People Before Profit blog

Latin Americans celebrate putting brakes on neo-liberal agenda

Mon, 30 Nov 2015 14:05:00 +0000

This past November 4-5, Latin America celebrated the 10^th anniversary of the Fourth Summit of the Americas, carried out in Mar de Plata, Argentina in 2005, and of the concomitant Third People's Summit. At Mar de Plata, U.S. President George W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin and Mexican President Vicente Fox Quezada arrogantly tried to change the agenda from a planned focus on social welfare to one of imposing the neo-liberal Free Trade Area of the Americas, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) expanded to include all the other countries in the region.

Instead of passively accepting the imperial dictates, the host of the Summit of the Americas, Argentine President Nestor Kirchner, Brazilian President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva, Uruguayan President Tabare Vazquez and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez sent them to blazes with fiery denunciations. As Chavez put it, they sent the ALCA (Area de Libre Comercio Americana, as the FTAA is called in Spanish) "al carajo." [to hell]

The meeting broke up without any action on the FTAA, and the basis was formed for the expansion of the nucleus of the Bolivarian movement to encompass a much larger number of countries in Latin America and the Caribbean behind a program that rejects the neo-liberal Washington consensus and domination by multinational corporations and the United States while emphasizing multinational cooperation to end poverty, inequality, illiteracy, preventable diseases, racial and gender discrimination and environmental degradation.

ALBA or Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of our America, which originally encompassed only Cuba and Venezuela, came to include also Antigua, Bolivia, Dominica, Ecuador, Grenada, Nicaragua, St. Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis and St. Vincent and the Grenadines (Honduras withdrew after a U.S. supported military coup in 2009).

A wider group of countries were integrated into the "Bolivarian pink tide" of left and left center governments through UNASUR and the expansion of the trade group MERCOSUR and other mechanisms: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, El Salvador Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname and Uruguay. The capstone of the Bolivarian success was the creation of CELAC, the Community of States of Latin America and the Caribbean, which includes all Western Hemisphere countries except - by design - the United States and Canada. CELAC is seen by many as a potential replacement for the venerable Organization of American States (OAS) which is perceived as an instrument of U.S. regional domination.

Countries in the region left out of the main aspects of the Bolivarian process have included Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras (after the 2009 coup), Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Peru, Paraguay (after a "constitutional coup" in 2012), Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago, as well as non-sovereign countries such as Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and remaining European colonies. Yet many of the countries that are not politically part of the Bolivarian group benefit from some of its programs, especially PETROCARIBE which has been providing fuel to them on very favorable terms.

The Bolivarian countries have made great advances in fighting poverty, inequality and racial and gender discrimination as well as improving schools, health care and housing for their people. They also played a major role in pressuring the United States to change its 50 year plus anti-Cuba policy, making clear that if this continued it might spell the end of the OAS.

Recently, some key Bolivarian "pink tide" countries have been experiencing difficulties. On November 5, the right wing candidate, Mauricio Macri, won the presidential election in Argentina, displacing the left wing coalition that had brought presidents Nestor Kirchner and Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner to power.

Earlier this year, a similar thing happened in Guyana. On December 6 there is a parliamentary election in Venezuela. That country has been experiencing an economic slump caused mainly by the drastic worldwide drop in the price of its chief export, oil, along with some instability, and this may cut into the ruling left-wing alliance's results or lose it the majority entirely, creating big difficulties for President Nicolas Maduro's progressive economic and social policies. There are serious problems in Brazil and Chile.

These negative developments have led to hand-wringing by some on the left, as well as undisguised glee on the right, which see this situation as a harbinger of the return of the FTAA in the form of the Transpacific Partnership (TPP). But others say it is too early to write off the Bolivarian approach and herald a region-wide return of full blast neo-liberal policies of free trade, deregulation, privatization, austerity and repression.

First of all, the electoral victories of the right in Argentina and Guyana were by very small margins, and it will be very difficult for those governments to dismantle progressive programs created by their predecessors with wide popular support.

Secondly, not a single major non-Bolivarian Latin American or Caribbean country is doing well economically or socially. In an earlier article, I pointed out some inherent difficulties faced by the Bolivarian project in a world still dominated by international corporate monopolies and imperial hegemony. These things impede the Bolivarian project but also the development efforts of the non-Bolivarian states, in some cases to an even worse degree because the states are themselves weakened by their subordination to corporate and U.S. power.

Mexico is in the throes of multiple economic and social crises. It is seeing an increase in inequality and poverty as well as crises of personal security, crime and corruption. The right wing, neo-liberal government of President Enrique Peña Nieto is deeply distrusted and reforms he has been promoting in the sectors of petroleum and education have either failed or caused massive strife.

Guatemala is a basket case. After a bloody civil war that lasted more than three decades and saw the massacre of more than 200,000 people, including large numbers of indigenous Mayas, Guatemala seems unable to get out from under the combined domination of fascistic militarists and corrupt political cliques connected to the international drug trade. The latest is that the health care system in Guatemala is near collapse because corrupt administrators have looted its funds.

Honduras has become poorer, more corrupt and more violent since the overthrow of left-wing President Manuel Zelaya in June of 2009. The world financial crisis that started in the United States in 2008 was certainly no help, but post Zelaya governments also imposed austerity, privatization and repression policies which, along with a mind boggling level of corruption, have made things much worse for ordinary Honduran workers, farmers and others.

Costa Rica has major labor conflicts and repression. The former president of Panama is being sought for extradition on charges of massive corruption. Paraguay, since the 2012 ouster of President Fernando Lugo, has seen a sharp increase in social conflict as multinational agribusiness, abetted by right-wing President Horacio Cartes, has moved in on the smallholdings of peasant farmers leading to militant protests and the left just won the municipal elections in the capital, Asuncion. In Peru, conflicts between indigenous farmers and abusive foreign mining companies have become the order of the day.

The Dominican Republic is wracked by corruption and the government of President Danilo Medina seeks to distract attention, in the lead up to presidential elections in May of 2015, by lashing out at Haitian immigrants and Dominican born people of Haitian descent, threatening them with massive deportation. Haiti itself just got through a very dubious election whose turnout was extremely low and whose results are suspected by many. It is likely to remain the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere.

Among the non-Bolivarian nations, the only bright spot is Colombia, where negotiations between the government of conservative President Manuel Santos and the left-wing guerrillas of the Armed Forces of the Colombian Revolution-People's Army (FARC-EP) in Spanish seem to be proceeding well. But the Colombian ultra-right, headed by ex President Alvaro Uribe, is doing everything it can to sabotage the peace talks.

In most of the non-Bolivarian countries the political left is relatively weak. But social movements of workers, farmers, women, youth and indigenous and Afro-descended people are strong and in many cases consciously see themselves as linked to the Bolivarian movement. And this is true of the Bolivarian countries as well. The Bolivarian project does not depend on specific leaders or political parties alone, but much more on an organized and mobilized social base which will not sit idly by while all that they have achieved is simply negated at the behest of imperial hegemony and transnational monopoly capital.

Photo: Nov. 11 in Montivideo, Uruguay, two days of meetings between representatives of social movements, states parties and institutions: With Rafael Reis, Eliana Zavarce, Rafael Alvariza, Coordinadora De Centrales Sindicales Del Cono Sur, IPPDH MERCOSUR, Andressa Caldas, UPS Mercosur, Redes-at Uruguay, Murilo Vieira Komniski, REAF MERCOSUR and Colin Cadier. Secretaría MERCOSUR, Facebook page.

Letter from China: "Hello teacher"

Mon, 30 Nov 2015 12:01:00 +0000

A note from the author:

I have been living and teaching English in Beijing, China, since June 2011. I regret that I haven't written more about my experiences here, but often didn't know what I should write about, or what readers would be interested in. So, I would like to begin taking questions from readers about what they would like to know about China. While my Chinese language ability has improved a lot over four-plus years, it is a difficult language, and while my Chinese is well beyond survival level, I'm sorry to say it is still short of fluency. I continue to study some every day, so hopefully that problem will be rectified within a few more years at most.

I'm starting out with some questions a People's World editor sent me: "What are public schools like in China? Are they very strict? rigid? or not? What subjects do they teach at different levels? Is the curriculum filled with "propaganda"? How do they compare with American schools, in your view? Tell us about your school."

When I first arrived in China four years ago, I taught in private for-profit schools, with heavy class schedules concentrated on the weekends. You have probably heard about "tiger moms" as a Chinese phenomenon, and there is a lot of truth to this notion of Chinese parenting.

Over the past two years, I have transitioned to the public school system (free from K-12, as in the U.S.), which I prefer for several reasons. One is that classroom behavior is better, as public schools are more structured, and I suspect some students view their private weekend institutions as being "not real schools." Another reason I prefer teaching in public schools, I must confess, is that public school teachers receive much more vacation time than their private counterparts (for example, one month for Spring Festival, also known as Chinese New Year; and two months summer vacation).

Chinese schooling is very competitive, and many parents seem intent on filling most waking hours in study of one kind or another. This is true of schools also, where, for example, students are given large amounts of homework for vacations. Also, typically, many vacation days must be "made up" by, for example, extra Saturday or Sunday classes.

Strictness? I don't know of any concept of after-school detention, or in-school suspension as we have in American schools, much less corporal punishment (as still exists in more than a few rural schools in the U.S.). Student behavior is, in accord with what many Americans would probably expect, generally much better than in American schools from my experience. There is a culture of respect for teachers. Large numbers of my students politely bow their head and say "Hello teacher" in Chinese when passing me in the hallway, something I never experienced in the U.S. Of course, they are still kids, and discipline problems do exist, mostly not paying attention, talking when they should be listening, off-task behavior, throwing things (paper, plastic bottles), pretty much the kinds of things you'd expect. Consequences are typically things like making a student sit alone rather than in a group, making a student stand in the back of the class, requiring a student to write a short essay about their misbehavior, or (most frequently) scolding (I've seen a few students reduced to tears).

School subjects are not too dissimilar from American schools. Students study English, Chinese, geography, physics, physical education, music, political science, etc. Students have a longer school day than American students, typically from around 7:30 a.m. to after 5 p.m.

China's President Xi Jinping was recently quoted in the Guardian as saying, following his much-touted recent visit to the UK, that Chinese students should have more free time, and more time to play. I agree with this, and hope that suggestion will be translated into practice in the future, although the aforementioned "tiger mom" culture seems pretty firmly ingrained here.

It is commonly believed in China that American schools are better at teaching creativity and critical thinking. While I think many Chinese have an overly glowing view of American schools (as well as other aspects of U.S. society and culture), it is true that much of the learning in Chinese schools seems of the 'rote learning variety - lots of memorization and repetition.

Is the curriculum filled with "propaganda," as Americans are led to believe? Certainly in China students are encouraged in the official views of patriotism, socialism, etc. As American schools teach a view of history and society consistent with official U.S. ideology regarding capitalism, foreign policy, etc., so do Chinese schools teach a view of history and society in accord with the official views of the People's Republic. China's Young Communist League has a visible presence on campuses, and many teachers are party members as well (I know which ones because they often wear red flag sickle-and-hammer lapel pins).

When a major anniversary, such as the victory over Japan in World War II, is observed in China, it is reflected by school activities (a film about the victory against fascism, for example), and it is common to have slogans such as "Socialism is Good" and "Long Live the Victory over Japan and Fascism" colored onto a chalkboard at the back of the classroom.

One last thing I'd like to add on a positive note. The cafeteria food! It's both healthier and, in my opinion, much tastier, than what you find in U.S. school cafeterias. Furthermore, food services are not outsourced to private corporations, as is typical in America. Breakfast and lunch are free to all students and staff. In the U.S., of course we have free and reduced lunches based on income (though this program is often attacked by right-wing politicians), but in China, it's universal.

Send me more questions about my experiences in China via contact@peoplesworld.org - put "Question for Brad Jansen" in the subject line. Or, post a comment below.

Photo: School children, Guangming School, China. IvanWalsh.com/Flickr/Creative Commons

Posts from Paris: Unions act on climate change

Mon, 30 Nov 2015 11:42:00 +0000

PARIS - One of the many trade unionists active here in Paris during the climate talks is Martha Hawthorne, a member of SEIU. She sent me this description of her second day here in Paris - Teresa Albano

Hi friends, neighbors, union pals, comrades and family,

This morning I joined the international union movement and 10,000 others to form the Human Chain for the Climate.

I posted pictures on my Facebook page:

I met Laura, from the Comisiones Obraras in Spain who told me this is her 10^th COP! Also met Ben from the Australian Council of Trade Unions who told me about the drought and fires in his country. Makes California sound like a picnic.

And Lynne, from the Canadian Postal Workers Union and of course lots of members from lots of unions in France.

Some are official delegates and some of us, "delegates without badges," will be in the outer areas of the conference, but we will be briefed every morning and will attend the Trade Union Forum and other events. One fellow who will be on the inside told me that there will be giant screens inside the official conference showing all the people in Paris and around the world who are demonstrating. Hundreds of thousands!

After the Human Chain, I walked with my Canadian union friend and a Parisian who lives right next door to one of the restaurants attacked, to pay our respects and mourn Bataclan. The club was surrounded with people and police. (I heard there are 120,000 police on the streets for COP 21.) There were thousands of candles and the sidewalks were overflowing with flowers and pictures and statements like these:

"Rest in Peace United Brotherhood...Together... Freedom...Respect...Equality,...Citizen... Italian, Cameroun, French, Arab, Portuguese, Greek, Spain, English, Russian, Swedish, Canadian, African, Tunisian, Pakistani, American, Moroccan, Roman and Asian."

More pictures here.

After Bataclan we tried to get to Place de la Republique to see the 1000 shoes (my flip flops among them), but I smelled tear gas and we decided to leave and call it a day.

Tomorrow I will focus on reading the platform of the Blue Green Alliance and that of Trade Unions for Energy Democracy and finding another chocolate eclair. Tuesday is the day "Delegates without Badges" check into the Union area.

My Servas host made leek and mushroom quiche for dinner and we drank an organic white wine from southern France. I'd tell you about the dessert another time...

Love to all,

Martha Hawthorne

Photo: Part of the Human Chain for the Climate. "The human chain this morning was incredible, from Place de la Republique down to Metro Nation, more than a mile! Labor was present!" Martha Hawthorne.

"Paris, a beacon of hope": Words of solidarity as COP 21 opens

Mon, 30 Nov 2015 08:37:00 +0000

PARIS - Leaders from all over the world gathered today in the suburb of Le Bourget for the opening of the 2015 UN Climate Change Conference (COP 21). From the very inauguration of the event, one thing was made clear; that the key to saving this planet is the same for everyday people as it is for the 150 heads of state and government attending: everyone must set aside their differences, and work together for the good of all.

The conference has taken on a dutifully somber atmosphere in the wake of the recent tragic terrorist attacks in Paris, and the discussions have certainly been affected by what happened. But if the tone of the talks so far are any indication, the response - both on the part of world leaders and the French people - has been one of resilience and perseverance, and especially of solidarity.

The first speaker, Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, the Minister of Environment of Peru, cut right to the heart of the matter and remarked, "The world is facing two very big threats: climate change and terrorism. We can work together against both. The principals of the climate conference have always been openness and transparency. Now, we take on new principals, as well: solidarity and friendship."

Laurent Fabius, French Minister of Foreign Affairs, took the podium next, and said that the need for leaders to come together is made imperative by the small time frame in which they have to do so. "It is time to come up with a concerted solution," he said. "We have just 11 short days in which to achieve this, and we are obliged to succeed. The eyes of the world are upon us, waiting for us to be able to say to them, 'Mission accomplished.' "

"Paris is the City of Light," said Christiana Figueras, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. After the attacks, she explained, "that is a title that has taken on new meaning. It is now a beacon of hope for the world, lighting the way for the betterment of humanity. Paris must be where the world unites, reaching an agreement that delivers support and catalyzes action. We must chart an unequivocal path forward."

Charles, Prince of Wales, made it clear in his own words that COP 21's theme of harmony and cooperation would help to prevent future generations from inheriting our environmental burden. The decision made at this conference, he said, "will decide the fates of generations not yet born, and of those without a voice, for whom hope is the rarest of sensations. None of us has the right to assume that for our today, they should have to give up their tomorrow. In damaging our climate, we become the architects of our own destruction. We know what needs to be done, and it can be done; we lack only the will and the framework."

The convention's preliminary introduction then segued into the opening ceremony of the leaders event, which will feature 150 heads of state from around the world. Among those speakers will be President Obama, who will be working with Microsoft founder Bill Gates and 20 other countries to create a new Clean Energy Initiative, which will establish technologies that provide affordable clean energy, especially for developing countries. Here again, it is shown that working together is the only viable solution.

Inaugurating the leaders phase of the conference was French president Francois Hollande. Addressing the audience with a solemn cadence, he said, "Two weeks ago, fanatics brought death to the streets of Paris. Tragic events like this represent an affliction, but also an obligation, forcing us to focus on what is important. I'm not choosing between the fight against terrorism and global warming. Climate change will bring conflict just like clouds bring storms. Famine, mass exodus, and clashes for resources" are all conducive to this type of violence. "We must respond to this challenge with solidarity. Not one of us should be left alone."

"Back in 2009," said the Prince of Wales, "just before COP 15, I tried to point out that we had less than 100 months to change our behavior in order to avert the tipping point. Well, 80 of those 100 months have now passed. If the planet were a patient, we would have treated her long ago. But now, at least, we have the chance to put her on life support."

Photo: Francois Hollande speaks at COP 21. | Blake Deppe/PW

After Keystone XL: Why the Paris climate summit could be different

Wed, 25 Nov 2015 22:00:00 +0000

From the vantage point of a few days out, the Paris climate summit looks set for success - at least by the metrics we've learned to use for these types of meetings. The main target for COP21, which is set to open on November 30, is to garner solid commitments aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and setting a strict bar to keep global warming from passing the 2°C mark.

At first glance, this sounds a lot like the goals of previous climate meetings that ended up going nowhere. The 2009 Copenhagen meeting of 115 world leaders, for instance, was at first seen as a big opportunity to reverse climate change. Even before it ended though, the summit was widely panned as a failure. Most of its major goals for reducing CO₂ emissions had to be dropped before a final communiqué could even be signed. But Paris could be different.

For the first time, leaders from the advanced capitalist countries and those of the emerging economies seem to be on the same page when it comes to the urgency of slowing climate change. Governments are declaring - in advance - their commitment to legally-binding targets and timelines for emissions reduction. That's a real advance compared to previous climate talks where there were only vague recognitions of climate change and pledges to do more. If governments stick to their commitments and follow through with real reductions, then Paris will be worth marking down as progress.

Reasons for optimism

So why are things shaping up so differently for COP21? A number of major political and economic developments portend a significant shift from what happened at Copenhagen.

After several years of wavering, President Obama forcefully rejected the Keystone XL pipeline in early November. By shutting down the plan to build a 1,700 mile pipeline to pump Canadian tar sands oil from Alberta down to Texas Gulf coast refineries, Obama helped set the stage for the discussions that will take place at COP21.

On the day of his decision, Obama declared, "If we're going to prevent large parts of this earth from becoming not only inhospitable but uninhabitable in our lifetimes, we're going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground." He continued, "America is now a global leader when it comes to taking serious action on climate change...approving that project would have undercut that global leadership, and that is the biggest risk we face: not acting."

Secretary of State John Kerry's comments at the time made it even clearer that the Administration had the upcoming Paris summit on its mind when making the decision. "The United States cannot ask other nations to make tough choices to address climate change if we are unwilling to make them ourselves," he said. "Denying the Keystone XL pipeline is one of those tough choices."

The symbolic importance of Keystone should not be underestimated. Stopping the pipeline was the biggest victory that the environmental movement has achieved in the U.S. in many years. It was proof that organized action could have an impact on policy debates.

But even more than that, it has sent the most powerful signal possible to other governments that America takes climate change seriously and is prepared to act. By pulling the plug on a pipeline that would have carried some of the world's dirtiest oil to market, Obama demonstrated that the U.S. is willing to be a serious partner in international efforts to tackle global warming. Presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton have both praised the President's decision.

Political developments in Canada have also contributed to a changed atmosphere for the Paris talks. The new prime minister, Justin Trudeau, was sworn in just days before Obama announced his decision. Though ostensibly a supporter of the Keystone pipeline, Trudeau was publicly against his predecessor Stephen Harper's aggressive lobbying on behalf of the TransCanada Corporation that planned to build it. Trudeau put up no real resistance to Obama's decision.

After Harper's loss, the changing of the guard in Canada has been swift. Trudeau moved the environment portfolio out of the Ministry of Natural Resources, which under Harper had prioritized tar sands exploration. Instead, he created a new Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. The new foreign minister, Stephane Dion, previously led the Liberal Party on a "Green Shift" platform in 2008 and recently declared that climate change is the "worst threat we are facing this century."

The scuttling of Keystone has also gone a long way, especially among developing countries, to begin reversing the image of the U.S. as one who preaches but does not practice. It was preceded by the historic U.S.-China clean energy agreement last year, in which both countries agreed to move toward more renewables. The fact that the world's two biggest polluters have already hammered out an understanding before they arrive in Paris bodes well for a positive outcome.

China has long argued that the U.S. had its industrialization heyday and yet continues to produce more emissions per capita than any other nation. The new trend of cooperation between Obama and President Xi signals that the U.S. may be recognizing Chinese criticisms. Taking on the role of leader among developing economies, China has set a target of 20percent clean energy by 2030 and announced a few weeks back that it was implementing a national cap and trade carbon market beginning in 2017.

In Britain, meanwhile, the Conservative government of David Cameron has declared its intention to shut down its last coal-fired power plants by 2025. The country which pioneered the fossil-fueled Industrial Revolution of early capitalism is now on board with the changing international climate discussion.

The divisions in big oil

Where is the credit due for the major turnarounds on the climate issue by these leading governments? Recognition first of all goes out to the environmental and labor movements who have come together to push for stronger climate policies, as well as to the activists and governments of poor and developing countries who are already feeling the effects of climate change.

It is also necessary, however, to look at how divisions among the major energy companies are producing cracks in the coalition opposed to climate action. At a gathering of the world's top oil executives - the OPEC International Energy Seminar - in Vienna earlier this summer, major divisions over how to respond to COP21 and the growing commitment to environmental action were revealed.

While world oil prices are down over the last several months, no one believes that oil and coal will not continue to be major parts of the world's energy mix. This means that although the market outlook for producers of the dirtiest oil, like TransCanada, may be dimming, all the companies agreed that they will of course continue to invest heavily in their respective sectors. Where the façade of unity begins to break down, however, is on the issue of long-term prospects.

The major European oil companies - Royal Dutch Shell, BP, Total, Eni, BG Group, and Statoil - released a joint statement at the meeting calling for the development of a global carbon pricing system. The CEO of Shell, Ben van Beurden, told the meeting that the global energy system is experiencing "a transition from the traditional model based on oil and coal to a progressively cleaner, less carbon-intensive model." With an eye toward long-term profitability and market opportunity, these companies are already beginning to think about a post-fossil fuel future.

The head of Exxon Mobil, Rex Tillerson, took a completely opposite stance. In a strongly-worded warning to his fellow executives, Tillerson said that carbon pricing would destroy economic growth. He declared, "It is very important for governments that make those choices to live with the economic consequences." The imperatives of the short-term thinking inherent to the obsession with quarterly reports and shareholder returns seem to be motivating Exxon Mobil's perspective.

The model of a carbon pricing market being debated by these oil executives is a complicated one that has all kinds of shortcomings of its own, not least of which is its in-built inequalities for developing and developed economies. This is not the most important thing to take note of at the OPEC Executives conference though.

The most important thing to pay attention to is the fact that big oil is divided and this leaves an opening for progressives to pressure their governments. It has been said that powerful enemies can be vanquished, but only by the most "thorough, careful, attentive, skillful, and obligatory use" of any, even the smallest, of rifts among that enemy. These divisions among big oil are ones that need further attention and study.

Stumbling blocks remain

While there is reason to be optimistic about the Paris summit, it will not be smooth sailing.

The recent terrorist attacks in the French capital have greatly altered the terrain in which the talks will take place. The recent downing of a Russian military plane by Turkish forces further threatens to overshadow the environmental focus that governments had earlier put so much of their efforts into.

The heavy focus on security also means that the atmosphere surrounding the conference will probably be very different than anticipated. The dynamics of debate outside of the meeting hall look to be radically changed as French President Francois Hollande has banned demonstrations and public protests by environmental groups.

How this will affect the wide range of civil society parallel conferences and events that were planned to take place alongside COP21 is uncertain. It could mean that only the voices of governments and the most well-funded green groups will be heard. That is why it's all the more important to have progressive news coverage and analysis from on the ground in Paris.

Back here in the U.S., meanwhile, Republicans in the Senate are doing all they can to sabotage the Paris talks before they even begin. On November 24, they passed two resolutions aimed at blocking EPA regulations that would impose stricter emissions targets on power plants. The President will certainly veto the resolutions, but the main political goal is to undermine Obama at the Paris talks. The Republican plan is to make it look like Obama will be unable to carry through his pledges. West Virginia GOP Senator Shelly Moore Capito admitted as much when she said foreign diplomats "will take away a message from this vote...the general support for the direction he's going is weak at best."

Many of the major oil companies, like Exxon Mobil and TransCanada, will also certainly be on the job the morning after the summit concludes to try to water down and derail any commitments that threaten their profits and investment plans. Lobbyists in Washington, Ottawa, and many other capitals will be hard at work to put a check on the drive to halt climate change.

COP21 has the potential to be big. Just like the lobbyists of big oil will be doing though, progressive activists and the climate justice movement will have to roll up their sleeves and get down to work if they want to make the pledges of Paris a reality.

Photo: People's Climate March, New York City, March 2015. | Jason DeCrow/AP

Argentina Elections: Right wins presidency, struggle goes on

Wed, 25 Nov 2015 15:52:00 +0000

On Sunday, Argentina held a runoff election. The candidate of the right wing "Cambiemos" ("Let's Change") coalition, Mauricio Macri, beat Daniel Scioli, the candidate of the ruling leftist Front for Victory by 51.4 percent of the vote to 48.6 percent.

Scioli's loss was by a smaller margin than many had expected, but still, as the saying goes, "a miss is as good as a mile." The loss of power by the left in a major Latin American country is seriously troubling to progressive people in the rest of the hemisphere; this is not the first, but is by far the biggest country of the "Bolivarian Pink Tide" to be moved back into the column of countries ruled by right wing governments.

Macri says he will settle with the hedge funds which have been demanding full payment on odious debt initially incurred by the bloodthirsty dictatorship of the 1970s and early 1980s, but if he does that he is in danger of undoing the whole financial settlement with other creditors which allowed Argentina to get out of its unprecedented economic crisis of the early 2000's. Macri has also hinted that he will put an end to the prosecution of members of the former military government which caused at least 30,000 murders and "disappearances."

The runoff was made necessary when no candidate emerged as a victor in the first round presidential election on October 25. On that occasion Scioli, supported by outgoing President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, got a plurality of 37.08 percent versus Macri's 31.45 percent. That Scioli would get a plurality was predicted by polls, but as it turned out his margin over Macri was much smaller than had been expected by many.

A third candidate, Sergio Massa, from a dissident right-leaning faction of President Fernandez' Justicialist (i.e. Peronist) Party got 21.39 percent of the October 25 vote, and immediately called on his followers to support Macri in the runoff. Smaller parties made up the rest of the 100 percent in the first round.

The geographical spread of the votes for Scioli and Macri in the runoff tell part of the story of why this happened. In Argentina, the vote of the capital, Buenos Aires, population three million, has often gone to the right. The friction between Buenos Aires and the rest of the country has to do with the capital's links to international trade, which today means transnational monopoly capital. Macri is also mayor of Buenos Aires.

However, this time Buenos Aires province, beyond the capital, also went for Macri, even though Scioli is its governor as well as head of the Justicialist (Peronist) party. So his loss of his own province may have more to do with his own tenure in that position than national policy issues, in which President Fernandez de Kirchner, who was term-limited out of this year's presidential running, had received much popular support. She and her husband and predecessor in the presidency, Nestor Kirchner, are credited by many with rescuing the country from a disastrous financial situation and sovereign debt default at the beginning of the 21^st Century.

Scioli was selected as the candidate of the Front for Victory via a complex primary process. But as governor of Buenos Aires Province, he evidently did not generate enough enthusiastic support to carry his own province in the elections. Macri says he will continue progressive social policies of the Kirchner governments but at the same time favor international corporate interests, while breaking away from the "Bolivarian" movement and aligning the country once more with the United States against Venezuela and other left-led countries. His party favor's Argentina's membership in the Alliance of the Pacific, a U.S. dominated free trade grouping.

Serving Argentine and transnational capital while serving the people is going to be impossible; the ability of the outgoing government to meet the needs of workers and the poor was based on its break with the neo-liberal Washington consensus of free trade, privatization, deregulation and austerity, and its willingness to resist the demands of creditors. So on the face of it, Macri's promises to maintain progressive pro-people policies appear to be demagogic, bait to get working class and poor voters to vote for him against their own interests. Macri is himself a big business figure associated with the international and Latin American right. One of his first moves was to call for leftist Venezuela to be suspended from participation in the MERCOSUR trade bloc, which echoes the demands of right wing groups in Venezuela and continent-wide.

How Macri's programs will fare in the Congress is yet to be seen. His own PRO party, part of Cambiemos, holds only 41 seats in the 257 seat Chamber of Deputies, the lower house of the legislature. In contrast, the left wing Justicialists and the Front for Victory of outgoing president Fernandez de Kirchner hold 117. Dissident Peronists have 38 and the historical enemies of Peronism, the Radical Civic Union, have 45. Thirteen seats are held by other small left of center parties. In the Senate, there is a similar breakdown. The leftist Front for Victory also won 11 of the country's 23 provincial governorships, while Cambiemos won only four.

So President Macri will face a lot of resistance within the political structures as well as on the streets. The implications of this election result are nevertheless very serious. Of the Bolivarian "pink tide" countries, Argentina comes fourth after Brazil both in population (41.5 million) and second in overall economic strength. So this is a blow to the left overall.

Next up are legislative elections in Venezuela on December 6. That is going to be a very significant battle also.

Photo: Daniel Scioli, the ruling party presidential candidate, delivers his concession speech to opposition candidate Mauricio Macri in Buenos Aires, Nov. 22. Ivan Fernandez | AP

Today in history: International Day for Elimination of Violence against Women

Wed, 25 Nov 2015 15:01:00 +0000

A staggering one in three women have experienced physical or sexual violence in their lifetime - a pandemic of global proportions. Unlike an illness, however, perpetrators and even entire societies choose to commit violence - and can choose to stop. Violence is not inevitable. It can be prevented. But it's not as straightforward as eradicating a virus. There is no vaccine, medication or cure. And there is no one single reason for why it happens.

As such, prevention strategies should be holistic, with multiple interventions undertaken in parallel in order to have long-lasting and permanent effects. Many sectors, actors and stakeholders need to be engaged. More evidence is emerging on what interventions work to prevent violence - from community mobilization to change social norms, to comprehensive school interventions targeting staff and pupils, to economic empowerment and income supplements coupled with gender equality training.

Prevention is the 2015 theme of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. November 25 marks the kickoff of the UNITE to End Violence against Women Campaign's 16 days of action. This year, at the official commemoration at UN Headquarters in New York, the first UN Framework on Preventing Violence against Women will be launched and discussed, a document coming out of the collaboration of seven UN entities: UN Women, ILO, OHCHR, UNDP, UNESCO, UNFPA and WHO. The framework develops a common understanding for the UN system, policymakers and other stakeholders on preventing violence against women and provides a theory of change to underpin action.

Historically, the date is based on date of the 1960 assassination of the three Mirabel sisters, political activists in the Dominican Republic; the killings were ordered by Dominican dictator Rafael Trujillo. In 1981, activists marked November 25 as a day to combat and raise awareness of violence against women more broadly, and on December 17, 1999, the date received its official United Nations resolution.

From November 25 through December 10, Human Rights Day, the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence aim to raise public awareness and mobilize people everywhere to bring about change. You are invited to "Orange the world," using the color designated by the UNITE campaign to symbolize a brighter future without violence.

Events this year have already included: a benefit concert for the UN Trust Fund to End Violence against Women set against an orange stage at Carnegie Hall in New York, and the lighting of the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands. Orange events are planned in more than 70 countries around the world ahead of and throughout the 16 days. They will include the orange lighting of major landmarks like Niagara Falls, the European Commission building (Belgium), the Council of Europe building (France), the archeological ruins at Petra (Jordan), the Christ the Redeemer statue in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), and the Palais de Justice (Democratic Republic of the Congo). Other events planned range from the "oranging" of bus stops in Timor-Leste (East Timor), to marathons in Venezuela, to spontaneous orange flash mobs in Indonesia.

See more here.

Adapted from unwomen.org and Wikipedia.

Photo: #orangetheworld - Brazil - Black Women's March against Racism and Violence in Brasilia, Brazil, November 18. Daughters, mothers, grandmothers, midwives, ministers, academics, activists, domestic workers and a diverse range of women came from all over the country. United Nations Development Programme | Tiago Zenero

Portugal: Socialist government takes power with Left support

Tue, 24 Nov 2015 17:56:00 +0000

After a lengthy wait, Portuguese President Anibal Cavaco Silva has finally agreed this morning to have the Secretary General of the Socialist Party and former mayor of Lisbon, Antonio Luis Santos da Costa, form a government with the support of the Communist, Ecologist (Green) and Left Bloc deputies in the national parliament.

This government replaces the right wing regime of now ex-Prime Minister Pedro Passos Coelho. The coalition headed by Passos Coelho, consisting of his Social Democratic Party and the smaller People's Party, lost its majority in the Portuguese Parliament in the election of Oct. 4 this year, ending up with 107 seats in Parliament to a total of 112 for the combined forces of the Socialist Party, the Left Bloc, and a united front of the Communist Party and the Ecologist, or Green Party.

The defeat of the Passos Coelho government came as a result of austerity policies it had enacted as a condition for an $83 billion bailout loan from the "Troika" of the European Union, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The resulting layoffs of state employees and cuts in wages, pensions and social services including health care and schools, have angered millions of Portuguese.

Portugal's unemployment rate is still high, especially among young people. At one point Prime Minister Passos Coelho had "suggested" to young Portuguese who could not find jobs that they should simply leave the country and go and live in the former Portuguese colonies of Angola and Brazil. This not only angered young people but also created diplomatic friction with Angola and Brazil, whose governments had not been consulted.

In the past the Socialists had feuded with the Communists, Greens and Left Bloc, but on this occasion Mr. Costa was able to work out an agreement with them whereby the Passos Coelho government would be ousted, as a shared priority of all of them.

Cavaco Silva, who belongs to the same political party as Passos Coelho, the Social Democrats - in Portugal a right-wing party in spite of its name-had expressed extreme reluctance to appoint a Socialist Party government, on the grounds that its reliance on Communist, Green and Left Bloc votes for a parliamentary majority would antagonize investors and thus harm the Portuguese economy. Initially re appointing the Passos Coelho government, Cavaco Silva had made red baiting statements about the prospect, even though the Communists, Greens and Left Blocs had agreed to take demands such as leaving NATO, the Euro Currency and the European Union off the table, and did not ask for ministerial positions in the new government. As the Secretary General of the Communist Party, Jeronimo de Sousa, repeated numerous times, the left's goal was to oust the Passos Coelho government and fight for the reversal of its austerity measures. In the left's agreement with Costa, items emphasized are restoring wages, pensions, and health and education services, defending rights of workers and unions, stopping privatization and reversing bans on abortion and adoption by same sex couples.

These demands alone are enough to enrage Portugal's right wing and the European financial establishment, so the new government will have a tough fight on its hands. But it is in somewhat better shape than Greece whose left wing government was forced to accept a continuation and intensification of austerity measures earlier this year.

President Cavaco Silva finally gave in when the Socialists and the left were able to vote no-confidence in the government and elect a socialist as speaker of the parliament, without dissention within the Socialist Party that the president had hoped for. So Cavaco has now appointed a Socialist-led government rather than appointing a caretaker government under Passos Coelho, which would not have been able to get any of its bills passed because of its lack of a parliamentary majority, pending a new election in June at the earliest.

Meanwhile, Portugal has a presidential election on Jan. 24 of next year, with a second round on February 14 if no candidate gets a majority. If Cavaco Silva had blocked a new government that has majority support, it could have affected the chances of the Social Democratic Party candidate for president, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa. Although Rebelo de Sousa is polling well so far, the candidates of the Socialists, Communist-Green Alliance (CDU) and Left Bloc and others are in full campaign mode already.

The new Socialist Prime Minister, Antonio Costa, lost no time in naming his cabinet. The new occupant of the all-important position of Finance Minister, Mario Centeno, has made statements to reassure Portugal's creditors so far. One of the first African descended people to be appointed to a Portuguese cabinet, Francisca van Dunem, who was born in Angola and was involved in that country's struggle for independence against Portugal, will be the new minister of justice.

Photo: Portuguese Socialist Party leader Antonio Luis Santos da Costa addresses the parliament in Lisbon during the debate of the government's four-year policy program, November 10. Armando Franca | AP

Restraint and cooperation needed in the fight against terrorists

Mon, 23 Nov 2015 15:23:00 +0000

The slaughter of innocent people in France last week has rightly earned worldwide condemnation.

Such immoral actions have no place in this world. Everyone agrees that a response to the carnage in Paris is imperative.

But beyond bringing the executioners of this grisly massacre to justice, the overarching question is: what else should be done? Here is what I think.

The sweeping curtailment of democratic and privacy rights, the racist stereotyping of Arabs and Muslims, xenophobia, closing borders to refugees, and putting boots on the ground won't end terrorist attacks. In fact, such a response, if experience is a guide, will likely set in train a new round of violence and counter violence that will further fray the fragile bonds that bind humanity together. It will bring neither peace nor stability nor safety.

Only a turn to restraint, diplomacy, cooperation, justice, anti-racism, and the language and practice of non-violence stands a chance of eliminating terrorist attacks and defeating terrorist organizations, like ISIS. In this effort, Russia has to be a full and equal partner. Diplomatic engagement with the Iranian government, building on recent successes, is necessary too, as is the full participation of other Muslim led governments. The international community must ramp up the pressure, on Saudi Arabia to end its funding of extremist groups, and on the Netanyahu government, whose actions in the West Bank and Gaza fuel rage across the Middle East and into the Muslim/Arab diaspora. New political initiatives to resolve divisions between Shia and Sunni in Iraq and Syria are crucial as well to weakening terrorism in general and ISIS in particular.

Another dimension of this effort should be a 21st century global "New Deal," at the core of which is a special and sustained focus on the countries of the global South and communities of immigrants in the global North. Even though poverty, unemployment, economic inequality, and scarce opportunities aren't the organizing rationale behind terrorist actions, it seems indisputable that these conditions make it easier for extremist movements to offer rootless, angry, and racially profiled individuals a sense of self-worth, of belonging to something bigger, with the promise of a redemptive and glorious future.

Another crucial element in any international effort to end terrorism is welcoming immigrants with open arms and appreciating the material and cultural contributions that they make in their new homes.

Finally, the United Nations should play a commanding role in this undertaking, including in situations that require military responses, as it probably the case with ISIS and Boko Haram.

Of course, war hawks, right-wing and misguided politicians, and the military-industrial-energy complex will resist such an approach. They thrive in an environment of fear, hatred, suspicion, and threats. It conceals their global economic and political ambitions and becomes a rationale to build up military capacity and presence around the world. It also amplifies the voices of the right wing in the U.S. and elsewhere, and positions them to win complete control of the levers of political power.

We shouldn't allow them to use the horror and tragedy of terrorist attacks for these ends. It's time for restraint, cooperation, inclusiveness, economic, racial, and gender justice, peace, and a heightened appreciation of the preciousness of life.

This was reposted from Sam Webb's blog.

Photo: Candlelight vigil in Paris. | Mindaugas Kulbis/AP

Saudi Arabia is stumbling

Fri, 20 Nov 2015 14:34:00 +0000

For the past eight decades Saudi Arabia has been careful.

Using its vast oil wealth, it has quietly spread its ultra-conservative brand of Islam throughout the Muslim world, secretly undermined secular regimes in its region and prudently kept to the shadows, while others did the fighting and dying. It was Saudi money that fueled the mujahedeen in Afghanistan, underwrote Saddam Hussein's invasion of Iran, and bankrolled Islamic movements and terrorist groups from the Caucasus to Hindu Kush.

Today that circumspect diplomacy is in ruins, and the House of Saud looks more vulnerable than it has since the country was founded in 1926. Unraveling the reasons for the current train wreck is a study in how easily hubris, illusion, and old-fashioned ineptness can trump even bottomless wealth.

Stumbling over oil

The Kingdom's first stumble was a strategic decision last fall to undermine competitors by upping oil production and, thus, lowering the price. Their reasoning was that, if the price of a barrel of oil dropped from over $100 to around $80, it would strangle competition from more expensive sources and new technologies, including the U.S. fracking industry, the Arctic, and emergent producers like Brazil. That, in turn, would allow Riyadh to reclaim its shrinking share of the energy market.

There was also the added benefit that lower oil prices would damage countries that the Saudis didn't like: Russia, Venezuela, Ecuador, and Iran.

In one sense it worked. The American fracking industry is scaling back, the exploitation of Canada's oil sands has slowed, and many Arctic drillers closed up shop. And, indeed, countries like Venezuela, Ecuador, and Russia took a serious economic hit. But despite obvious signs, the Saudis failed to anticipate China's economic slowdown and how that would dampen economic growth in the leading industrial nations. The price of oil went from $115 a barrel in June 2014 to $44 today. Because it is so pure, it costs less than $10 to produce a barrel of Saudi oil.

The Kingdom planned to use its almost $800 billion in financial reserves to ride out the drop in prices, but it figured that oil would not fall below $80 a barrel, and then only for a few months.

According to the Financial Times, in order to balance its budget, Saudi Arabia needs a price of between $95 and $105 a barrel. And while oil prices will likely rise over the next five years, projections are that the price per barrel will only reach $65. Saudi debt is on schedule to rise from 6.7 percent of GDP this year to 17.3 percent next year, and its 2015 budget deficit is $130 billion.

Saudi Arabia is spending $10 billion a month in foreign exchange reserves to pay the bills and has been forced to borrow money on the international financial market. Two weeks ago the International Monetary Fund's (IMF) regional director, Masood Ahmed, warned Riyadh that the country would deplete its financial reserves in five years unless it drastically cut its budget.

But the Kingdom can't do that.

When the Arab Spring broke out in 2011, the Saudi Arabia headed it off by pumping $130 billion into the economy, raising wages, improving services and providing jobs for its growing population. Saudi Arabia has one of the youngest populations in the Middle East, a lot of it unemployed and much of it poorly educated. Some 25 percent of the population lives in poverty. Money keeps the lid on, but for how long, even with the heavy-handed repression that characterizes Saudi political life?

Stumbling over Yemen

In March, the Kingdom intervened in Yemen, launching an air war, a naval blockade, and partial ground campaign on the pretense that Iran was behind the civil war, a conclusion not even the Americans agree with.

Again, the Saudis miscalculated, even though one of its major allies, Pakistan, warned Riyadh that it was headed for trouble. In part, the Kingdom's hubris was fed by the illusion that U.S. support would make it a short war - the Americans are arming the Saudis, supplying them with bombing targets, backing up the naval blockade, and refueling their warplanes in mid-air.

But six months down the line the conflict has turned into a stalemate. The war has killed 5,000 people, including 500 children, flattened cities, and alienated much of the local population. It has also generated a food and medical crisis, as well as creating opportunities for the Islamic State and al-Qaeda to seize territory in Southern Yemen. Efforts by the UN to investigate the possibility of war crimes were blocked by Saudi Arabia and the U.S.

As the Saudis are finding out, war is a very expensive business, a burden the Saudis could meet under normal circumstances, but not when the price the Kingdom's only commodity, oil, is plummeting.

Stumbling over Syria

Nor is Yemen the only war that the Saudis are involved with. Riyadh, along with other Gulf monarchies, including Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, are underwriting many of the groups trying to overthrow Syria's Bashar al-Assad. When anti-government demonstrations broke out in 2011, the Saudis - along with the Americans and the Turks - calculated that Assad could be toppled in a few months.

But that was magical thinking. As bad as Assad is, a lot of Syrians, particularly minorities like Shiites, Christians, and Druze, were far more afraid of the Islamists from al-Qaeda and the IS then they were of their own government. So the war has dragged on for four years and has now killed close to 250,000 people.

Once again, the Saudis miscalculated, though in this case they were hardly alone. The Syrian government turned out to be more resilient that it appeared. And Riyadh's bottom line that Assad had to go just ended up bringing Iran and Russia into the picture, checkmating any direct intervention by the anti-Assad coalition. Any attempt to establish a no-fly zone will have to confront the Russian air force, not something that anyone other than U.S. presidential aspirants are eager to do.

The war has also generated a flood of refugees, deeply alarming the European Union, which finally seems to be listening to Moscow's point about the consequences of overthrowing governments without a plan as to who takes over. There is nothing like millions of refugees headed in your direction to cause some serious re-thinking of strategic goals.

It's a mess

The Saudis' goal of isolating Iran is rapidly collapsing. The P5+1 - the U.S., China, Russia, Great Britain, France, and Germany - successfully completed a nuclear agreement with Tehran, despite every effort by the Saudis and Israel to torpedo it. And at Moscow's insistence, Washington has reversed its opposition to Iran being included in peace talks around Syria.

Stymied in Syria, mired down in Yemen, its finances increasingly fragile, the Kingdom also faces internal unrest from its long marginalized Shia minority in the country's east and south. To top it off, the IS has called for the "liberation" of Mecca from the House of Saud and launched a bombing campaign aimed at the Kingdom's Shiites.

Last month's Hajj disaster that killed more than 2,100 pilgrims - and anger at the Saudi authorities foot dragging on investigating the tragedy - have added to the royal family's woes. The Saudis claim 769 people were killed, a figure that no other country in the world accepts. And there are persistent rumors that the deadly stampede was caused when police blocked off an area in order to allow high-ranking Saudis special access to the holy sites.

Changes in the region

Some of these missteps can be laid at the feet of the new king, Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud, and of a younger generation of aggressive Saudis he has appointed to key positions. But Saudi Arabia's troubles are also a reflection of a Middle East in transition. Exactly where that it is headed is by no means clear, but change is in the wind.

Iran is breaking out of its isolation and, with its large, well-educated population, strong industrial base, and plentiful energy resources, is poised to play a major regional, if not international, role. Turkey is in the midst of a political upheaval, and there is growing opposition among Turks to Ankara's meddling in the Syrian civil war

Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, is impaled on its own policies, both foreign and domestic. "The expensive social contract between the Royal family and Saudi citizens will get more difficult, and eventually impossible to sustain if oil prices don't recover," Meghan L. O'Sullivan, director of the Geopolitics of Energy project at Harvard told the New York Times.

However, the House of Saud has little choice but to keep pumping oil to pay for its wars and keep the internal peace. But more production drives down prices even further, and, once the sanctions come off of Iran, the oil glut will become worse.

While it is still immensely wealthy, there are lots of bills coming due. It is not clear the Kingdom has the capital or the ability to meet them.

Photo: In this 2013 photo, former Saudi King Abdullah stands next to his younger brother Salman bin Abdul-Aziz al Saud, who was crown prince at the time and is now king of Saudi Arabia. Tribes of the World/Flickr

Is "pitiless war" the best leaders can offer these days?

Thu, 19 Nov 2015 14:10:00 +0000

The following article was reposted from Open Democracy. Read the original version here.

A week of horrible carnage - bomb blasts in Beirut and Baghdad and then the cold-blooded shootings in Paris. Each of these acts of terror left dead bodies and wounded lives. There is nothing good that comes of them - only the pain of the victim and then more pain as powerful people take refuge in clichéd policies that once again turn the wheel of violence.

How does one react to these incidents? Horror and outrage come first. They are instinctual. We grieve for the dead: the young parents of Haidar Mustafa (age 3), who shielded him and spared his life as the explosion in Beirut tore them to shreds. In Paris, the terrorists killed Djamila Houd (age 41), who worked for Isabel Marant, at a café. There are faces to each of the victims. Each of these faces will appear in the press and on social media. They will smile at us, telling us about their best days and their promise. None of them had an active role in any conflict. Their murder had nothing to do with them.

We will be bewildered by the incomprehensibility of these deaths - the waste of life in the face of death. We will search for explanations. It has already become clear that the perpetrators in all these bombings - Baghdad, Beirut and Paris - is ISIS or "Daesh", the group that controls a large section of Iraq and Syria as well as parts of Libya and Afghanistan (with fraternal groups in Nigeria and Somalia). ISIS, like al-Qaeda, is tentacular - it does not have a head, only limbs that are inspired to act in fury. If it is ISIS, why are they striking in these places?

For those in the west, the bombings in Baghdad and Beirut will not take up too much time - after all, the western media seems to suggest that bombings of this kind are routine in these places; they are almost natural. In October, 714 Iraqis died in acts of violent terror. These monthly numbers remain the same if we go backward to 2003, when the US invaded Iraq. For eleven years, then, Iraq has faced such an enormous death toll, with the population in a comatose trauma. There is little regard for the people here, whose death and life in death - occasioned by western wars - is now a footnote to global concern.

French president Francois Hollande reacted to the Paris attacks with tough words: "we are going to lead a war which will be pitiless." But the west - including France - has already been at war against both ISIS and groups like ISIS. Who else will be attacked? Will the strategy change? Will the western leaders be able to take a longer view than one constrained by the emotional reaction of the present and be able to see past the reflex of more war? Would the western intelligentsia and its leadership be able to acknowledge that some of the strategic choices made in the west have only exacerbated animosities and conjured up a great many threats? It is unlikely.

Macho language about "pitiless war" defines the contours of leadership these days. Little else is on offer. It is red meat to our emotions.

Where did these ISIS attackers come from? The temptation is to blame religion or race, to take the eye off more substantial areas of investigation. Amnesia is the order of the day. Each terror attack on the west resets the clock. No-one must pay attention to the western and Saudi-backed World Muslim League, whose job was to destroy the forces of secular nationalism and communism in the Arab world in the 1960s and 1970s. All those who were on the good side of history fell to the sword, destroyed as anti-Islamic in order to protect the Gulf Arab emirates and the Saudi kingdom as well as western interests in oil and power.

We must not mention the western and Saudi assault on Afghanistan in the 1970s, before the Soviet intervention, to cut down that nation's communist republic. No one should talk about the creation of the "mujahideen", whose core contained a brutal kernel that exploded into al-Qaeda. Why make so much of the wars on Iraq and then on Libya and Syria, which wrecked states and turned them - like Afghanistan - into playgrounds for the "jihadis", children of the Cold War?

Disbelief will greet those who remind us of western violence, from the aerial bombardment of Libya in 1911 to the bombing of Libya in 2011 - untold numbers dead; "it was not war," wrote a journalist in 1911, "it was butchery." Few will go to their shelves and pull out Leila Sebbar's La Seine était rouge, a searing novel about the French government's murder of hundreds of pro-Algerian protesters in Paris in October 1961.

You will read these words and say, are you blaming the people who died for their own death? You will be outraged at me. You will not be outraged at the history of these countries, of the death they have occasioned, of the misery they have concocted and then denied. You will not ask, why did these thousands of Europeans go to Syria and fight these last few years, or why the French foreign minister - Laurent Fabius - seemed reticent to place the al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria on the terror list?

You will not ask who influenced these young men, sanctified by their governments to go fight in a war elsewhere and then inspired by Saudi-funded clerics who told them not only to fight in Syria but to go home and create mayhem? You will think all this is made up, that I want to justify the massacres.

There is no justification here. There is only the recitation of a pitiless history that is buried under official clichés.

After 9/11, the Bush administration decided to ignore its own history. It was almost a crime to suggest that the wars to come would merely exacerbate the problem - throw fuel on the fires of hatred. A few days after that violence, I wrote, "nothing good comes from terror. It never did and it never will." What I meant was not only the terror of those who attacked the US, but also the terror that was to follow. What came of the Bush wars is not the resolution of violence - Mission Accomplished, as Bush arrogantly said - but endless wars.

Is there another way? After the Mumbai Attacks of 2008 (164 killed), the government of India did not rush to war. It opened a slow investigation into the attack and unraveled the plot and its execution. Diplomatic discussions opened with Pakistan, which is accused by India of harboring the planners of the attack. The file remains open. Patience is the order of the day. No hasty missile strike could make up for the attack in Mumbai. It would only have escalated the conflict further and drawn India and Pakistan into an intolerable war. It is far better to pursue the case prudently.

All parties agree that the problem of ISIS and al-Qaeda does not afford easy answers. The west has not been willing to confront its main west Asian allies - the Saudi kingdom and the Gulf emirates, whose funds continue to lubricate the networks of extremism and whose sheikhs continue to agitate young minds with dangerous ideas - including hateful sectarianism. No western country has put sufficient pressure on these countries to do anything. No western country has asked Turkey's ruling party to set aside its own domestic ambitions and allow the Kurdish militias to fight ISIS freely. Not one western power has admitted that their continuous logistical support of proxies of Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey has fed the cycle of extremism.

No one has taken seriously the call from the UN member states to revise trade agreements and financial policy so that their countries are not suffocated into chaos, the breeding ground of terror. In 1992, Mali's liberal leader Alpha Oumar Konaré asked the west to forgive his country's odious debt. He could not lead his people out of division and poverty if he had to keep paying the banks every month, and if his farmers got no relief from adverse trade policy. No one listened. The US brushed him off, saying "virtue is its own reward" - meaning, pay up. Konaré could not move his agenda. He left office. The country imploded. Al-Qaeda took Mali's second city Timbuktu. The French bombed them in 2013. The country remains shattered. It is the outcome of a series of bad policies. Nobody bothers with them. They are only interested in al-Qaeda of the Maghreb and its movements.

Western policy-makers are like little boys playing with their little toys. They don't see the human suffering and the terrible outcomes of their terrible polices.

We are in pitiless times. There is terrible violence. There is awful sadness.

This is for Adel Termos, of Beirut, who gave his life so others could live.

Photo: Demotix/OpenDemocracy

Today in Indigenous history: Louis Riel, rebel Canadian Métis leader, hanged

Mon, 16 Nov 2015 16:17:00 +0000

On Nov. 16, 1885, Louis Riel, a leader of the Métis people in their resistance against the Canadian government in the Canadian Northwest, was hanged for treason. He remains perhaps the most controversial figure in Canadian history. His life and deeds have spawned a massive and diverse literature.

Riel was born in the Red River Settlement (now Manitoba) in 1844. After exploring the priesthood and the law, he returned home and emerged as a leader among the Métis people. In 1869-70 he headed a provisional government, which would eventually negotiate the Manitoba Act with the Canadian government. The Act established Manitoba as a province and provided some protection for French language rights.

Although chosen for a seat in the House of Commons on three occasions, he was unable to take his seat. In 1884, while teaching in Montana at a Jesuit mission, Riel was asked by a delegation from the Métis community to present their grievances to the Canadian government. Despite Riel's assistance, the federal government ignored Métis concerns. By March of 1885, Métis patience was exhausted and a provisional government was declared.

Riel was the undisputed spiritual and political head of the short-lived 1885 Rebellion. On May 15 Riel surrendered to Canadian forces and was taken to Regina to stand trial for treason. Riel's leadership in the agitation, especially his decision to execute a Canadian named Thomas Scott, enraged anti-Catholic and anti-French sentiment in Ontario.

At his trial, Riel gave two long speeches which demonstrated his powerful rhetorical abilities. He personally rejected attempts by his defense counsel to prove he was not guilty by reason of insanity. A jury of six English-speaking Protestants found Riel guilty but recommended mercy. Judge Hugh Richardson, however, sentenced him to death. Appeals were dismissed and a special re-examination of Riel's mental state by government appointed doctors found him sane. He was hanged in Regina.

Politically and philosophically, Riel's execution has had a lasting effect on Canadian history. He became the martyr of the Métis people. In Central Canada, the political fallout from Riel's hanging enlivened French Canadian nationalism. Riel's death also caused a fundamental shift in Québec voting trends, moving the province's traditional support of the Conservative Party to the Liberal Party led by Wilfrid Laurier.

Riel's execution remains a contentious issue, and demands for his retroactive pardon have been made on a number of occasions. Far from the days where Riel was a hated "traitor" and "murderer," Riel has been recognized as a Father of Confederation, as a wronged man, as a defender of his people, and as a protector of minority rights in Canada. A number of statues commemorate him in his home province, and in 2007, Manitoba recognized him with a public holiday held each February.

For the Métis, November 16 is a national public commemoration of Riel's life and struggles.

For many, Riel has become a Canadian hero, as he embodies many contemporary issues in the country - bilingualism, multiculturalism, tolerance for difference, and a keen sense of social justice. However, Riel was very cautious of the Canadian national project, seeing it as assimilatory as much as unifying. Some Métis critique the zeal with which Riel has been Canadianized and how this appropriation is often at odds with Riel's belief in Métis nationalism and political independence.

Adapted from The Northwest Resistance, A database of materials held by the University of Saskatchewan Libraries and the University Archives

Photo: Louis Riel, circa 1873 (courtesy Provincial Archives of Manitoba/N-5733).

French communist leader speaks on Paris attacks

Mon, 16 Nov 2015 13:04:00 +0000

Press release from Pierre Laurent, national secretary of the French Communist Party.

Our country has just experienced one of the worst events in its history. Last night's simultaneous terrorist attacks in Paris and Saint-Denis, for which Daesh [short for Dawlat al-Islamiyah f'al-Iraq wa al-Sham] claims responsibility, and which, at this moment, have resulted in 127 deaths and 200 casualties, were horrifying. France is in mourning.

The day after the carnage, our first thoughts go out to the victims, their families, to those close to them, to the witnesses and to all those whose lives were threatened. For all, the pain is immense. Each and every one of us in France feels deeply wounded.

We salute the work of law enforcement, the emergency services, the Accident and Emergency doctors, healthcare workers and public service personnel, whose response to the situation has been exemplary, as has the people's solidarity, which was felt straight away.

Less than a year after the attacks in January [on the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo on Jan. 7], the Republic has been struck at its heart.
Even as a state of emergency has now been declared by the government, reinforcement of the police and of the justice system's resources is an imperative. The state must find suitable ways to guarantee the people's safety in the long term.

I ask our people not to give in to fear, and to stand together for freedom, equality, fraternity, and for peace. We must make careful distinctions between issues, and avoid stigmatization. Together, we must firmly reject hatred and racism.

France is affected by the war and the destabilization that is plaguing the Middle-East. The fight against terrorism calls for increased engagement and international solutions.
It can only be won by coming together to create a united society that places, at the heart of all its decisions, human emancipation, the values of the Republic and peace.

The French Communist Party, its representatives and its elected officials, will support all initiatives that, in the days to come, will allow our fellow citizens to take on together this challenge and to open up a path of hope for our people.

In this tragic time, the French Communist Party has put all election-campaign activities on hold.

Translated Sunday 15 November 2015, by Ciaran Edwards

Reposted from l'Humanité in English

Original French article: Pierre Laurent: "Face aux attentats, rassemblons-nous pour la liberté, l'égalité, la fraternité, et la paix."

Photo: People attend a vigil outside the French consulate in Montreal, Nov. 13. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau offered "all of Canada's support" to France in the wake of "deeply worrying" terrorist attacks in Paris. Graham Hughes | The Canadian Press via AP

Socialist coalition hands right-wing Portuguese government defeat

Fri, 13 Nov 2015 13:34:00 +0000

On Tuesday November 10, the right wing Portuguese government headed by Prime Minister Pedro Passos Coelho of the Social Democratic Party (which in Portugal is a right wing party in spite of its name) was defeated in a vote of confidence moved by the opposition Socialist, Communist, Ecological (Green) and Left Bloc parties.

In elections on October 4, the coalition headed by Passos Coelho, of the Social Democrats and the right wing People's Party had lost heavily in relation to the last election, in 2011, and even lost their parliamentary majority. The evident reason was the Portuguese people's dissatisfaction with an austerity program imposed by the European Union, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund in exchange for an $83 billion bailout. The conditions for the bailout and also those imposed under the stringent "Stability and Growth Pact" which was imposed on all members of the Euro currency group, led to declining wages and pensions, slashed public services and sharply increased unemployment, especially among young workers, who have been leaving the country in large numbers in search of work. Although the spokespeople of finance capital and their allies in the media have praised Portugal's "progress", the voters thought otherwise.

The Socialist, Communist, Ecological and Left-Bloc opposition, who had won 122 parliamentary seats to the government coalition's 107, a clear majority in the 230 seat chamber, then announced that they were ready to form a government with the Socialist Party's General Secretary, former Lisbon Mayor Antonio Costa, at its head as the new Prime Minister. But the country's president, Anibal Cavaco Silva, who also belongs to the right-wing Social Democratic Party, reacted angrily with an intemperate red-baiting speech focusing on the inclusion of the Communist Party in Costa's proposed coalition. Cavaco Silva issued dire warnings that Portugal would be heavily punished by the European institutions if it took that path and abandoned austerity.

Cavaco Silva also made a heavy-handed attempt to get members of the Socialist Party's parliamentary caucus to break with their leadership and support the continuation of the right wing government, playing on past disagreements between Socialists and Communists, but this fell far short when they succeeded in electing a Socialist to chair the chamber. Cavaco appointed a government headed by Passos Coelho anyway, in spite of threats by Costa that he and his allies would call for a vote of no confidence on its program and thus bring the government down, forcing new elections.

During the weekend of November 7 and 8, the Socialist and Communist leaders met to create a more detailed joint programmatic agreement on the basis of which they could bring down the Passos Coelho government and form a new one headed by the Socialist Party. The Communists agreed to defer their demand that Portugal leave NATO, the Euro currency and the European Union, and the Socialists agreed that the policy of a new coalition would focus on rolling back the anti-worker austerity program imposed by the outgoing government (evidently the Ecological and Left Bloc parties also agreed to this).

Among other things that were agreed to in the document signed by Communist and Socialist leaders were an end to the freeze on pensions, a "decisive fight" against job precariousness, protections against home foreclosures, boosting support for health care and schools (including reducing class size), lowering of regressive taxes, revocation of anti-abortion legislation, no more privatizations and much more.

Now what happens? President Cavaco Silva can either lower his banner and agree to appoint Mr. Costa as Prime Minister in charge of a Socialist-Communist-Green-Left Bloc government, or he can continue Passos Coelho as prime minister in a "caretaker" capacity with full knowledge that almost no new legislation can be passed in that case. This will trigger a new election, but not until April. First, there is an election for President in January, which the right is likely to lose. In that case, the Socialist-left coalition is likely to end up in power anyway.

What remains to be seen, also, is what finance capital, the European Central Bank, the European Commission (governing body of the European Union) and the International Monetary Fund, as well as the government of Germany and other wealthy conservative countries will do in the face of Portuguese defiance of their "rules." Even under Passos Coelho's government Portugal was being threatened because they were late presenting a budget for the approval of Brussels. So a repeat of what happened in Greece, in which the European financial elites bludgeoned the government of Prime Minister Tsipras into agreeing to an even more onerous fiscal package in exchange for financial relief, will certainly be repeated.

There are differences. One is that Portugal is not in such immediate need of further bailouts as Greece was (and still is). Another is that the left and center are united in Portugal (and the left itself has achieved tactical unity), whereas they were not, and are not, in Greece, where the Communist Party (KKE) and the ruling SYRIZA have not been able to work together. The Unity in Portugal has been made possible by the practical stance of the left, and a very evident left turn on the part of the Socialist Party under Antonio Costa's leadership.

Yet it is certain that this country of 11 million is in for a wild ride in the coming months. That the Portuguese working class and people will have to fight hard is well understood by the leaders of the opposition to austerity. Jeronimo de Silva, the Secretary General of the Communist Party, in his speech in parliament calling for the no-confidence vote, said "this is a time for participation, for action, for the construction of a better future!"

Photo: Socialist Party leader, Antonio Costa, interviewed by journalists after casting his ballot in Portugal's general elections Oct. 4, outside Lisbon. | Steven Governo/AP

Today in history: Saudi women protest by driving cars

Fri, 06 Nov 2015 09:29:00 +0000

On this date 25 years ago, on Nov. 6, 1990, 47 women in Riyadh, the Saudi Arabian capital, drove their cars in a 14-car convoy to protest the driving ban. They were called "whores" and "prostitutes," imprisoned overnightalong with their male supporters, had their passports confiscated, and some lost their jobs. The next day their names, addresses and phone numbers were published and readers were told, "Do what you believe is appropriate regarding these women." Death threats and social stigmatization followed promptly.

According to scholar David Commins, "In 1957, Riyadh pronounced a ban on women driving." Saudi Arabia is unique in being the only country in the world where women are forbidden to drive any kind of motor vehicle on public roads. Nor can they take taxis on their own. On buses women are obliged to sit separately from men. Since 1990 several further driving protests have occurred, but the unwritten "law of convention" has still not changed.

Some who have written about it hypothesize that in 1990, as the First Gulf War was gearing up, Saudis were exposed to female American military driving jeeps in the country, inspiring Saudi women to question their own "gender apartheid."

In 2007, Wajeha al-Huwaider and other women petitioned King Abdullah for women's right to drive, and a film of al-Huwaider driving on International Women's Day 2008 attracted international media attention.

In 2011, the Arab Spring motivatedwomen, including al-Huwaider and Manal al-Sharif, to organize a more intensive driving campaign, and about 70 cases of women driving were documented that June.Al-Sharif described the action as acting within women's rights, and "not protesting." In late September, Shaima Jastania was sentenced to 10 lashes for driving in Jeddah, although the sentence was later overturned.

Another woman from Jeddah, Najla Hariri, started driving in May 2011, stating,"Before in Saudi, you never heard about protests. [But] after what has happened in the Middle East, we started to accept a group of people going outside and saying what they want in a loud voice, and this has had an impact on me."

Maha al-Qahtani was given a ticket for driving without a Saudi Arabian licence. She was pleased to receive the ticket, stating to a Time magazine journalist traveling with her, "It's a ticket. Write this down. I am the first Saudi woman to get a traffic ticket."

In July 2011, Princess al-Taweel, niece-in-law of King Abdullah, spoke about her opposition to the driving ban on the U.S.National Public Radio, and called for women to have equal rights in the workforce, in the legal system, and in education. She described these human rights as more important than the right to drive. In response to criticisms of women's rights campaigns, she described her approach as "evolution not revolution."

In early December, a member of the Consultative Assembly, Kamal Subhi, submitted a report to the Assembly saying that lifting the ban would cause prostitution, pornography, homosexuality, divorce and the "end of virginity."

In 2002, The Economist magazine estimated that the salaries of the approximately 500,000 (male) chauffeurs driving women in Saudi Arabia came to 1percent of the national income.

By the year 2012 there were upward of 100 Saudi women who had driven regularly since June 2011, often without incident, but unlicensed and unpublicized.

In 2013 another campaign to defy the ban targeted October 26th as the date for women to start driving. Sheikh Saleh al-Lohaidan, one of Saudi Arabia's top clerics, said women who drive risk damaging their ovaries and bearing children with clinical problems. Interior Ministry employees warned leaders of the campaign not to drive on that date, and in the Saudi capital police road blocks were set up to check for women drivers.

However, despite this discouragement and a heavy police presence, by the next day Saudi activists had posted 12 films on YouTube said to be of women driving the day before, and reported that other women had also driven but without recording their exploits on video or in photographs.A YouTube film made by a male Saudi comedian went viral to support the women's driving campaign, parodying the Bob Marley song "No Woman No Cry" as "No Woman No Drive."

Although various acts of international solidarity with the Saudi women have been documented, Western nations have shown profound reluctance to engage the Saudi leaders on their policies toward women, as well as on their harsh punishment, including the death penalty, for commonly respected rights in much of the world, such as basic freedom of speech.

American politicians have saved their sense of outrage over "human rights" for much weaker states, such as Cuba, Venezuela, and Honduras. U.S. and other Western investment in the Saudi economy - and significant Saudi investment in the West as well - are determining factors in the U.S. timidity in criticizing the Saudis.

There's also a lot of oil in Saudi Arabia to which U.S. policy has been committed to preserve access for the better part of the last century.

American journalist Rosemarye Levine lived in Saudi Arabia during the time of the 1990 driving demonstration and later wrote about it. See here. Another account can be readhere.

Adapted from the above sources and Wikipedia.

Photo: Cartoon for Saudi Arabia's Women to drive Movement by Carlos Latuff. | Wikipedia (CC)

Refugee crisis exposes Germany’s political crisis

Thu, 05 Nov 2015 11:34:00 +0000

BERLIN - How the world changes! Last spring many Europeans, especially Greeks, were so angry at a tight-fisted, cruel Angela Merkel and her acceptance of people's sufferings that they scribbled Hitler mustaches on her public portraits. Only weeks later she was celebrated around the continent, indeed the world, as a symbol of generosity and humanity. Which judgment is correct, that until July or that since late August?

What defies any clear appraisal is the on-going wavering of her government, her party and herself! The German political scene is in turmoil, with echoes all over Europe! Such turbulence has on occasion opened the way to healthy change. Now, in my view, it can lead to great dangers.

The remorseless driving element is the tidal wave of human beings, over 200,000 in October alone, risking their lives to reach Europe, especially the fabled Utopia, Germany. And didn't Merkel say they are welcome, that Germany is open to refugees fleeing death and destruction?

It would be nice to believe that Merkel was guided by altruism and humanitarian impulses, perhaps thanks to her pastor father or (as some whisper) to a spirit of internationalism learned in her East German youth. Maybe she was. More cynical critics point to Germany's demographic problems: more and more pensioners, far too few births; a flood of young people urgently hunting for any jobs could weaken pressure from the labor movement to maintain benefits and achieve higher wages.

But the numbers are exceeding all expectations. For a large proportion - from Iraq, Afghanistan, from Syria and soon Yemen - most blame for their flight must be directed at Washington, which openly started or indirectly supports the never-ending conflicts in all four. But Germany has also engaged in vicious bombing in Afghanistan, and while US weapon-makers have been raking in a giant share of the profits from the bombing, droning and destruction, German weapons, heavy and light, have also meant billions of Euros, with sales to Gulf monarchies, large, small but always wealthy, of everything from small arms to howitzers and Leopard tanks, which often end up further demolishing towns and cities in Syria and Yemen.

Two other conflict area states, Israel and Turkey, have never been exempted from such lucrative exports, and the latter was just rewarded with a highly-celebrated state visit to Ankara by Merkel, thus aiding Erdogan's roughneck election campaign. The visit also raised questions about what they did aside from reviewing elite troops. Did they make or re-shuffle deals about refugees, about feeding and sheltering them in Turkey, perhaps even about finally dissuading - or preventing - them from the short, simple but very dangerous voyage from Turkish shores to nearby Greek islands and then on northwards. Have bribery or blackmailing been involved here? We can only speculate.

Waves of immigrants are straining a German government coalition

It is far clearer that the seemingly endless waves of immigrants are straining a German government coalition which had ruled thus far with almost unexpected coziness, considering that Social Democrats and Christian Democrats were once presumed to be principled opponents. Actually, the first big attacks against Merkel's "welcome all refugees" policy came rather from her usually more placid sister party in Bavaria. Called the Christian Social Union (CSU), it is usually at one with its far bigger sibling in all the other states, Merkel's Christian Democratic Union (CDU). But it always stands a shade or two further to the right, like a majority of Bavarian voters in this biggest, most prosperous state in Germany, with its wealth of profitable industry, especially of the weapons variety. Its Alpine regions, known for lederhosen, dirndls, plumed hats and yodeling, are scenic but hard-bitten.

As the map shows, all immigrants who cross over from Turkey, then trek somehow through the states of one-time Yugoslavia and Austria, first reach a German border at Bavaria. Horst Seehofer, the Bavarian leader, relying on and encouraging resentment against them, pushed hard against Merkel in harshly challenging tones, insisting on more limitations and tougher policies. He was soon joined by further-right elements in Merkel's own CDU in the first incipient rebellion to challenge her hitherto virtually total domination. And the poll figures for her party dipped disturbingly.

While this dispute simmered, Social Democratic vice-chancellor Sigmar Gabriel weighed in, challenging Merkel's partial abandonment of her "welcoming" policies to meet the challenge from the right. Last Sunday the dispute came to a head. Merkel, bowing in many ways to Seehofer's Bavarian CSU, approved a compromise between the two allied "Christian" parties, one which was not all too Christian in nature. All coalition leaders had previously agreed that refugees from Balkan areas, mostly miserably discriminated Roma ("Gypsies"), would be rejected and sent back to their shacks and hovels. They were not "refugees" - and few of them had the skills sought after by German industrial employers. Now, in line with Bavarian demands, it was agreed that "transit zones" should be set up on the Bavarian borders, weeding out "undesirable non-refugees" before they even arrived. As for the others, some were more privileged, some less so - and could stay conditionally but not fetch wives or children for two years. Vitally necessary lessons in German would not be free but must be paid for out of meager allowances granted "asylum seekers", if possible in rations not money.

But the stout Social Democrat Sigmar Gabriel - stout in figure in any case - rejected fenced-in "transit zones" which evoked nasty recollections of Germany's past. After two hours he left the planned conciliatory meeting in a huff. Immigrants should be sent to the sixteen German states before being separated and perhaps sent home. They could thus enjoy at least a little salubrious German air. All decisions are up in the air for several days at the least, here too a compromise will emerge, but the splits may not heal so easily, deepened as they are by early posturing for the elections of 2017 - and earlier ones on a state level.

Reports on violent actions are increasing

The political scene is visibly changing, with many, many thousands of Arab, African and Afghani refugees being lodged in emergency quarters all over Germany. Whereas countless people went out of their way to welcome them and assist them, with everything from food aid and plush toys for the children to free medical assistance by doctors - often outdoing by far the slow-moving, even reluctant authorities - the almost inevitable backlash has been even nastier than in some areas in southwestern USA or other places around the world. Reports on violent actions are increasing, there are fires in buildings which were to house immigrants - or already did - and now we read horrible stories of gang attacks, often black-masked and armed with baseball bats and the like, against individual refugees.

Such attacks, already in the hundreds, are scattered throughout the country but most frequent in eastern Saxony, in and around its capital of Dresden, where the insecure economic situation typical for most of East Germany, distrust of all current parties, the hitherto rarity of contact with non-German groups plus a provincial local patriotism are all cleverly cultivated by a particularly vicious group of fascist-minded leaders. Their Monday PEGIDA marches, 5000-15,000 strong and based on Muslimophobia, are continuing, though countered, as with countless smaller racist marches and demonstrations all over Germany, by large groups of people who reject their racism and carry "Immigrants welcome" signs.

Polls in Dresden indicate that 40 percent in Dresden sympathize with the refugees, 20 percent are strongly against them, while the remaining 40 percent are wavering, but perhaps tending toward the right, especially since some mass media have gradually altered earlier support for Merkel's "Welcome".

PEGIDA may run candidates in future but is as yet not a party. Most of its dumb and misled adherents will probably vote for the Alternative for Germany (AfD), which after a split and a dip in strength, is now growing again, far too quickly. In the polls it averages 8 percent (about 13 percent in the eastern states), edging it closer to the two opposition parties in the Bundestag, the Greens, wavering between 10 percent and 11 percent and the LINKE (Left) between 9 percent and 10 percent. (The Social Democrats remain at a steady, dismaying 25 percent, while the two "Christian Union" parties led by Merkel have dropped sharply from 43 percent to 38 percent. Thus an almost openly pro-fascist party may well make it into the Bundestag in 2017, giving it government financial support and a stronger media presence. And its curve seems to be moving upward.

Nearly one million immigrants in or approaching Germany

The other European Union members, whose statesmen love grandiose statements about continental unity, lasting cooperation and friendship, have been almost totally unwilling to accept more than a token number of the nearly one million immigrants in or approaching Germany. Especially those great new democracies created on the ruins of the Eastern Bloc, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and the three Baltic states, refuse to take any newcomers (Slovakia might accept a few hundred temporarily, but only if they are Christians. The others have echoed this wish). The fabric of the European Union is wearing very thin - and hungry harpies, far-right or fascistic parties from Austria to Sweden, from Greece and Italy to France and Flanders, are just waiting to pick its bones - and are truly awakening bitter memories of the past.

I temper such fears with hopes based on popular movements in Portugal, in Spain, on victories like that of Jeremy Corbyn in the British Labour Party - and on the once so glorious rise of the Syriza Party in Greece. But the stifling of the Greek movement and its enforced kowtow to giant forces led by Merkel's Finance Minister Schäuble indicate the complexity and the difficulties involved in any gains for "common people" against attacks by powerful harpies, werewolves and vultures.

Photo: Anti refugee protest in front of the Church of our Lady, by the ultra right PEGIDA (Patriotic Europeans against the Islamization of the West) in Dresden, Germany, Nov. 2. Jens Meyer | AP

Today in history: Fellowship of Reconciliation, 100 years persevering for peace

Thu, 05 Nov 2015 09:38:00 +0000

This weekend, a number of events taking place in and near New York City celebrate the centennial of an organization some call "the conscience of the peace movement."

In 1914, an ecumenical conference was held in Switzerland by Christians seeking to prevent the outbreak of war in Europe. Before the conference ended, however, World War I had started and those present had to return to their respective countries. At a railroad station in Germany, two of the participants, Henry Hodgkin, an English Quaker, and Friedrich Siegmund-Schultze, a German Lutheran, pledged to find a way of working for peace even though their countries were at war. Out of this pledge Christians gathered in Cambridge, England, in December 1914 to found the Fellowship of Reconciliation. The U.S. FOR was founded one year later, in November 1915, at a conference in Garden City, Long Island, N.Y.

FOR has since become an interfaith and international movement with branches and affiliated groups in over 50 countries and on every continent.

Some highlights in FOR history

1916-1917: FOR helps organize the National Civil Liberties Bureau, now the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). It supports World War I conscientious objectors (CO) and contributes to legal recognition of COrights.

1920s: Helps organize the National Conference of Christians and Jews (now the National Conference on Community and Justice), and sends a peace delegation to meet Augusto CésarSandino in Nicaragua.

1930s: Works to strengthen the labor movement and secure better working conditions. Sponsors Ambassadors of Reconciliation to visit world leaders.

1940s: Supports those who nonviolently resist during World War II. Leads the struggle against internment of Japanese Americans. European FOR members rescue Jews and political refugees fleeing Nazism. Post-war, sponsors an interracial team on the first "freedom ride" to test court decision outlawing discrimination in interstate travel. Organizes extensive campaign to prevent the Pentagon from extending wartime conscription into universal military training.

1950s: Helps organize the American Committee on Africa (now part of Africa Action) to support African independence movements. Conducts 6-year Food for China program in response to Chinese famines. FOR staff work with Martin Luther King, Jr. during the Montgomery bus boycott, and hold workshops in nonviolence throughout the South. Its full-color comic book, Martin Luther King and the Montgomery Story, sells over 250,000 copies.

1960s: Launches Shelters for the Shelterless, building real shelters for homeless people, in response to increasing public demand for fallout shelters. Makes contact with Vietnamese Buddhist pacifist movement and sponsors Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh's world tour. Forms International Committee of Conscience on Vietnam with 10,000 clergy in 40 countries, and raises money for medical aid for both sides in Vietnam.

1970s: Founds Dai Dong, a transnational project linking war, environmental problems, poverty and other social issues, involving thousands of scientists around the world. Seeks to reverse the Cold War and the arms race with campaigns, marches, educational projects and civil disobedience. Opposes death penalty in concerted campaign with ACLU.

1980s: Takes a leading role in the Nuclear Freeze Campaign in cooperation with other groups. Initiates U.S.-USSR reconciliation program, including people-to-people exchanges, artistic and educational resources, teach-ins and conferences. Leads nonviolence training seminars in the Philippines prior to the nonviolent overthrow of the Marcosdictatorship.

1990s: Sends delegations of religious leaders and peace activists to Iraq to try to prevent war and later, to see the massive devastation caused by the economic sanctions imposed upon Iraq. Starts the Campaign to Save a Generation, an ongoing project centered on saving Iraqi children from the horrors of the sanctions, and American children from the poverty rampant in the United States. Launches "Stop the Killing, Start the Healing" campaign in response to escalating levels of gun violence in the U.S. Initiates Bosnian Student Project, bringing students from the former Yugoslavia out of war zones and into U.S. homes and schools, and later starts the International Reconciliation Work Camp Project. Works to bring an end to the suffering of the Serbs and Kosovars during and after the war. Works to ensure the U.S. military's withdrawal from Panama.

2000s: Organizes a People's Campaign for Peace and Justice to inspire nonviolent witness in Washington, D.C. and nationwide. Accepts invitation from the Colombian Peace Community of San José de Apartadó to provide protective human rights accompaniment in a rural war zone in Colombia. Launches the I Will Not Kill campaign for young people to make a life commitment to resist participating in violence. Pressures the U.S. military to end its testing of bombs in Vieques, Puerto Rico, and to be accountable for the environmental devastation of the island. Sends delegations of people committed to civilian diplomacy to Iran to build relationships between the West and Iran, and to seek to prevent militaryintervention.

FOR supporters have included, among many others, such world leaders as Albert Einstein,Rev. Joseph Lowery of the Southern Christian Leadership Council, and Coretta Scott King.

The centennial events include:

Centennial exhibit opening reception, Thurs., Nov. 5,6-8 pm at the Union Theological Seminary, James Chapel, 3041 Broadway (at 121st St.). , New York, NY. Exhibit showing from Nov. 5 to 30. The exhibit features images chosen from 1000 Fellowship and The World of Tomorrow magazine covers, various other FOR publications and extensive photo archives. The exhibit is on until Nov. 30 and is free and open to thepublic.

A wine and cheese reception and the premiere of a short film on the FOR centennial takes place atFOR USA's national headquarters, Shadowcliff, 521 N. Broadway, Nyack,N.Y., on Fri., Nov. 6, 5:30-8 pm. The evening offers an opportunity to visit the stately mansion that has been home base for staff and a refuge for peace workers for more than 50 years; and enjoy the view of the mighty Hudson River. This event is free and open to the public.

On Sat., Nov. 7, 3-4:15 pm, a multifaith service takes place in the Nave at Riverside Church, 490 Riverside Dr., New York. The service honors the various faith traditions that are the fabric of the Fellowship of Reconciliation, and will feature performers Lisa Sokolov, Naaz Hosseini, and Guy Davis.Free and open to the public.

Later, from 5:30-7 pm is a reception and silent auction at Riverside Church, followed at 7 pm by a dinner and program. Further information on the FOR centennial can found here.

FOR comprises a number of smaller member groups adhering to many different religious denominations. For a list of them and appropriate contacts, see here.

Next summer, July 1-4, the FOR national conference will be held at the Seabeck Conference Center, 13395 Lagoon Drive, NW, Seabeck,Wash.

Photo: ForUSA.org

Today in history: Israeli Prime Minister Yitzkhak Rabin assassinated

Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:07:00 +0000

Twenty years ago today, on November 4, 1995, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzkhak Rabin was assassinated at 9:30 pm just after addressing a peace rally in support of the Oslo Accords at the Kings of Israel Square in front of Tel Aviv City Hall.

The assassin, an Israeli religious ultranationalist terrorist named Yigal Amir, strenuously opposed Rabin's peace initiative and particularly the signing of the Oslo Accords.

The assassination of Rabin, who also served as Defense Minister, was the culmination of Israeli right-wing dissent over the Oslo peace process which proposed to set into motion an eventual resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.Despite his own extensive service in the Israeli military, Rabin was disparaged personally by right-wing conservatives and Likud party leaders who perceived Oslo as a project to forfeit the occupied territories and the Jewish settlements established on them (against international law) starting in 1967.

The religious right wing believed that withdrawing from any "Jewish" land was heresy. Rallies, organized partially by Likud, became increasingly extreme in tone. Likud leader (and current prime minister) Benjamin Netanyahu accused Rabin's government of being "removed from Jewish tradition...and Jewish values." Netanyahu addressed protesters of the Oslo movement at rallies where posters portrayed Rabin in a Nazi SS uniform or as the target in the cross-hairs of a sniper. Rabin accused Netanyahu of provoking violence, a charge which Netanyahu strenuously denied.

Yigal Amir, a religious school graduate and far-right law student at Bar-Ilan University, felt that an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank would deny Jews their "biblical heritage which they had reclaimed by establishing settlements." Amir believed that Rabin was endangering Jewish lives, and interpreted traditional Jewish law to justify eliminating him. Amir planned this assassination for two years.

Prime Minister Rabin, over half the members of the the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, and over half the population of Israel believed exactly the opposite - that the Oslo Accords would on the contrary save Jewish lives and end the seemingly intractable dispute. No one's life was in imminent danger. Rabin had won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994, alongside Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, precisely for their efforts toward creating the Oslo Accords.

Yigal Amir had been under surveillance by the Israeli internal security service (Shin Bet), but the agent monitoring him had concluded that Amir posed no threat to the Prime Minister's life.

After the rally, Rabin walked down the city hall steps toward his car, at which time Amir fired three shots at Rabin with a Beretta semi-automatic pistol. He was immediately subdued by Rabin's bodyguards and arrested with the murder weapon. The third shot missed Rabin and slightly wounded security guard Yoram Rubin.

Rabin was rushed to nearby Ichilov Hospital, where he died on the operating table within 40 minutesfrom blood loss and a punctured lung. His death was announced immediately.

In Rabin's pocket, a blood-stained sheet of paper was found with the lyrics to the well-known Israeli song "Shir LaShalom" ("Song for Peace"), which had just been sung at the rally. The lyrics emphasize the impossibility of bringing a dead person back to life and, therefore, the need for peace.

Rabin's funeral took place the day after the assassination, at the Mount Herzl cemetery in Jerusalem, where Rabin was buried. Hundreds of world leaders attended, including about 80 heads of state, among them President Bill Clinton, United Nations Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, with whom Rabin had been negotiating.

In the aftermath...

Amir was sentenced to prison for the rest of his life.

A national memorial day for Rabin is set on the date of his death according to the Hebrew calendar.Kings of Israel Square was later renamed Rabin Square in his honor. Many other streets and public buildings around the country were named for Rabin as well.

In March 1996, the Shamgar Commission issued its final report on the assassination. It was critical of Shin Bet for putting the Prime Minister at risk and ignoring threats to his life from Jewish extremists.

The assassination of Rabin was a shock to the Israeli public, from which the country has never recovered. Although loud alarms had sounded as to the danger of hateful rhetoric in public discourse, the killing confirmed just how murderous the religious nationalists could be. Over time, flaws in the Oslo Accords were magnified by the essential unwillingness of the Israeli State to come to terms with Palestinian autonomy and independence. Numerous proposals for peace - such as the Geneva Accord, drawn up by a joint blue-ribbon committee of leading Israeli and Palestinian thinkers, or the Saudi proposal for a just resolution, which would leave the State of Israel in place with Arab state recognition, and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry's attempt to develop a peace plan -have been rejected by Jerusalem.

The politics of the current Israeli government under Netanyahu - adamantly opposed to a final border adjustment with Palestine, shamelessly flouting world opinion in favor of the most militarist and chauvinist policies at home and in the region, and beholden to the most fascist-minded of the settler movement - are not so far removed from Yigal Amir's views.

Israel's peace movement struggles to maintain hope. Many believe that Israel is incapable of saving itself. It is evident that the pressure for change, indeed for Israel to survive at all in any democratic form, must come from outside the country, from Israel's friends and economic partners. A few days ago, at the 20th anniversary commemoration in Tel Aviv, Bill Clinton spoke to a crowd of thousands, saying, "The next step will be determined by whether you decide that Yitzhak Rabin was right, that you have to share the future with your neighbors...that the risks for peace are not as severe as the risk of walking away from it."

American citizens have a vital role to play every time we go to the polls to elect our representatives and political leaders.

Adapted from Wikipedia and other sources.

Photo: The monument at the site of the assassination: Solomon ibn Gabirol Street between the Tel Aviv City Hall and the main city park. The monument's broken rocks symbolize the political earthquake that the assassination represents.

Be very afraid: the price of Turkey’s elections

Wed, 04 Nov 2015 12:36:00 +0000

If there is a lesson to be drawn from the Nov. 1 Turkish elections, it is that fear works, and there are few people better at engendering it than Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Only five months after the Justice and Development Party (AKP) lost its majority in the Turkish parliament, a snap election put it back in the driver's seat.

The cost of the victory, however, may be dear, because, to achieve it, Erdogan reignited Turkey's long and bloody war with the Kurds, stood silent while mobs of nationalists attacked his opponents, and unilaterally altered the constitutional role of his office.

Violence and fear

Observers from the Council of Europe and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe said that violence and attacks on the media had a significant impact on the election.

"Unfortunately we come to the conclusion that this campaign was unfair, and was characterized by too much violence and fear," said Andreas Gross, a Swiss parliamentarian and head of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe delegation,

At the same time the European Union (EU) seemed to favor an AKP victory. The EU Commission held off a report critical of Turkish democracy until after the vote. Two weeks before the election German Chancellor Angela Merkel visited Turkey bearing $3.3 billion in aid for Syrian refugees and an offer for Turkey to revive its efforts to get into the EU. Previously, Merkel had been opposed to Turkish membership in the EU.

Almost everything Erdogan wanted ... but

The finally tally is almost everything Erdogan wanted, although he fell short of his dream of a supermajority that would let him change the nature of the Turkish political system from a parliamentary government to one ruled by a powerful and centralized executive - himself.

There are 550 seats in the Turkish parliament. The AKP took 49.4 percent of the vote and won 317 seats, an increase of 64 over the June election. While 276 seats is a majority, what Erdogan wanted was a supermajority of 367 seats that would allow him to change the constitution without involving the electorate. He did not achieve this.

The secular Republican People's Party (CHP) picked up two seats over the June election for a total of 134 seats. The Kurdish-dominated left-wing People's Democratic Party (HDP), which scored an historic 13.1 percent of the vote and 80 seats in the June election, managed to squeak by with 10.7 percent of the vote and 61 seats. If it had failed to pass the 10 percent barrier for parliamentary representation, most of those seats would have gone to the AKP, possibly giving Erdogan's party the supermajority it craved.

Indeed, it was a statement of the HDP's resilience that despite the violence directed at the party and the arrest of many HDP activists, the organization still managed to clear the 10 percent bar for representation in the parliament. The HDP announced that it planned to challenge several seats that the party says involved fraud.

The right-wing Nationalist Action Party (MHP) dropped 31 seats, falling to fourth place with only 40 seats. It would appear that most of their voters jumped to the AKP.

Erdogan set out to change the Turkish constitution back in 2007 and has pushed to reconstruct the country's politics ever since. However, the AKP has never had 330 votes in the parliament, the number needed to place a referendum before the voters. Erdogan did not get that magic number this time either, but he is close and may be able to pry a dozen or so voters from the ranks of the right-wing nationalists and get his referendum.

The AKP won almost 5 million more votes than it did last June. Voter turnout was over 86 percent.

A referendum is a disquieting thought. Erdogan is a relentless campaigner, and opponents are worried that, while most Turks do not show much enthusiasm for his constitutional changes, scare tactics, repression, and money will push such a referendum through. Pre-election polls predicted that the AKP would get about the same number of votes in November that it got in June. They were dead wrong. Erdogan's formidable political skills and his willingness to polarize the country are not to be underestimated.

Unprecedented attacks on Kurds and more

While the AKP now has a majority, it is at the expense of re-igniting the war with the Kurds, a conflict that has cost Turkey $1.2 trillion and some 40,000 lives. It has also seen an almost unprecedented wave of attacks on the Kurdish party, its supporters, and the press.

Four days before the Nov. 1 election, police raided the offices of Ipek Media, closing down two newspapers and two TV stations. The news outlets have been handed over to a government trustee who is investigating them for "supporting terrorism." Ipek Media is closely associated with Fethullah Gulen, an Islamic preacher currently living in exile in the U.S. Gulen and Erdogan were formerly allies, but had a falling out in 2012.

Erdogan has also gone after several other media outlets, including the Dogan Group, which owns Turkey's popular daily, Hurriyet, and CNNTurk. Both outlets have interviewed politicians from the HDP, which the president charges is a front for the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK). The PKK is designated a terrorist organization and the target of Turkey's current war on the Kurds.

While there is a relationship between the PKK and the HDP, the latter has sharply condemned the violence of the former and has a far broader base among Kurds and non-Kurds. Apparently some of the conservative religious Kurds, who voted for the HDP in June, were spooked by the violence and returned to the AKP.

Right-wing mobs

Mobs led by the Ottoman Hearths - the youth arm of the AKP - and the Idealist Hearth - youth arm of the right-wing MHP - have burned HDP offices, attacked Kurdish businesses and homes, and attacked left-wing bookstores. On Sept. 8 a nationalist mob rioted for seven hours, burning offices and stores in the city of Kirsehir, while police stood by and watched.

The chair of a local branch of the HDP, Demet Resuloglu, said she warned police about the mob, but they did nothing. She and several others were temporarily trapped in a bookstore by a mob that set the establishment on fire. "We escaped with our lives after jumping from the second floor. It was an organized affair. Everything happened with the knowledge of the police, the governor and everybody," she told the news outlet Al-Monitor.

Similar attacks took place in the resort towns of Alanya and Manargat.

During the election campaign, Turkish Kurds and leftists were the targets of several bombings that took over 130 lives and were almost certainly the work of the Islamic State. But Erdogan and his prime minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, blamed it on the PKK and tried to tar the HDP with the same brush.

Selahattin Demirtas, a leader of the HDP and a member of parliament, is currently being investigated for supporting "terrorism" and insulting the president, Since Erdogan became president in August of last year, more than 240 people have been charged with insulting him.

Syria mess

Erdogan is likely to treat the AKP's victory as endorsement of his campaign to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, even though polls show that 63 percent of Turks disapprove of getting involved in Syria.

The war has turned into a disastrous quagmire, and the Europeans and the Russians are pushing for a political settlement. Erdogan - a man with a stubborn streak-will probably insist that Assad first must go, a formula that will endear him to the Gulf monarchies, but will almost certainly keep the war going. Turkey is already hosting 2 million Syrian refugees and millions more are headed toward Europe.

The Turkish president has unilaterally redefined the office of the president from one of neutrality to partisan activist. Rather than trying to form a coalition government after last June's election - a major part of the president's job - Erdogan sabotaged every effort to compromise, banking he could stir up the furies of sectarianism and fear to create the climate for a comeback. While the AKP is wealthy, parties like the HDP were tapped out by the June election and could not marshal the resources for another national campaign. In the last weeks of the election the HDP canceled rallies, fearing they would be attacked by right-wing mobs or create targets for Islamic State bombers.

Erdogan created chaos and then told voters the AKP was the only path to peace and stability. It was an argument a lot of voters bought, but the costs are high. The press has been muzzled, a war that was over has been re-started, and Turks and Kurds are once more at each other's throats. The war in Syria is likely to drag on, and the polarization of Turkish society will deepen.

But the AKP has only a slim majority, and the peace and stability it promises is an illusion. As the British Guardian noted, "President Erdogan has got his majority back, but Turkey has been damaged in the process ... Sadly, this election is unlikely to mark a passage into calm waters for Turkey."

This article originally appeared at Conn Hallinan's blog Dispatches from the Edge.

Photo: The Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, casts his vote at a polling station in Istanbul. | Lefteris Pitarakis/AP

Indigenous news: First Nations MPs elected, Day of the Dead history

Mon, 02 Nov 2015 14:57:00 +0000

"Harper awoke a sleeping giant": First Nations break election records

Last Monday's election was historic for Canada's First Nations community, which saw 10 indigenous MPs elected. Winners included Liberals Vance Badawey, who was elected in Niagara Centre, and Yvonne Jones, who was re-elected in Labrador.

The election also saw a record-breaking 54 indigenous candidates run for office. Each candidate ran in one of the 51 swing ridings identified by Assembly of First Nations Chief Perry Bellegarde, where he said the aboriginal vote could make a difference between a majority and minority government. Read more at: http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/election/harper-awoke-a-sleeping-giant-first-nations-break-election-records-1.2619227

The new House of Commons: More women and aboriginal MPs

The Liberals' decisive election win will radically alter the complexion of the House of Commons.

Given that the party went from having 37 seats when the writ was dropped in August to 184 on election night, the extent of the change was bound to be significant. View the full results for election 2015.

The election has also made the House more diverse. The 43rd Parliament of Canada will contain over 200 new faces, including a record number of aboriginal (10) and female MPs (88).

Here's a closer look at the makeup of the new House of Commons. Read more at: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/multimedia/the-new-house-of-commons-more-women-and-aboriginal-mps-1.3280256

Yakama Nation to have full authority over civil, criminal proceedings on tribal land

YAKIMA, Wash. - Federal officials have accepted a petition that will give Yakama Nation authorities exclusive jurisdiction for certain cases on tribal land, and will have the State of Washington withdraw from any authority.

The United States Department of the Interior said in a news release a week ago that "retrocession" has been granted, and tribal police and courts will have full authority over civil and criminal cases involving members of the nation.

The federal government will retain its authority over the Nation, and Yakama Nation authority will remain the same. The removal of state authority over tribal persons is the only change to come from this decision.

The state will keep jurisdiction over those involving non-tribal defendants, plaintiffs or victims.

As part of the agreement the federal Office of Justice Services (OJS) assessed the Yakama Nation's court system and offered recommendations for improvements to their tribal court operations, as well as helped develop a 3-5 year plan. Read more at: http://www.kimatv.com/news/local/Yakama-Nation--334387651.html

Val-d'Or allegations spark crisis at Native Women's Shelter of Montreal

The Native Women's Shelter of Montreal says women staying at the shelter are coping with painful memories this week as they follow developments about allegations of abuse by some provincial police officers in Val-d'Or.

"It's touched them somehow - it's either a friend or it's happened to them," said Nakuset, executive director of Native Women's Shelter of Montreal, in an interview with CBC Montreal's Daybreak. Read more at: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/val-d-or-allegations-spark-crisis-at-native-women-s-shelter-of-montreal-1.3291706

Day of the Dead history: Ritual dates back 3000 years

More than 500 years ago, when the Spanish conquistadors landed in what is now central Mexico, they encountered natives practicing a ritual that seemed to mock death. It was a ritual the indigenous people had been practicing at least 3000 years, which the Spaniards would try unsuccessfully to eradicate.

The ritual is known today as Dia de los Muertos, or Day of the Dead, celebrated in Mexico and many parts of the United States.

Although the ritual has since been merged with Catholic theology, it still maintains the basic principles of the Aztec ritual, such as the use of skulls. Read more at: http://www.azcentral.com/story/entertainment/holidays/day-of-the-dead/2014/09/24/day-of-the-dead-history/16174911/

Photo: Dia de los Muertos celebrations in Mexico. | Marco Ugarte/AP