ahmadinejad will be looking to strengthen his position in the parliament but will face an uphill struggle given the negative impact of his economic reforms upon huge sections of the population. Also, the fact that he is in clear dispute with the Supreme Leader will mean that traditionally conservative voters may think twice before backing candidates who support the president.

Ahmadinejad has bolstered his position by having members of his family and close circle in key government ministries and by awarding them lucrative contracts for economic projects, notably the multi-billion-dollar oil and gas pipeline to India and Pakistan. The president will also be watching closely the health of the Supreme Leader. Khamenei is 72 years old and not in the best of health. A power vacuum in the clergy may be Ahmadinejad's best opportunity to consolidate his position.

While the political moves are played out in Iran's ruling circles the economy continues to be in freefall and the lives of the Iranian people remain characterized by unemployment, inflation and uncertainty. The removal of subsidies on fuel, food and other daily essentials has led to unrest, with labor protests recently over delayed salary payments and rising unemployment. This is where the hope for the Iranian people lies, in their own hands. Action by the people in Egypt and Tunisia is showing what is possible. Iran's leaders are well aware that, for all their maneuvering, the people may yet decide the election outcomes in ways that are not to the liking of the establishment.

Photo: A bas relief at the ancient Persian ruins in Persepolis, Iran. indigoprime CC 2.0

Right and left gain in Spain elections

Wed, 25 May 2011 13:48:00 +0000

On Sunday, May 22, the ruling Socialist Workers' Party of Spain, the country's social democrats, took a severe beating in regional and local elections, while the right-wing People's Party surged ahead. Communists, starting from a small base, also picked up a significant number of votes and seats. Meanwhile, demonstrators who have been sitting in at Madrid's Plaza del Sol and other public places throughout the nation vowed to continue their protests against austerity measures that are being imposed on Spain in the context of Europe's worsening financial and economic crisis.

Spain has been plagued by severe unemployment (now at 21 percent) since the 2008 world financial crisis, although its budget is not as far in the red as are those of the other poor Western European countries, known as PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain).

Under pressure from the European Union and the Central Bank of Europe, the Socialst Workers government of Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero has been implementing severe austerity measures, which include 5 percent cuts in public employees' pay, an end to cost of living adjustments of pensions, and the elimination or cutback of aid to regional and local governments, among others. Unfortunately many of these things exacerbate the unemployment problem.

As in the other PIIGS countries, austerity and privatization have led to public protests by unions, students and other sectors. Over the days leading up to Sunday's elections, tens of thousands of people have converged for a massive protest at the Plaza del Sol, the main central plaza of Madrid, right next to Spain's royal palace. Demands have been for a rescinding of the austerity measures, on pain of losing votes. Ordered to leave on the pretext that public political agitation is not allowed in Spain right before elections, the demonstrators refused, and other similar demonstrations have arisen all over Spain. The protestors have vowed to continue these "May 15" protests beyond the elections.

Spain's multiple communist parties have taken different stances toward the protests, which are heterogeneous in social origin and therefore sometimes confused in their messages. The Communist Party of Spain and the Communist Party of Catalonia hailed the demonstrations and urged their members to support them. The Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain, however, has withheld its support.

In the event, on Election Day, the governing Socialist Workers took a drubbing, losing to the People's Party and its right-wing allies in all provincial governments and most local ones. The popular vote went 38 percent to the rightists and 28 percent to the socialists, a sharp change from the 2007 regional and local elections, in which the People's Party had a slight advantage, and from the 2008 parliamentary elections, won narrowly by the socialists. Losses included such former Socialist Workers strongholds as the city of Barcelona, which the social democrats and Catalan allies had ruled for many years. The United Left, which unites the Communist Party of Spain with smaller left-wing groups, advanced, raising its popular vote total to 6.33 percent, compared to 5.48 percent in 2007, and picked up 200 municipal council seats and 12 provincial ones. However, they lost their control of the city of Cordoba in Andalusia to the right. A new left-wing Basque nationalist party, BILDU, also advanced, gaining 18 new municipal council seats out of 83 in the historically Basque provinces of Bilbao, San Sebastian and Vitoria, plus three out of 27 in Pamplona, in spite of government attempts to prohibit it, which were based on accusations of connections to the armed Basque guerilla organization ETA.

Seeing their opportunity, People's Party leaders immediately asked for a vote of confidence in parliament, hoping to force an early national election that otherwise would not be due until next year. Prime Minister Rodriguez Zapatero had announced before the elections that he would not run for reelection.

The Spanish scenario is similar to that of Greece and Portugal, economically beleaguered countries also ruled by social democrats. Pressure from their own ruling classes, from the European Union and its wealthier countries, the European Central Bank and the IMF leads these social democratic governments to implement austerity programs, slashing social welfare programs that they themselves had introduced many years ago. This leads to massive labor and social protests.

The communist parties and their allies grow and advance electorally, but do not have the numbers to force the social democrats to back away from austerity or to form socialist-communist electoral blocs and governing coalitions, let alone to take power themselves. The right then moves into the vacuum, taking advantage of anger with the social-democratic governments in power, in spite of the fact that, after all, the social democratic governments are only enforcing policies that the right itself has always advocated.

How to break this pattern is the great problem now to be tackled by the European left.

Photo: Pamphlet from the United Left electoral alliance.

Winners and losers in Bremen elections

Wed, 25 May 2011 11:47:00 +0000

Berlin - For many people in the U.S. whose ancestors came from northern or eastern Europe there's a good chance their ship left from the German city of Bremen or its adjunct Bremerhaven. For World War II veterans who were part of the U.S. occupation army in Germany, the chances are even better that they arrived via Bremerhaven and Bremen, as I did.

Today in Bremen, most shipyards are a thing of the past and it is struggling to climb out of its heavy debt as a container port. Bremen is both the smallest German state and the poorest of the former West German area. Its heavily working class population has made it a stronghold of the Social Democratic Party, without interruption, from the very beginning.

The May 22 election was true to that tradition. Nobody was surprised that the SDP got 38.1 percent of the vote and will keep the same mayor. Nor were many eyebrows raised at the big gains of the Greens. Shutting down reactors has always been a main Green talking point, and ironically the Greens are now riding on a huge popularity wave since the Japanese nuclear power plant disaster alarmed Germans.

Greens, though aging a bit around the edges, and no longer the radicals they once were, still appeal with their informality to young people. Since Bremen gave the right to vote this year to 16 and 17-year-old teenagers (the first and only such attempt in state elections) this also helped the Green party to gain an increase of over 6 points for a grand total of 23 percent.

The election results were a bitter disappointments for those two parties which form the federal government. Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union got its worst result in years, with 21.5 percent, which put them, almost incredibly, behind the Greens in third place.

What about their national partners, the big-business supporters, the Free Democratic Party (also known here, strangely enough, as the "Liberals"!). For weeks they got top media coverage when they threw out their leader of ten years Westerwelle in favor of the charismatic young Philip Rösler, of Vietnamese birth but German upbringing. In one clever speech after another, Rösler claimed his party would finally move out of the doldrums. And what happened? It stayed in the doldrums, getting only 3 percent and thus not a single seat in the city-state legislature. All the happy PR effort seems to have been in vain, while party leaders, forcing a smile, say "Just wait for the next election!"

Thus the national ruling parties both lost out in Bremen, reflecting growing dissatisfaction. Exports may be doing well, the banks again handing out 6 and 7 digit bonuses to their happy bosses, and even joblessness is officially easing. But low-paid, part-time, precarious jobs have multiplied and the social network is sagging sadly, with Merkel now proposing to raise retirement age to 69 even before it has been fully raised to 67. And Bremen has far more than its share of the underemployed and jobless.

But in the past both Social Democrats and the Greens, when in opposition on the national level, made progressive sounding noises, but once they got into office watered down their juicy promises. They helped raise the retirement age, lower taxes on the wealthy, weaken the once so exemplary medical system, make things tougher for the jobless and sent troops to Afghanistan. Both echo "Bomb Libya" slogans even though Westerwelle and Merkel refrained from joining in.

And the Greens, while stressing ecology and atomic dangers, often forget people's social needs. Some Germans say they have become a party whose members are most often high-salaried professionals.

But what about the Left Party? Four years ago Bremen was the first West German state where it cleared that 5 percent hurdle (with over 8 percent) and got into the legislature. That was the first of a happy series. But this past year has seen nothing but downturns. Recent attempts to break through in two more western states failed, it barely stayed on in Hamburg. And in Bremen?

The Left Party got close to 6 percent and 5 or 6 seats in the legislature. But this was a net loss of almost 3 percent, a lot for such a small party. What has been going wrong?

The Left Party has been subjected to media attacks or, as in Bremen, almost total silence about its election campaign. But The Left Party itself has supplied far too much ammunition, arguing, backbiting, jockeying and moving far too close to splitting.

One side in the dispute, stronger in western areas, is more militant and demands certain conditions before even considering coalitions with Greens or Social Democrats (both of whom abhor the very idea of such a coalition if at all avoidable). It wants sharper attacks again privatization of utilities and a greater stress on future anti-capitalist goals. And it wants the party program to oppose any use of German soldiers outside German borders.

The other side, far stronger in eastern Germany where it often commands 20-25 percent of the vote, hopes for a share in coalition governments, such as currently exist in the city-state of Berlin and the surrounding state of Brandenburg. To achieve this it is ready to tone down demands.

Today Germany needs a unified fight to improve conditions for all those people, many of them children, who face poverty here and now. The Merkel government is trying to use the European Union to raise the pension age, cut vacation length and force wages down in all member countries, including Germany.

Neo-fascist parties, all specializing in Muslimophobia, are growing alarmingly all over Europe: Austria, Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Belgium, even France, Italy and England. The Left Party should be in the lead in fighting back, in concert with young people in Spain and England, working people ion Greece and Portugal (and Madison) and in the Arab world. Things are moving faster and faster, but require across-the-borders coordination and cooperation. It is urgently needed!

Photo: Karoline Linnert, top candidate of the Greens for the state elections in Bremen, celebrates victory May 22. Jens Schlueter/dapd/AP

Scientists fine-tune extinction rate projections

Mon, 23 May 2011 14:26:00 +0000

The journal Nature recently reported that modern methods of measuring animal populations are too simple and often do not take into account the complexity of what influences species numbers. Professor Stephen Hubbell, from California, and Professor Fangliang He, from China, found that existing mathematical models for measurement were flawed: present figures overestimated rates by up to 160 percent, showing that calculations must be updated and made more accurate.

Nevertheless, Hubbell maintained although species extinction caused by habitat loss is not as dire a problem as initially believed, the global extinction crisis is still a real threat.

"We are not in quite as serious trouble right now as people had thought," Hubbell told Smithsonian Science on May 18. "But that is no reason for complacency. I don't want this research to be misconstrued as saying we don't have anything to worry about." He maintained, "Nothing is further from the truth."

While there were predictions in the early 1980s that as many as half the species on Earth would be lost by the year 2000, Hubbell explained, "Nothing like that has happened. However, the next mass extinction may be upon us or just around the corner. There have been five mass extinctions in the history of the Earth, and we could be entering the sixth mass extinction."

Probably the most authoritative global assessment of species status is the Red List of Threatened Species, which is published by the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

Jean Christophe Vie, IUCN's species program deputy director, responded it was good that this was a clear effort to "get the science right," but had reservations about how people would interpret it. He acknowledged to BBC News that he was worried about how the report could be used by those who were reluctant to take environmental issues seriously.

"We have explicit details in our guidelines that to estimate extinction is not something we should do," said Vie. "For example, we know that species are not evenly distributed in ecosystems; habitat loss is not the only threat." He added that the actual concern was "the rate of decline in populations."

Addressing the issue, Hubbell cited a comparison: When a meteor struck the Earth some 65 million years ago, the Earth's tree life was incinerated, and it took about 10 million years to fully recover and redevelop into continuous, flourishing forests. Hubbell said that the extinctions humans cause might be equally catastrophic, though in different ways.

"We need much better data on the distribution of life on Earth," Hubbell said. "We need to rapidly increase our understanding of where species are on the planet. We need citizens to record their local biodiversity; there are not enough scientists to gather the information. We also need much deeper thought about how we can estimate the extinction rate properly to improve the science behind conservation planning.

"If you don't know what you have," Hubbell concludes, "it's hard to conserve it."

Photo: Wandering Skipper (Panoquina errans), a species that exists only in coastal salt marshes, with narrow requirements for life that make it vulnerable to extinction.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn scandal has international repercussions

Mon, 23 May 2011 14:06:00 +0000

The recent indictments of Dominique Strauss-Kahn on criminal sexual assault charges are widely seen, especially by women's rights organizations, as another case of powerful and wealthy men thinking they have the right to sexually exploit women in subordinate positions. The charges against Strauss-Kahn include attempted rape, sexual abuse and unlawful imprisonment of a hotel housekeeper.

Unfortunately, many corporate media reports are treating the case more as a matter to titillate their audience than as a serious story to explain. Strauss-Kahn, like anybody, is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. And the accuser also has rights, which should be respected.

The incident has wide political implications. In the first place, Strauss-Kahn, a French citizen who is head of the International Monetary Fund since 2007, was being talked up as the probable candidate of the Socialist Party in the April 2012 presidential elections in France. The poll numbers for the incumbent, rightist Nicolas Sarkozy of the Union for a Popular Movement, are rock-bottom low, so Strauss-Kahn was seen as a very likely future president.

The scandal knocks him out of the running, and it remains to be seen whether any other Socialist Party politician can win.

Some in France have suggested Sarkozy operatives are behind this case. This is far-fetched. But it is certainly true that for the moment, the scandal has probably helped either Sarkozy or the leader of the far-right National Front Party, Marine Le Pen.

The French Communist Party, in a statement on its website, pointed out that rape is a serious crime and that the U.S. justice system should do its job. The party also said the French people have very important political issues to deal with and should not allow themselves to be distracted by a sleazy scandal.

It is possible that the fall of Strauss-Kahn may have a worldwide impact on the IMF.

The IMF and World Bank were established in 1944 as a result of an international conference at Bretton Woods, N.H. The IMF eventually became a major source of development aid, especially for poorer countries.

However, the IMF has always, by design, been dominated by wealthy European countries plus the United States. Votes on the IMF governing board are allotted on the basis of the size of the economies of the member countries (most countries in the world), rather than the size of their populations. Thus France, with its population of 62 million, has 107,635 votes, while India with a population of nearly 1.2 billion, has only 58,832 votes. Moreover, major decisions require an 85 percent majority, further strengthening the Euro-American hegemony.

This, along with the "tradition" that the head of the IMF must be a European, has meant that the IMF has acted as an instrument of the interests of the ruling classes of the wealthy imperialist countries. Especially after the fall of the Soviet Union and the other European socialist states, poor countries have been caught between having to accept IMF and World Bank dictated "structural adjustment" policies, or forgoing help.

Structural adjustment means that in order to get loans from the World Bank and development aid from the IMF, countries have to open themselves up to bogus free trade, privatize their state enterprises and many services, and cut public budgets to the bone. This has led to an impoverishment of wide sectors of the populations of already poor countries, and serious damage to health care, education and other public services.

A very small number of countries have simply refused to cooperate with these policies. Most notably, Argentina thumbed its nose at "structural adjustment," and has been better off for doing so. But few have dared to imitate that example.

There have been many attempts to find ways to end reliance of poor countries on the Bretton Woods organizations. The integration attempts in Latin America, including the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of our America, UNASUR and MERCOSUR, have sought to better coordinate regional aid and development resources.

And recently, the rise of the BRICS group of countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) as a powerful economic bloc has shown signs of being a game-changer, even as some crisis-wracked European countries look to the IMF for help.

The BRICS countries have been pushing within the IMF to change the way it does business, and to some small extent, Strauss-Kahn was open to this. For example, he was willing to reconsider the dominant role of the U.S. dollar.

But now all this is up in the air. American corporate economist Joseph Lipsky has replaced Strauss-Kahn on an interim basis. The international media are pushing the idea of French Economics Minister (and IMF governing board member) Christine Lagarde to permanently replace Strauss-Kahn.

As a member of Sarkozy's conservative government, she would be likely to promote the status quo. On the other hand, the BRICS countries and other poorer states are calling for an open process in which the "traditional" selection of a conservative European figure is set aside, giving them a chance to push for fundamental changes.

Yet other countries, such as Cuba, see a necessity to replace the entire Bretton Woods setup with a new system based on international equality and solidarity.

Photo: Dominique Strauss-Kahn (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

War crimes and the bombing of Libya

Fri, 20 May 2011 11:41:00 +0000

According to the New York Times, Gen. Sir David Richards, "Britain's top military commander," is proposing that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization target Libyan "infrastructure," including electrical power grids and fuel dumps, in government held areas.

Frustrated by the two-month old stalemate, Gen. Richards told the Times that "The vice is closing on [Muammar el-] Gaddafi, but we need to increase the pressure further through more intense military activity." The British are playing a major role in the bombing campaign, and Gen. Richards was in Naples, the command center for the war in Libya, when he talked with the Times.

The Times went on to write, "The General suggested that NATO should be freed from restraints that precluded attacking infrastructure targets."

Let us be clear what "infrastructure" means: "The fundamental facilities and systems serving a country, city or area, as transportation and communication systems, power plants and schools"(Random House Dictionary, Second Edition).

Now let's see what the 1977 Protocol Addition to Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 say on the business of attacking "infrastructure."

"In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives."

Part IV, Section I, Article. 48

"It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuff, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works..."

Article 54

"It is prohibited for the Parties to the conflict to attack, by any means whatsoever, non-defended localities..."

Article 59

In short, you can't bomb power plants, electrical grids, water pumping plants, or transport systems that service the civilian population, even if the military also benefits from them. As Article 50 states: "The presence within the civilian population of individuals that do not come within the definition of civilians does not deprive the population of its civilian character."

The pressure to step up the bombing and widen the delineation of targets reflects the fact that the war has turned into a stalemate. "We need to do more," Gen. Richards told the Times, "If we do not up the ante now there is a risk that the conflict could result in Gaddafi clinging to power."

That last statement appears to be a violation of United Nations Resolution 1973, which called for "protection of civilians," a "no-fly zone," "sanctions," a "freeze of assets" and an "arms embargo." Nowhere does 1973 mention regime change and getting rid of Qaddafi.

So are we being dragged into a war whose goals violate UN Resolution 1973, and whose means violate the Geneva Conventions for the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts? It is hard not to answer that question in anything but the affirmative.

Image: BRQ Network // CC 2.0

Obama’s “new chapter” for Middle East leaves questions unanswered

Thu, 19 May 2011 15:48:00 +0000

President Obama reserved the last section of today's much-publicized speech about the Middle East for the tangled issue that affects just about every other development in the region: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Calling the pursuit of Israeli-Palestinian peace "more urgent than ever," Obama strongly advocated for immediate steps to achieve a two-state resolution of the conflict, based on the 1967 borders. However he made no mention of any U.S. initiatives to advance that process.

Just before he spoke, and as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu prepared to head to Washington for talks with Obama, the Israeli government announced it had approved discussion of big new settlement construction in East Jerusalem's Har Homa neighborhood. The action was widely seen as a rude challenge to Obama, similar to the announcement of 1,600 new settler homes in East Jerusalem during a visit by Vice President Joe Biden in 2010.

Obama did not mention the Israeli action. But while reaffirming strong U.S. support for Israel, he said, "The dream of a Jewish and democratic state cannot be fulfilled with permanent occupation."

The White House titled the president's speech "A Moment of Opportunity." Its central point was to announce to the world that the U.S. is making a major shift in its foreign policy - as Obama put it, "a new chapter in American diplomacy." The symbolism of the setting was unmistakable. The president delivered his speech in the Benjamin Franklin room at the State Department, rather than in the White House. In introducing him, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pointedly emphasized the role of the State Department, in contrast to the Defense Department, in projecting U.S. interests via diplomacy and economic ties. In other words, the message was: the Bush era is over. But the new policy has its own contradictions, as Obama's speech revealed.

A democratic Middle East, Clinton said, is "profoundly in our interests."

Obama traced the development of the Arab democracy movements over the past six months, calling them a struggle for "self-determination" both in personal expression and in economic life.

He condemned the governments of Libya, Syria and Iran for repressing peaceful popular democratic movements, and defended the U.S. military intervention in Libya. He also criticized governments he characterized as "our friends" - Yemen and Bahrain - for their suppression of peaceful protests.

But one country he did not mention was Saudi Arabia, one of the most repressive regimes in the region, and one that intervenes in neighboring countries to advance its own interests. The Associated Press reports today that "the United States and Saudi Arabia are quietly expanding defense ties on a vast scale, led by a little-known project to develop an elite force to protect the kingdom's oil riches and future nuclear sites." Sooner or later, many believe, the U.S. will have to address the "elephant in the room" of its unwholesome relationship with this problematic feudal regime.

Obama said the new U.S. foreign policy will center on human rights and economic development. On the human rights side, Obama announced a series of initiatives to foster educational exchanges, develop ties with civil society in the region, and promote equality and full participation for women. He emphasized that the U.S. would respect the results of democratic elections, even if the winners are people the U.S. disagrees with.

On the economic side, he announced the U.S. will aid Egypt's move toward democracy by canceling up to $1 billion of its debt and guaranteeing $1 billion in loans. Beyond that, for countries that are making a transition to democracy, he said the U.S. will work with the European Union to promote "economic modernization" and establish funds to encourage private investment and enterpreneurship.

There seem to be some blind spots here. Obama criticized some regimes for trying to divert pro-democracy movements by blaming "the West ... as the source of all ills, a half century after the end of colonialism." But surely he is well aware that over the past half century the West, and in particular the U.S., has played a very damaging role by seeking to impose its economic model, and the domination of U.S. transnational corporations, in the region. How will this new economic development policy differ from those harmful ones? It remains to be seen.

Clearly, a human rights and economic development approach to foreign relations is a positive step away from the militarism of the Bush-Cheney administration. Obama spoke of "humility" and "mutual interests" as governing principles. But there will undoubtedly be a struggle within our own country over exactly whose interests will determine U.S. actions in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world.

Photo: whitehouse.gov

Cuba's oil prospects pose dilemma for U.S.

Mon, 16 May 2011 11:38:00 +0000

On May 12, the Cuban government took advantage of an international meeting on oil drilling safety in Trinidad and Tobago to announce that drilling is about to begin for offshore wells in deep water off Cuba's northeastern coast. The amounts that might be eventually produced are substantial and of potentially high quality, and could radically improve the socialist island's economic prospects. In the United States, this has produced varied reactions, from calls for action to stop the drilling, to calls for an end to the 50 year U.S. economic blockade of Cuba.

Cuba has produced oil in the past, but in relatively small quantities and of a quality that has limited its use. Before the collapse of the Soviet Union, that country was Cuba's major oil supplier, in a mutually favorable arrangement between the socialist states. After 1991, Cuba's access to oil and refined petroleum products was drastically cut (there was a 19% drop in 1991 and another 22% drop in 1992, with even bigger drops in subsequent years).

Cuba's response was to cut back on domestic oil use, while looking for alternative sources. Though the cutbacks inspired some innovative approaches to efficient energy use, they also had a negative impact on the living standards of the Cuban people, affecting electrical generation, public and private transportation and many other things. Imported oil also became more expensive for Cuba. The U.S. economic blockade, under which foreign companies trading with Cuba are fined and sometimes excluded from U.S. markets, also drove up the price of all Cuba's imports.

After the election of President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, and especially after a U.S. supported coup against him fell flat in 2002, Venezuela in effect came to Cuba's rescue. Through the PETROCARIBE organization, whereby Venezuela supplies oil to most countries of the Caribbean area on very favorable credit terms, Cuba was able to up its imports of petroleum. Venezuelan oil imports to Cuba have sharply increased, by 32% in 2008 alone. Cuba has been paying for some of this Venezuelan oil by sending doctors, teachers and other specialists to help Venezuela.

In 2004, European oil explorers found large potential undersea oil reserves off Cuba's northwest coast. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates the quantity at between five and ten billion barrels, but the Cubans themselves say they might be as much as 20 billion barrels. In either case, these are very significant finds.

Presently, Cuba produces about 60,000 barrels per day of its own oil and imports more than twice as much, approximately 150,000 barrels. Once the Cuban undersea sources come on line, the ratio might change drastically, turning Cuba from an oil importer to a major oil exporter. This would create thousands of jobs, as well as solving problems of transportation, electrical generation and production.

Moreover, the offshore reserves are said to be of high quality, with a low sulfur content. However, they are in the deep ocean, about 5,000 feet down, which means complicated and expensive drilling technology. As this is about the same level as the Deepwater Horizon well whose failure led to an ecological disaster last year, it also raises safety concerns.

The initial wells will be 20 miles north of Havana and 60 miles from some of the Florida Keys. Cuban scientists at the Trinidad meeting stressed safety measures they are implementing to prevent an incident like Deepwater Horizon.

The initial drilling of five test wells will be carried out by the Spanish company Repsol YPF, which is bringing over a Chinese constructed, Italian owned platform, with plans to get the operation going by this fall. Brazil is helping finance the conversion of the port of Mariel, about 50 miles West of Havana, into an oil facility, and Venezuela is helping Cuba to restore a USSR built refinery at Cienfuegos, about 150 miles Southeast of Mariel.

U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar expressed "concern" about Cuba's plans, while anti-Cuba politicians from South Florida called for drastic action to stop the Cuban drilling, for example by denying visas to officials of any foreign companies that help the Cuban effort.

On the other hand, oil industry experts say the United States is potentially losing out on a good deal: The Cubans have stated that they are open to letting U.S. companies in on the possible bonanza, but current U.S. law punishes U.S. citizens and corporations who trade with Cuba. Furthermore, the prohibition on cooperation with Cuba would worsen safety concerns, as U.S. entities with expertise on drilling safety would be forbidden to advise the Cubans, even if an actual emergency were to arise.

NPR quotes John McAuliffe of the Fund for Reconciliation and Development as saying "..there is only one way to minimize the risk, and that is to have the kind of collaboration with Cuba that we have with Mexico and the Bahamas and any other country that is exploring for oil" near U.S. shores.

Photo: The Camilo Cienfuegos oil refinery in Cienfuegos, Cuba. Ismael Francisco, Prensa Latina/AP

Japan business lobby used cash to push nuclear plants

Thu, 05 May 2011 12:55:00 +0000

Both the Liberal Democratic Party and the Democratic Party of Japan, in response to the business community's request, have promoted nuclear power generation in an attempt to receive more corporate donations.

The Japan Business Federation (Nippon Keidanren) between 2004 and 2009 issued a "report card" evaluating the policies of the two parties. Using its "policy priorities" as the criteria for rating parties on a scale of A to E, Keidanren annually made its evaluation on how much the two parties incorporated Keidanren's priorities into their policies and on how hard they were working to realize them, and Keidanren encouraged its member corporations to use the "report card" as a reference for making political donations.

Keidanren always called for the promotion of nuclear power generation as one of the top ten "policy priorities."

The LDP continuously received a rating of "A" because the party had 54 nuclear reactors constructed while in power.

In contrast, at the beginning of the "report card" system, Nippon Keidanren gave low evaluations on the DPJ's energy policy. However, the DPJ gradually got better evaluations, because it began placing importance on the promotion of nuclear energy.

Aside from the "report card", Keidanren gave an "oral test" to both parties. In the 2006 oral test to the DPJ, Keidanren vice-chair at the time Katsumata Tsunehisa said, "Utilization of nuclear power should be promoted as national policy." DPJ Policy Research Committee deputy chair at the time Naoshima Masayuki replied, "Without making use of nuclear energy, it is difficult to ensure Japan's energy supply."

Katsumata used to be the vice president of Tokyo Electric Power Corporation (TEPCO) and is now the TEPCO chairman. Naoshima in 2009, as a member of the DPJ's Hatoyama Cabinet, became the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry and took charge of nuclear power administration. In 2010, under Prime Minister Kan, he formulated the "Basic Energy Plan," which calls for the construction of 14 more nuclear reactors by 2030.

DPJ member of the House of Councilors Fujiwara Masashi, who used to work at Kansai Electric Power Co., said that since 2007, the DPJ has regarded nuclear power generation as a "key to a stable energy supply" in an interview published in the organ paper of the Federation of Electric Power Related Industry Workers' Unions of Japan (June 1, 2007).

Facing public criticism, Keidanren decided to stop issuing the "report card," but the practice of corporate donations to favorable political parties still continues.

This article originally appeared in the Japan Press Service. Photo by Matthias Lambrecht // CC BY-NC 2.0

Palestinians sign unity pact

Wed, 04 May 2011 13:06:00 +0000

Leaders of 14 Palestinian political parties including Fatah and Hamas announced a unity agreement in Cairo on Wednesday. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who also heads the Fatah party, joined Hamas leaders Khaled Mashaal and Ismail Haniyeh for the announcement.

Also present were Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Egyptian Foreign Minister Nabil al-Arabi and United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process Robert Serry.

The pact provides for a transitional unity government of nonpartisan "technocrats" that will prepare for presidential and parliamentary elections next year. The new government will administer the Palestinian territories, while the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) will continue to be in charge of international relations including peace talks with Israel.

The signing of the agreement on Tuesday and the ceremonial announcement Wednesday saw "all the Palestinian factions come together for the first time in four years," al-Jazeera correspondent Nicole Johnston noted.

The agreement would end the split between the West Bank and Gaza which dates back to 2007. It is seen as a key step for the Palestinians in building international pressure on the Israeli government to come to terms with a Palestinian state. A next step is a request for full United Nations recognition of Palestine based on the pre-1967 borders. That request is expected to be taken up by the UN in September.

"We signed the deal despite several reservations," Walid al-Awad, a leader of the Palestinian People's Party, told Egyptian television, according at an al-Jazeera report. "But we insisted on working for the higher national interest," he said.

Abbas aide Nabil Shaath told Israel Radio ahead of Wednesday's ceremony that demands by Israeli leaders and others that Hamas recognize Israel as a precondition for talks "are unfair, unworkable and do not make sense," the Associated Press reported.

The only thing that should matter, he said, is that Hamas "would refrain from any violence ... and be interested in the peace process."

In his speech at Wednesday's ceremony, Abbas declared that the unified Palestinian government will be "an authority committed to non-violence," the independent Palestinian Maan News Agency reported. At the same time, he emphasized that nonviolent Palestinian resistance against Israel's military and settler presence in the West Bank would continue.

Hamas leader Mashaal, in his remarks, praised the mediation efforts of Egypt, and said he supported "elections at first possible moment," but said that in order for the vote to be genuine, "first we must establish a real and normal atmosphere on the ground."

Abbas assailed the hostile response by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials to the Palestinian unity move, including the announcement by the Israeli government that it would withhold tax revenues from the Palestinian Authority, Maan reported.

"If they keep blackmailing us, we'll make September nearer," Abbas said, referring to the Palestinian plan to seek UN recognition in September.

"Israel used division as pretext to stall a peace deal. Now they object to unity. That's unacceptable, it's illegitimate," he said.

The Palestinian president said Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu must now "choose between [building] settlements and peace." He accused Israel of opposing the Palestinian reconciliation agreement as "a pretext to avoid peace negotiations."

Earlier in the week, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh stirred some controversy when he reacted to the U.S. killing of Osama bin Laden by seeming to refer to bin Laden as a "holy warrior." His actual statement was somewhat ambiguous, however. As quoted by Israeli Ynet News, his comment was, ""We condemn any killing of a holy warrior or of a Muslim and Arab person and we ask God to bestow his mercy upon him."

But the issue seemed of little interest to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, where a secular grassroots movement, inspired by those in Egypt and elsewhere, has been demonstrating for Palestinian unity since March.

Following the announcement of the unity agreement, celebrations took place in both the West Bank and Gaza, Maan reported. In Gaza City, around 300 people waving Palestinian flags as well as flags of both Hamas and Fatah "gathered in a festive atmosphere to celebrate the deal, dancing and letting off firecrackers," the news agency reported.

"Palestinians want to end the division," said one banner held aloft by the crowd.

Photo: Ismail Haniyeh, left, and Mahmoud Abbas, in a 2007 photo. (AP/Khalil Hamra, File)

Canadian election brings historic shifts

Wed, 04 May 2011 12:17:00 +0000

TORONTO - Canada's history-making federal election on May 2 shifted the political dynamics of the country and set a new stage of struggle for progressives. In the most disappointing news, Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives were returned to government for a third time with just under 40 percent of the vote, though this time Harper was finally able to secure a majority of seats in the House of Commons.

For Canadian progressives and the labor movement though, the night was not all bad news. The left-of-center New Democratic Party soared to historic levels of support on a platform of protecting public healthcare, strengthening pensions and making education more affordable. Holding 36 seats at the time the campaign started, the New Democrats vaulted to 108 seats (out of 308). This surge, called the "orange wave" in the media, brought the NDP its best results in its 50-year history and made party head Jack Layton the Leader of the Official Opposition in the new parliament. The Green Party also made history by electing its first MP.

The centrist Liberal Party had long been called the country's "natural governing party" due to its electoral dominance, but its vote collapsed near the end of the campaign and sent only 34 members back to Ottawa. The Liberals struggled to clarify their message as right-wing party leader Michael Ignatieff unconvincingly promoted a left-wing platform that shared much in common with the NDP. In the end, Ignatieff was unconvincing to voters as an alternative to Harper and could not even manage to hold onto his own seat. He resigned as head of the party the morning following the election.

Much of the NDP's success came in Quebec, where the anti-Harper vote solidified around it in the closing weeks of the campaign. The separatist Bloc Quebecois party had held a lock on Quebec for two decades, but lost almost all of its seats to the NDP.

Progressive organizations and the labor movement are already gearing up for battles outside of parliament against Harper's agenda. Criticized for his undemocratic and authoritarian style, many are concerned about how Harper will wield his new majority. He is expected to weaken gun control laws and overturn the system for publicly financing political parties. Fears have also risen about federal program cuts and the safety of the public healthcare system.

While the historic rise of the New Democrats was celebrated by the party, the gains were bittersweet, since Harper was able to garner his majority largely due to vote-splitting between the NDP and the Liberals. The combined anti-Harper vote was more than 60% nationally and Harper's share actually declined in most areas of the country. But because of Canada's first-past-the-post electoral system, three- four- or even five-way races in districts often allowed the Conservatives to come up the middle and win with a minority of votes.

Harper ironically gained most of his new seats in and around Toronto, districts traditionally held by the Liberals or the NDP. This result will certainly give new life to debates about closer cooperation between the center and left parties and has already boosted talk among some about a full merger between the Liberals and New Democrats.

The Liberals though, as Ignatieff rightly pointed out, are not a left-wing party and many of their policies have a lot in common with the Conservatives. And with the NDP riding higher than ever before, the old dream of squeezing out the Liberals and becoming the left alternative to the Conservatives has again been reborn. But eventually, arithmetic may force a rethinking by the two parties if neither is ever able to envision a situation where they can individually gain enough votes to take government.

Whatever electoral arrangement is eventually worked out, progressives and the people's movements will have a tough four years under Harper, until the next election in 2015.

Image: Jack Layton election poster. Sid Williams // CC BY-NC 2.0

Chavez's jailing of Colombian political refugee causes outrage

Mon, 02 May 2011 12:28:00 +0000

Joaquin Perez Becerra's April 23 arrest at Marquetia Airport near Caracas triggered questions about Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's role in the affair. Many leftists in Venezuela and elsewhere have lauded Chavez as a socialist and protagonist of continent-wide emancipation, but in this instance, see him as knuckling under to a repressive Colombian government.

The murder of his wife prompted Perez Becerra to leave Colombia for Sweden in 1993 to save his own life. He was city councilor in Corinto, Valle del Cauca, elected through the Patriotic Union (UP) electoral coalition of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and communists (the Colombian Communist Party and the FARC went their separate ways in the early 1990s, on issues of tactics). A massacre of UP elected officials and adherents was underway and would eventually take 5,000 lives

Sweden granted Perez political asylum in 1994 and citizenship in 2000. He worked in a senior citizens' home and, with others, formed the News Agency for the New Colombia website, serving as its director. Almost two decades later Venezuelan police seized him as he exited an airplane in Caracas. Within two days, he was in a maximum security prison in Bogota.

As his flight from Frankfurt, Germany, neared Caracas, Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos called President Chavez. "I told him," Santos informed reporters, "that a very important FARC guy was arriving on a Lufthansa flight to Caracas that afternoon and asked if he could detain him. He didn't hesitate. He ordered his capture and will deliver him to us." The Interpol International Police Organization put up a "red alert" on Perez during his flight.

Santos's government accuses Perez of terrorism, specifically, fundraising and buying arms for the FARC in Europe. Statements and documents of both governments referred to Perez only as a citizen of Colombia. Swedish consular officials were unable to make contact with Perez. A Swedish foreign ministry official promised investigation into possible violations of international law regarding political asylum and citizens' rights in foreign countries.

Perez's defenders say the alert could have been announced earlier when Perez boarded planes in Stockholm and in Frankfurt. Red alerts, applied now to 444 exiled Colombians, are by no means predictable. Ecuador assigned one to Santos as defense minister following Colombia's 2008 attack on a FARC camp in Ecuador. Colombia called an Interpol red alert on Mexican student Lucía Andrea Morett, wounded in that bombardment.

Communist parties in several countries, blogs, unions, political refugees and left leaning websites have castigated Chavez and, of course, Santos. Speaking for the Venezuelan Communist Party, Pedro Eusse condemned "a concession the government has made to imperialist forces, to reactionary forces and counter-revolutionaries in the continent, a dangerous concession casting doubt on the principles and values set forth as the orientation of the Bolivarian process." Santos is blamed for attacking media freedom and for renewing persecution of the UP.

The news site Perez helped found has covered popular mobilizations, human rights abuses and news on the FARC. With 800,000 daily visits, it was Colombia's fourth most widely read website when it was closed April 26. Nelson Lombana Silva, writing for the Colombian Communist Party's Voz newspaper, laments that. "Journalism again comes under a storm of censure and intimidation from the powerful capitalist regime. In the last 20 years, 150 journalists have been assassinated in Colombia, three in the last year."

Reporting on Perez' arrival on April 25 in Bogota, El Tiempo (owned by President Santos's family) detailed government evidence on Perez: "With more than 700 emails on Raul Reyes' PC, the police built the criminal dossier of 'Alberto'" (Perez's alleged pseudonym). Perez supposedly visited FARC encampments. The case against Perez - as with many accused journalists, political dissidents and labor leaders inside Colombia - rests upon information taken from FARC leader Reyes' computers, seized after his killing by the military in Ecuador on March 1, 2008. Interpol found the chain of custody for these computers had been broken. Police inspector Ronald Coy testified he manipulated files in the computers. They were word documents, he said, not emails

In an open letter, 75 Latin American and European writers and intellectuals told Chavez, "No European government, almost none in the world, honors extradition requests from Colombia against its political opponents...Why does Venezuela?" They reminded Chavez that while Colombia launches witch hunts against terrorists, his own government in 2008 identified the FARC not as terrorist but as "revolutionary combatants."

When Santos and Chavez reestablished diplomatic relations between their countries last year after a three-month break, they agreed on security cooperation. Under these arrangements, Chavez's government has returned eight Colombians resident in Venezuela.

Image: Bernardo Londoy // CC BY-NC-SA 2.0