The dead Ali Khamenei hands over the Iranian flag to a mirror image of his son, Mojtaba Khamenei. From the web site https://english.khamenei.ir/

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Mar 12 2026 (IPS)

The US/Israeli war on Iran might be like messing with a hornets’ nest, spreading fear and chaos all around. The Israeli government claimed that the war was a “preventive” measure to address an immediate threat of Iran constructing a nuclear bomb. However, this war has obviously been meticulously planned over a long period of time and it now seemed to be the right time to put this plan into action. The Iranian air defences had been weakened through earlier attacks, while recent Israeli strikes decapitated Hezbollah’s Lebanese leadership, Iran’s allies north of Israel. With Gaza destroyed and Syria’s unreliable Assad gone, Netanyahu had succeeded in securing his party’s coalition with the far-right and could continue to count upon the support of the Trump Administration, providing Israel with a free hand vis-à-vis the Palestinians and turning a blind eye to the massacre of civilians. The U.S. is continuously supporting Isreal with missile-defence systems, coordination, cooperation, and intelligence sharing.

It appears as if the U.S./Israeli forces now intend to bomb everything in Iran – from its highest leaders, down to police stations and thus hope that Iran will exhaust its defence capacities. The aggressors furthermore claim they intend to achieve an Iranian regime change. However, even if Iran’s ninety-two million people now are trapped between a bloody war and a repressive regime it is highly unlikely that a tolerant government will emerge from a battered rump version of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is more probable that such a state will be governed by leaders even more determined to cling to their power after gaining more confidence after overcoming a terrible crisis. U.S. actions seem to be more improvised than Israel’s and it seems that they have not learned from the Afghanistan failure, i.e. the difficulties in achieving and maintaining a regime change through military means.

The U.S. government rejoiced from the killing of Ali Khamenei – a mid-ranking cleric who did not meet the constitutional requirements of being a marja, i.e. a cleric enabled to make legal decisions for followers and clerics below him in rank. Instead, Khamenei was during his 36 years and six months in power forced to rely on his close ties with the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Now, in spite of the fact that the Iranian revolution’s father, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, had declared that “hereditary succession is sinister, evil, and invalid,” Khamenei’s son has been elected as Supreme Leader. So far Mojtaba Khamenei has acted in the shadow of his father and few Iranians have heard him speak. He has not made any public appearances, never given a sermon, or made any declarations; just working in close relation with the leaders of IRGC.

Whereas the Iranian Army acts as protector of the nation’s sovereignty, the IRGC “safeguards” the Islamic Republic. With more than 125,000 members it serves as Iran’s coast guard, operates a media outlet called Sepah News, and controls the nuclear program. From its origins as an ideological militia, the IRGC now controls nearly every aspect of Iranian politics, economy (including energy and food industries), as well as the nation’s social life. It counts upon a paramilitary volunteer militia with 90,000 active personnel. One of IRGC’s branches is the Qods Force, which specialises in unconventional warfare and military intelligence operations.

The presence, terror and fear created by IRGC have made it difficult for any internal opposition to get organised. In Iran there is nothing akin to the African National Congress with leaders like Nelson Mandela. If a leader would arise from the mess created by the U.S. and Israel it would more likely be a man like Alia Ardashir Larijani, a former commander of the IRGC who holds a B.Sc. in computer science and mathematics, as well as a PhD in Western philosophy.

Larijani has served as deputy minister in various cabinets, been head of the Republic’s broadcasting service, and Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council. Larijani also served as Iran’s top nuclear envoy. However, in late March 2025 he stated that if Iran would be attacked by the United States and Israel, the nation would have no other choice than to develop nuclear weapons. Larijani is accused of having played a key role in the deadly crackdown against opposition protests that gripped the country in January this year. Since the end of December 2025, he is regarded to be the de facto leader of Iran and after originally opposing the election of Mojtaba Khamenei, Larijani has now rallied his supporters behind the newly elected Supreme Leader.

Apart from the fear of an internal collapse of the Islamic Republic of Iran, there are concerns about the economic effects of the current war. Beyond the physical damage, Epic Fury has been quite costly for the Trump Administration that so far has deployed nearly half of the United States’ air power and roughly a third of its naval assets. So far, the Pentagon has not released an official estimate of the cost of the war, but it is currently believed to be USD 2 billion per day. Meanwhile, stocks have plunged all over the world and the price of crude oil spiked from USD 65 per barrel to USD 120 after the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s oil and liquified gas passes, had been effectively closed.

89 percent of Saudi Arabia’s oil shipments used to pass through the Strait, while Kuwait and Qatar shipped 100 percent, Iraq 97 percent and the United Arab Emirates 66 percent. Qatar has so far been worst hit, particularly since it took the place of Russia for liquified gas exports to Europe. Kuwait has now been forced to suspended its production and export of crude oil and liquefied natural gas (of which it is second to the U.S. as the world’s largest provider).

Winners of this situation are large net energy exporters outside the Gulf whose ability to sell abroad remains unaffected, such as Norway, Russia and Canada, and to a lesser degree Nigeria and Angola. Not the least the U.S. is a winner thanks to its expanding fracking industry. At the other end of the spectrum sit economies where energy imports account for a large share of their GDP. This group includes countries such as South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, India and China, as well as most European economies including France, Germany and the UK.

It has even been speculated that the war on Iran is a means of USA to hurt China’s economy. In 2025, China bought more than 80 percent of Iran’s shipped oil, around 12 percent of China’s crude oil imports, while approximately 3 percent came from Venezuela (now subjugated by the U.S.).

In 2021, China and Iran signed a 25-year strategic partnership, meaning that China promised to invest USD 400 billion in exchange for keeping Iranian oil flowing. China does not view its “alliances” in the same way the West does, meaning that its government does not sign mutual defence treaties and will not come rushing to its allies’ aid. However, an unpredictable and dysfunctional actor as the U.S. has become under the Trump administration is a great source of unease for Beijing. Worries worsened by the fact that China’s annual economic growth target has reached its lowest level since 1991. Even as Beijing continues its rapid development of high-tech and renewables industries the country is currently battling with low consumption levels, a prolonged property crisis, and a huge local debt.

A big economy like China’s, as well as other wealthy nations, might find means to mitigate rising oil prices, but it’s much worse for smaller, poorer nations. Disruptions to energy supply as a result of a prolonged conflict will have far greater ramifications economically in the Global South than in the West. As an example, a country like Bangladesh, which is particularly dependent on Middle Eastern oil, not least for its garment industry, has already imposed daily limits on fuel sales after panic buying and stockpiling raised concerns about supply. Furthermore, approximately 13 million Bangladeshi expatriates are currently supporting the country’s economic stability through their remittances, of them 8 million live and work within the Middle East.

The same is true of Pakistan, with over 11 million Pakistanis living and working abroad, mainly in the Gulf states. In January 2025 alone, the country received USD 3 billion in remittances, reflecting a 25 percent year-on-year surge. Furthermore, Pakistan shares a 900-kilometre border with Iran and a collapse of Iran into civil war is a constant worry for Pakistan, which also maintains a military relationship with Saudi Arabia with an estimated 1,500 to 2,000 Pakistani troops stationed in the kingdom. If the situation worsens, as Saudi infrastructure is hit any further, it is only a matter of time that Saudi Arabia will ask Pakistan to contribute towards its defence. Pakistan’s border areas with Iran and its huge Shia population (generally well-disposed towards their fellow believers on the other side of the frontier) are already highly volatile and if internal strife within Iran spills over the border, the fallout for Pakistan would be severe. Pakistan is furthermore recently engaged in a war with Afghanistan. On 6 March, Pakistan carried out air strikes in more than twenty locations across Afghanistan, while the Taliban targeted dozens of Pakistani border posts.

Other neighbouring nations to Iran are equally nervous. In Turkmenistan prices have almost doubled compared with pre-war levels. With an average salary of around USD 714 a large portion of the population is hard hit, since Turkmenistan is importing a considerable amount of industrial goods from Iran – like steel, construction materials, and petrochemicals, as well as food and household items that constitute a critical lifeline for many of its residents.

Turkey is also alarmed by the present situation and worries what will happen if Iran collapses into warring factions. If the U.S./Israel confrontation with Iran deepens, particularly in ways that involve regime change with a spillover effect on Turkey, or security implications as a result of expanded U.S./Israeli cooperation with hostile Kurdish militants, this war could quickly evolve into another fault line in U.S.-Turkish relations.

To sum up – the U.S./Israel attack on Iran is very unlikely to result in a regime change, but might instead result in a chaotic and bloody collapse of the entire country. The war is a high-risk game that might have dangerous effects not only on Iran and its immediate neighbours, but the entire world as well.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Refugees by Honoré Daumier (1808-1879)

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Jan 13 2026 (IPS)

At the moment, ICE’s advancement in the U.S. is apparently dividing the nation’s population into desired and undesirable elements. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was born after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the Twin Towers and intended to be a response to terrorism. However, with Donald Trump’s return to the White House, federal immigration agents have become the president’s praetorian guard, implementing his immigration politics.

ICE has currently 22,000 employees, a number destined to grow thanks to new recruits. Its budget is USD 30 billion a year. During 2025, the agency’s spending on fire arms has grown 600 percent. Its agents generally act with their faces covered, and move around heavily armed, in unmarked vehicles.

ICE agent, photo from Huffington Post

This while it has been indicated that between 900,000 and 1.6 million Ukrainians on Russian-occupied territories have been deported to Russia, including 260,000 children. Outside of Europe similar activities are taking place in several other areas. For example, in Gaza where from the beginning of the Gaza war on 13 October 2023, the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) forced the evacuation of 1.1 million people from Northen Gaza, while the land strip has been bombed and destroyed.

We have to admit that after reaching catastrophic dimensions during the last century the phenomenon of ethnic cleansing is still with us. As the herd animals that we are, we humans have become afflicted with the unfortunate trait of dividing individuals into groups, which we judge and treat according to broad generalizations based on people’s group affiliation, regardless of their unique personality.

Given the xenophobic storms now raging in both in the U.S. and Europe, it may be appropriate to recall the human disasters that such behaviour has caused on their continents. The genocide that the indigenous people of the U.S. were subjected to is well known, and also when during World War II U.S. forcibly relocated and incarcerated about 120,000 U.S, citizens of Japanese descent in various concentration camps. Lesser known is probably the forced deportation of between 300,000 and 2 million Mexicans and Mexican-Americans during the Great Depression between 1929 and 1939, forty to sixty percent of them were U.S, citizens and overwhelmingly children.

The European 20th century history of mass deportations and human slaughter is even darker. It began at the outskirts of the continent when Russian forces between 1863 and 1878 invaded Circassia by the Black Sea, systematically killing and deporting 95 to 97 percent of its population, resulting in the deaths of between 1 and 1.5 million. This was followed by the pogroms, i.e. mass killings of Jews, in for example Odessa (1881), Kishinev (1903), Kiev (1905), and Bialystok (1906), leaving more than 2,000 dead and resulting in a mass migration of Jews from the affected areas, worsened during the following civil war when 35,000 to 250,000 Jews were massacred between 1918 and 1920. At the same time the Bolshevik regime killed and/or deported an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 Don Cossacks.

After World War I between 90,000 and 300,000 Albanians were deported from Yugoslavia and up to 80,000 were killed during this new nation’s colonization of Kosovo. The expulsion and genocide of Armenians and Greeks which occurred in Turkish Anatolia both during and after World War I resulted in mass migrations and between 2 and 3 million Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians were killed. Over 1.2 million ethnic Greeks were expelled from Turkey in 1922-1924, while the Greeks expelled 400,000 Muslims.

Even worse was to come. Between 1935 and 1945, Nazi Germany systematically killed an estimated 130,500 Roma and Sinti people and between 1938 and 1945 more than 6 million Jews. During the same period Nazi German forces killed 3 million Ukrainians, 1,6 million Poles, 1,6 million Russians, 1,4 million Byelorussians. The German allies in Croatia massacred between 200,000 and 500,000 Serbs, as well as approximately 25,000 Roma/Sinti and 30,000 Jews. Their adversaries, the Serbs, killed 32,000 Croats and 33.000 Bosniaks.

The overwhelming part of all these victims were civilians, not combatants, and the estimations above are only some examples of massacres and deportations that occurred all over Europe during World War II.

In the Soviet Union (USSR), Stalin ordered the resettlement of more than 3,5 million ethnic minorities – Ukrainians, Volga Germans, Chechens, Balts, Kalmyks, Crimean Tatars, Balkars, Karachays, Turks, and Ingush. Many of them never returned to their homelands and up to 400,000 deaths due to these expulsions were archived by Soviet authorities.

Before that the Holodomor, a massive man-made famine from 1932 to 1933 had killed 3.5 to 5 million in Ukraine, as well as 62,000 in the Kuban area, while over 300,000 Ukrainians were deported to Kazakhstan, where many died.

All these numbers are just estimations and they might be higher or lower. However, we have to keep in mind that behind every single number we find cruelty and unimaginable suffering.

At the conclusion of World War I, it was borders that were invented and adjusted, while people were on the whole left in place, but during and after World War II what happened was rather the opposite – boundaries remained broadly intact (though USSR significantly expanded its territory) and people were moved instead … millions of them.

For example, 1.6 to 2 million Poles were by the invading Germans expelled from their lands, not counting millions of slave workers deported from Poland to the German Reich. At the same time the USSR transferred 380,000 Poles from their home territories, while 410 000 Finns had to leave Karelia, ceded to the USSR.

On top of that, losses on the battle fields were enormous – Soviet Union lost 6 million soldiers, Germany 4 million, Italy 400,000, and Romania 300,000. If combining military and civilian losses Poland lost one person in 5 of her pre-war population, Yugoslavia one in 8 and Greece one in 14, compared with one in 15 in Germany and 1one in 77 in France.

Nazi Germany captured 5.5 million Soviet soldiers and out of them 3.3 million died in the camps, of the 750,000 German soldiers captured by USSR 20,000 survived.

All this cruelty continued after the war and it was now members of ethnic groups connected with loosing nations who were lumped together into one unit, where individuals came to suffer, both the guilty and the innocent ones.

At the Potsdam Conference from 17 July to 2 August 1945 the heads of the leading Allies – the USSR, the United Kingdom, and the U.S. – agreed upon “orderly and humane” expulsions of the “German populations” from Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary, but not Yugoslavia and Romania. As a result, between 13,5 and 16.5 million “ethnic Germans” were expulsed from Central and Eastern European countries.

Estimates of the number of those who died during this process are being debated and range from a half to 3 million. As an example, investigations by a joint German and Czech commission of historians did in 1995 established that 2.1 million ethnic Germans were deported from Czechoslovakia to Germany. The death toll was at least 15,000 persons, but it could range up to a maximum of 30,000 dead, if one assumes that many deaths were not reported.

Yugoslavia was a particularly horrifying example of ethnic cleansing both during and after World War II. As mentioned above Croats and Serbs constantly massacred each other. During the so called foibe massacres (foibes are sink holes common in the region and many victims were thrown into them) ethnic Italians were killed by Communist partisans. During and after the war these crimes caused an exodus amounting to between 230,000 and 350,000 “ethnic Italians”, estimates of massacred victims range from 3,000 to 11,000.

These are just a few examples of expulsions and massacres of some Europeans, without mentioning the horrible fate of many Greeks, Albanians, Bulgarians, Hungarians, Turks, and many others who happened to be minorities in countries where they had lived for centuries. While considering this often forgotten, or at least unmentioned, history of millions of unwelcomed victims and refugees criss-crossing a bombed out and miserable Europe it is difficult to comprehend that so many descendants of these suffering people are now gathering around xenophobic parties which make refugeeism, whether for one’s life, or due to general misery, a crime.

Contemplating the heavily armed ICE agents in the U.S. “liberating” their nation from “foreign elements” you might easily evoke images of equally armed SS troopers, Soviet NKVD agents, Romanian Iron Guards, Croatian Ustaše and many similar units who expelled, and often killed, ethnic groups all over Europe.

Main sources: Judt, Tony (2005) Postwar: A History of Europe since 1945. London: Vintage. Lieberman, Benjamin (2013) Terrible Fate: Ethnic Cleansing in the Making of Modern Europe. Lanham MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Totten, Samuel et al., eds. (1997) Century of Genocide; Eyewitness Accounts and Critical Views. New York: Garland Publishing.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Kathmandu’s Singha Durbar in flames

By Jan Lundius
ROME, Oct 2 2025 (IPS)

In the Global South, where people under the age of 18 comprise more than 50 percent of the population, youth activism is increasing rapidly. Youngsters are more agile and volatile than older people, less restrained by family, prestige and work. However, many suffer from marginalisation, lack of employment, and poverty. Furthermore, insecurity and limited life experience make young people an easy target for manipulating and unscrupulous politicians, criminal networks, and religious fanatics.

Students and young citizens come together by using social media to make their presence felt and mount protests in public spaces. The role of new media technologies as an organising tool has led besieged authorities to ban online platforms, though imposed restrictions have rather than contain protests accelerated them.

Rebellious youth generally belong to the Gen Z, which refers to “digital native”, the first generation fully immersed in a digital world, with constant access to internet and social media. An upbringing that has shaped their world view, making them independent, pragmatic and focused on social impact.

South Asia has recently experienced massive protest movements involving crowds of young people. In July 2022, after an economic collapse in Sri Lanka, a rebellion forced its president to flee the country. In July 2024, upheavals ended the long rule of Sheikh Hasina in Bangladesh, and in September this year, violent protests in Nepal forced Prime Minister Khadga Oli’s government to resign.

Even though specific incidents triggered these upheavals, they were all due to long-term, shared grievances evolving from stark wealth gaps, rampant nepotism, and unlimited corruption. Above all, youngsters protested against members of powerful dynasties, favouring a wealthy and discredited political elite.

Sri Lankans were in 2022 faced with a galloping inflation, daily blackouts, as well as shortages of fuel, domestic gas, food, medicines, and essential imports. Amid massive desperation, huge crowds of mostly young people did on 25 March take to the streets under the slogan Aragalya, Struggle.

Political power had by then become embedded within the Rajapaksa dynasty. From 2005 to 2022, two brothers – Mahinda and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, had alternately shared the presidency and prime minister post, while another brother headed their political party; a fourth was speaker of the parliament, and other relatives occupied influential political positions.

While Gotabaya Rajapaksa served as defence minister, he was credited with ending the twenty-six-year-long civil war with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. After churches and luxury hotels in April 2019 had been targeted by ISIS-related suicide bombers, killing 270 people, Mahinda and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who at the time were in opposition, accused the current government of leniency. When Gotabaya ran for the presidency the same year, he based his campaign on his record as a militant leader, embracing a Sinhalese-Buddhist nationalism inspired by his brother Mahinda’s ethno-nationalist rhetoric, favouring the Buddhist establishment. Gotabaya was elected with an overwhelming majority and six ministries were then headed by members of the Rajapaksa clan.

Most Aragalaya protesters considered their personal hardships to be a result of the mismanagement and corruption of the Rajapaksa-led government. They demanded that the president be deposed and a thorough “system change” brought about. After appointing an astute insider, Ranil Wickremesinghe, as acting president, Gotabaya Rajapaksa fled to Singapore. Wickremesinghe’s government refused to hold elections and persistently portrayed Aragalaya as a chaotic movement, captured by militants, fascists, and terrorists.

Several Aragalaya supporters were wary of being used by partisan or militant groups, particularly those with leftist ideologies which had a long history of organizing protests and strikes. One exception could have been the leftist National People’s Power (NPP), established in 2019. The 2024 elections, which Wickremesinghe had been forced to accept, was won by a NPP coalition lead by Anura Dissanayake.

So far, Dissanayake and his NPP coalition have not introduced any radical political or economic changes. They have largely continued the Wickremesinghe government’s economic and foreign policies, raising questions about the extent to which the NPP coalition is willing, or able, to depart from established governance patterns and deliver the systemic change that has been promised. Deep set divisions and ethnic-religious tensions continue to harass the nation and NPP is apparently trying to tread lightly to avoid stirring up any violent disaccord.

The same could be said about Bangladesh, where an interim government led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus seems to be cautious not to cause any antagonistic violence. Yunus’ group of personal supporters and experts presides over a nation with a chilling rise in mob violence and political discord; women are often being targeted, as well as there are reports of attacks on religious minorities.

The formerly dictatorial, but secular and highly corrupt political party, the Awami League, has been banned and democratic elections are promised by the interim government in February 2026. Some are optimistic about democratic elections, described by Yunus as becoming the most “beautiful elections ever”. However, others are unsure if elections will actually be held within a political scenario where violence is a common-day affair.

In Bangladesh, it was a quota system for jobs that forced youngsters into the streets. It was mainly students who led the protests. Student politics had for several years been ferocious, especially since religious and political fractions used them as a mobilising force. Violent feuds within educational institutes had killed many and seriously hampered the academic atmosphere.

Student anger became unified through a common resentment of reserved positions in the Bangladesh Civil Service (BCS), a cherished field of government service. The reserved positions were destined to “freedom fighters, i.e. veterans from the 1971 liberation war, as well as their children and grandchildren. Protests erupted in full force on 1 July after the Supreme Court in June 2024 had reinstated a 30 percent quota reserved for veteran descendants, generally interpreted as an intent by the governing party to favour its traditional supporters.

Bangladesh became a sovereign nation in December 1971, after a war against Pakistan, which was supported by India. Sheik Mujibur Rahman was until his assassination in 1975 president and prime minister. Following further turmoil with counter coups, General Ziaur Rahman eventually took over as president; he was in May 1981 assassinated in yet another coup. Ziaur Rahman’s widow, Begum Khaleda Zia, served from 1991 to 1996 as the second female prime minster in the Muslim world (after the Pakistani Benazir Bhutto) and again between 2001 and 2006, when Bangladesh, according to the Corruption Perceptions Index was listed as the most corrupt country in the world. Following the end of her government’s term, a military-backed caretaker government charged Khaleda Zia and her two sons with corruption and in 2018 she was sentenced to 17 years in prison.

Sheikh Hasinah, daughter of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was prime minister between 1996 and 2001, and again from 2009 to 2024, following several controversial elections. Her tenure as prime minister was marked by economic mismanagement, rampant corruption, leading to a rising foreign debt, increased inflation, youth unemployment, banking irregularities and an enormous wealth gap. The Financial Times reported that more than an estimated USD 200 billion was allegedly plundered from Bangladesh during Sheikh Hasinah’s time as prime minister, with a lot of these money ending up in countries such as the UK.

As the case had been in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, several members of the Nepalese political elite considered themselves as privileged and not accountable, while favouring family members and supporters to syphon wealth from overprized building endeavours.

Khadga Prassad Oli, a communist who began his political career as “spokesman for the oppressed”, seemed to be unaware of the anger accumulating around him within a nation where some two thousand men and women daily left to look for livelihoods in other countries (remittances from Nepalis working abroad constitute a third of the country’s GDP). Of those who stayed behind, more than 80 percent work in the informal sector, while youth unemployment in the formal sector is more than 20 percent.

On 4 September this year, the government ordered authorities to block 26 social media platforms, including Facebook, X, YouTube, LinkedIn, Instagram, Reddit, Signal and Snapchat, for not complying with a deadline to register with the country’s ministry of communication. The measure was explained as a means to tackle fake news, hate speech, and online fraud.

By then, youngsters had with increasing anger accessed platforms where politicians’ children posted photos of their opulent existence, awash with designer clothes, luxury holidays, and lavish parties. The close down of all media platforms, except the Chinese TikTok, further inflamed the resentment of Nepalese youth.

Soon Kathmandu was burning – Singha Durbar, i.e. Nepal’s administrative headquarters; the health ministry; the parliament building; the Supreme Court; the presidential palace; the prime minister’s residence, offices of the governing communist party, and the Kathmandu Hilton, were all set ablaze.

Nepal, the oldest sovereign, and until 2008 only Hindu state in South Asia, was for 250 years, under a strict caste system, ruled by the Shah dynasty. After internal power struggles and murders within the “Royal House of Gorkha” the monarchy was abolished and it was only in 1990 that it had ceded partial power to political parties. After that, a series of failing civilian governments gave in 1996 rise to a “Maoist” insurgency, which took sixteen thousand lives.

The leader of that rebellion, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, was in 2008 elected prime minister. However, he and his erstwhile revolutionaries proved incapable of improving Nepalese living standards and soon indulged themselves in corruption. After the September Gen Z-led upheaval a caretaker Prime Minister has been appointed. Sushila Karki, has a good record after being Nepal’s first female Chief Justice, between 2016 and 2017.

While new leaders seem to have emerged in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal, the general public is now asking itself if these recently arrived politicians will be more prudent, corruption free and restrained in controversial actions, than their predecessors.

Much of the outcome depends on the “big brother” in the area – The Republic of India, where millions of migrant workers from Nepal, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka reside and work. Indian democracy has, with all its shortcomings, been characterized by a collective political discourse in which concerns of a diversity of all Indians could find a space. However, under prime minister Modi we now witness the rise of Hindu nationalism, rooted in homogeneity and exclusion, questioning who really belongs in the Hindutva community, while marginalizing those who don’t, among them migrants, Muslims, and many others. A dangerous polarization that could worsen the situation in neighbouring countries, particularly considering the huge number of their emigrants being present in a country prone to discriminate against them, as well as forcing them back to a tumultuous situation in their countries of origin.

This is part 1 of an analysis of the connection between youth movements and political change, part 2 will analyse how youth-led revolutions have changed political scenarios globally.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Charlie Weimers with EU flag and the Sweden Democrat’s party symbol, a bluebell.

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Sep 19 2025 (IPS)

On September 11, Charlie Weimers, a Swedish Member of the European Parliament and active within the European Conservatives and Reformists Group, rose up during a Parliamentary session and asked for a minute of silence to honour the memory of Charlie Kirk, who the day before had been shot and killed during a political meeting at the Utah Valley University in the U.S.

“Madam President, dear colleagues, the murder of political activist Charlie Kirk, a husband, loving father and patriot has shocked the world. We must strongly condemn political violence and rhetoric that incites violence. Will you stand with me in reflection and prayer in his honour, and I yield the rest of my time for a moment of silence.”

Charlie Weimers began his political career as a member of the Swedish Chrisitan Democrat Party, but later switched to the Sweden Democrats, a nationalist, right-wing populist party, which in spite of efforts to tune it down finds its roots in Neo-Nazi fringe organizations. It is now Sweden’s second largest political party with more than 20 percent of the electorate behind it.

There is nothing wrong in condemning murder political violence and defend freedom of speech, but this cannot hinder us from scrutinizing who is canonized as a victim of radical aggression. Charlie Kirk was 33 years old when he was murdered, leaving a wife and two small children behind. He had admitted that when he in 2012 started Turning Point USA, which eventually would become a rich and powerful organization, he had “no money, no connections and no idea of what I was doing.” At that time, Kirk had dropped out of college and been rejected by The U.S. West Point Military Academy. Nevertheless, he had rhetorical gifts for countering progressive ideas, being sensitive about cultural tensions, and endowed with an aptitude for making provocative declarations that resonated with frustrated college audiences, who followed and agreed with his web postings. Kirk’s frequent college rallies eventually attracted tens of thousands of young voters, as well as the attention and financial support of conservative leaders. President Trump was not wrong when he declared that:

The Great, and even Legendary, Charlie Kirk, is dead. No one understood or had the Heart of the Youth in the United States of America better than Charlie.

After his death Kirk has been praised for showing up at campuses where he talked with anyone who would approach him. Conservative journalists have declared him to be one of the era’s most effective practitioners of persuasion. Kirk’s message was readily embraced by youngsters who accepted his view that Democrats had spent hundreds of billions of dollars on illegal immigrants and foreign nations, while the young “lost generation” of the U.S. had to pinch their pennies, but would not be able to own a home, never marry, and even be forced to work until they died, abused and childless. However, he also gave them hope, telling these unfortunate youngsters that they did not have to stay poor and accept being worse off than their parents. They just had to avoid supporting corrupt political leaders, who were lying to them only to take advantage of their votes. Kirk assured his young audience that it is an undeniable fact that cultural identity is disappearing, while sexual anarchy, crime and decadence reign unabated, private property is a thing of the past, and a ruling “liberal” class controls everything. The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, was probably right when she said that Kirk had inspired millions of young people “to get involved in politics and fight for our nation’s conservative values.”

Kirk allied his Turning Point USA not to any poor radical fringe groups, but to conservative, wealthy donors and influencers. He preached a “Christian Message” well adapted to several members of such groups, declaring that Turning Point USA was dedicated to “recruiting pastors and other church leaders to be active in local and national political issues.”

Kirk fervently defended the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, i.e. “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed “, declaring that it was worth “a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can keep a Second Amendment which protect our other God-given rights”.

However, Kirk was not happy about the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlawed “discrimination based on race, colour, religion, sex, or national origin in employment, education, and public accommodations.” He stated that the Civil Rights Act was a “huge mistake” and declared that if the majority of Americans were asked if they respected the Civil Rights Act the answer would have been a “no”. Adding the caveat that “I could be wrong, but I think I’m right.”

Undoubtedly, there was a racist ingredient in Kirk’s ideology. He did for example state that the concept of white privilege was a myth and a “racist lie”. In October 2021, he launched an Exposing Critical Racism Tour to numerous campuses and other institutions, to “combat racist theories”, by which he meant the propagation of an understanding of the relationships between social conceptions of race and ethnicity, social and political laws and mass media, all of which Kirk considered to be propaganda and an unfounded brainchild of liberal Democrats. He blamed the DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) programmes for threatening U.S. competitiveness and security, even claiming that upon sitting in a plane and realising that the pilot was “Black”, he could not help thinking “’Hey, I hope he’s qualified”.

Like most populist, “patriotic”, European right-wing political parties, not the least the Sweden Democrats, though they nowadays try to hide it more carefully than before, Kirk endorsed the so-called “great replacement theory”. This way of thinking assumes that powerful, nefarious actors, for some obscure reason, are trying to replace an upright indigenous, generally white-skinned population with immigrants of “doubtful” origin. Kirk did not even hesitate to state that Democrats supposedly wanted to make the U.S. “less white”.

Kirk also argued that humans have no significant effect on global climate change and joined antivax activists by, among other statements, calling the mandatory requirements for students to get the COVID-19 vaccine “medical apartheid”. Kirk was outspoken when it came to claim that Trump’s loss in the president elections of 2022 was due to fraud, supported the “stop the steal” movement and denied that the violent attacks on the Capitol were an insurrection.

Opposing political violence and supporting free speech does not mean that you have to sanctify a victim like Charlie Kirik, who after all was a racist and an incendiary agitator against underprivileged groups, as well as he degraded scientists who warned against climate change and vaccine denial. It is not defensible that such a voice, no matter how despicable it might be, is silenced by violence and murder. However, we cannot refrain from pointing out the great harm the kind of agitation Kirk devoted himself to can cause. As an educator, I have often been forced to experience how children suffer from racism and bigotry preached and condoned by influencers like Charlie Kirk. Accordingly, to sanctify such persons and tolerate their prejudiced ideology is hurtful and dangerous.

Furthermore, let us not be fooled by deceitful propaganda trying to convince us that Charlie Kirk’s so called “debates” were neither aggressive, nor mendacious. They were brutally provocative; opponents were shouted down, or belittled. The rhetoric was hateful, contempt was poured out over women, Black people, immigrants and Muslims, queer and trans people. Liberals were branded as enemies, science demeaned. And, yes – Charlie Kirk turned to young people, who felt frustrated, marginalized and despised, telling them that he wanted to give them hope and a will to fight injustice. But at what price? Based on what truth? Incitement to violence and contempt for humanity might be safeguarded in the name of free speech, but it should never be accepted and defended. It must be attacked through an unconstrained press based on facts, a well-founded science, and an unfaltering respect for human rights.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

On August the first, the Italian daily La Repubblica published an interview with David Grossman, Israel’s most renown author and supporter of a “two-state solution”, as well as an outspoken critic of Israel’s violence against Palestinian civilians.

Israeli presence on the West Bank. The orange and red patches are what remains of Palestinian controlled areas.

Grossman’s interview received international attention and was quoted by respected newspapers like The Guardian, Le Figaro and Haaretz. It was emphasized that so far, few Israeli intellectuals have reacted against what is happening in Gaza. The New Yorker reminded that wars waged by the U.S. in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan transpired in far-away places, unlike the current destruction of lives and cities taking place close to Israel. In some places, Israelis might hear explosions, see attack planes and missiles thundering past, while they quietly enjoy their drinks by the beach. How is it possible that so many Israelis are able to indifferently accept that tens of thousands of innocent people are being mutilated and killed in their close vicinity?

Grossman suffers from crimes against humanity committed in the name of Israel, a country where he was born and learned to love. A nation for which his twenty-one years old son Uri lost his life while fighting in Lebanon. During his entire life Grossman has strived for understanding between Palestinians and Israelis. However, he has been forced to experience how people instead of helping each other to achieve peace and prosperity, have armed themselves while preaching vengeance and death. Grossman states that surrendering to fear and hate is much easier than trying to promote empathy and conciliation. He does not deny that Hamas acted in a deplorable manner when its members on the 7th of October 2023 crossed the border and spread terror in Israel. However, after that date many of Grossman’s friends have abandoned their earlier liberal and tolerant convictions and fallen victims to fear and chauvinism.

According to Grossman “Israel’s curse began with the occupation of the Palestinian territories in 1967. We became militarily strong and fell into the temptation of our absolute power and the idea that we can do anything.” He states that up until now he has been reluctant to use the word “genocide”, which for a Jew is “an avalanche word; once you utter it, it just keeps growing, like an avalanche. And it brings even more destruction.” Can a Jew, a Jewish state, really commit genocide? A terrible crime that their close of kin suffered less than hundred years ago? Grossman says that unfortunately the word has to be uttered loud and clear – Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. “It breaks my heart, but I have to say it now.” Fear and power madness brought Israel to a breaking point where so many have lost their respect for the lives and welfare of others. Grossman knows that many Israelis and Palestinians “have our heart in the right place, but it beats in a world without any heart at all.”

The day after the Grossman interview, Liana Segre, 95 years old and an Auschwitz survivor, reacted in the same paper: “It must be clear that Israel is neither the heir, nor the representative of the European victims of the Shoah, which must not be used as a shield to justify its excesses, and neither should the behaviour of the Israeli state be used as a pretext for returning to hating the entire Jewish people.” It ought to be possible to criticize Israel’s killing of innocent civilians without being accused of being an antisemite. Grossman’s use of the term “genocide” for what is currently happening in Gaza is actually defensible and ought to be disconnected from allusions to anti-Semitism, regardless of what Netanyahu’s regime might imply. It is actually he and Trump who misuse words by throwing the epithet “anti-Semite” in the face of anyone who questions the slaughter of civilians in Gaza.

While addressing the thorny issue of Israeli-Palestinian relations one might pay attention to the history of Hamas. The Hamas movement was founded in 1987. For years, various governments led by Benjamin Netanyahu tried to create a rift between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. His idea was to prevent PLO from advancing toward the establishment of a Palestinian state. Accordingly, Hamas was upgraded from being just one of many terror groups to become an organization with which Israel held indirect negotiations via Egypt, discreetly allowing it to receive infusions of cash from abroad, while increasing the number of work permits granted to Gazan labourers, who kept money flowing into Gaza. Since 2018, Israel also allowed millions in Qatari cash to enter Gaza. Apparently, Israeli policy was to treat the Palestinian Authority as a burden and Hamas as an asset. This while Hamas grew stronger and stronger until its terrorists crossed the border to Israel, slaughtering hundreds of Israelis and kidnapping 251, to be used in exchange för Hamas prisoners held in Israel. Since then, as of 30 July 2025, over 62,700 people (60,785 Palestinians and 1,983 Israelis) have been reported killed, according to the Gaza Health Ministry and Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Among them 217 journalists and media workers and 224 humanitarian aid workers, including 179 employees of United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

Considering the great number of civilian casualties, it might be opportune to emphasize what opponents to the Hamas regime often have stated: “The world thinks that Gaza is Hamas and Hamas is Gaza.” Actually, during Hamas reign in Gaza it has always been dangerous to speaking out against the Organization. In polls taken before 7th of October 2023, 44 percent of Gazans claimed they had no trust at all in the Hamas government, while 23 percent had “not a lot of trust.” Only 29 percent expressed either a great deal or quite a lot of trust in Hamas. When it came to Hamas’ corruption, 72 percent stated they believed there was a large amount of corruption in government institutions, and only a minority thought Hamas was taking meaningful steps to address the problem.

Hamas consolidated its power in the Gaza strip through the Battle of Gaza in 2007, a brief civil war between Fatah (the largest faction of the multi-party PLO). Fatah lost and its officials were either taken as prisoners, executed, or expelled, while the Palestinian territories came to be divided into two entities – the West Bank, governed by the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) and the Gaza Strip governed by Hamas. In March 2019, Gaza witnessed widespread protests, reflecting dissatisfaction with the severe living conditions, which were marked by a 70 percent unemployment rate among young people. Dozens of individuals, including activists, journalists, and human rights workers were beaten, arrested and subjected to home raids.

While considering Nethanyahu’s, and to a certain degree successful, policies to sabotage Palestinian efforts to constitute a two-state solution his support to Israeli settlements on the West Bank might be added. These settlements have been constructed on lands that Israel has occupied since the Six-Day War in 1967. All these settlements are illegal under international law.

As of January 2023, there were 144 settlements on the West Bank, including 12 in East Jerusalem. The West Bank is also hosting at least 196 so called outposts, settlements not officially authorized by the Israeli government. Over 450,000 Israeli settlers reside in the West Bank, while 220,000 live in East Jerusalem. The presence of settlements and Jewish-only bypass roads creates a fragmented Palestinian territory, seriously hindering economic development and freedom of movement for Palestinians. The Israeli Government spends more than double per citizen in the settlements than it does on citizens within Israel.

In March 2024, the Israeli government announced that it was planning to construct more than 3,300 new homes in the West Bank. This while, according to the UN, since October 7, 2023 at least 964 Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank. During the same period, more than 2,900 home demolitions were carried out. In January this year, Israel launched a major military operation called “Iron Wall”, forcibly displacing 30,000 Palestinians in the West Bank.

It is easy to forget the individuals behind the statistics. Two days before Grossman’s interview was published in La Repubblica, Awdah Hathaleen, a Palestinian activist and journalist who helped to make the Oscar-winning documentary No Other Land, was killed. A settler had been driving a bulldozer trough land belonging to Palestinians in the village of Umm al-Khair, south of Hebron and close to an Israeli settlement. The vehicle was destroying trees and cultivated land. When a Palestinian resident approached to ask the driver to stop, he knocked him down with the blade of the bulldozer. Residents began to throw stones. Yinon Levi, a well-known, militant settler, who by Donald Trump had been removed from a U.S. sanctions list, was captured on a video wildly firing his gun at the Palestinians. Awdah Hathaleen, who was standing a distance away from the confrontation, was hit by a bullet and died immediately.

The Israeli government is currently punishing an entire population for the misdeeds of a violent, corrupt regime, which it earlier had been supporting. The Netanyahu regime thrives in a climate of fear and violence. The Israeli war on the civil population of Gaza is accompanied by the defense of what actually appears to be ethnic cleansing. A suspicion supported by Netanyahu’s flagrant disregard for international law in his support to illegal settlements on Palestinian territory and his portrayal of every critic as an anti-Semite, thus hiding the misdemeanors of his regime behind an abuse of the memory of the millions of Jews who perished in European genocides. The crimes of Netanyahu’s regime contribute to an increasingly powerful and unsavory anti-Semitism. A nasty situation in which sensible individual voices like Gossman’s barely can be distinguished.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Members of a Haitian family return from the Dominican Republic carrying the few possessions they have. Credit: IOM/Antoine Lemonnier

By Jan Lundius
SANTO DOMINGO, Dominican Republic, Apr 8 2025 (IPS)

On March 18, the first plane with deportees from the US landed in Cap-Haïtien. Of the 46 passengers, 25 were convicted felons. Taking effect on April 24 the US Department of Homeland Security will revoke the temporary legal status of more than 210,000 Haitians. They had by the Biden administration been granted a safe haven, but all these Haitians are now expected to be deported back to a country immersed in a humanitarian crisis.

Escaping poverty and violence, Haitians have also crossed the border into neighboring Dominican Republic, where they are constantly running the risk of being captured and transported back across the border. An activity that has given rise to a multifaceted and difficult-to-investigate corruption, including politicians, lawyers and the police. In 2024, The Dominican Republic deported more than 270,000 Haitians. In the last three months of this year alone, over 90, 000 “foreigners with irregular status” have been deported under a new operation aiming to remove 10,000 undocumented Haitians per week. This from a country where more than 75 percent of the estimated 800,000 Haitians are working full-time, particularly in agriculture and construction.

In the past month alone, violence in Haiti’s capital, Port-au-Prince displaced over 60,000 people. Only since the beginning of March, attacks by armed gangs have displaced more than 24,000 people. Desperate people are seeking refuge in 48 displacement sites, others have turned to host families. Despite ongoing efforts, the scale of need far exceeds available resources, this while the Trump administration has ended the USAID’s support to Haiti.

Efforts to curb gang violence have so far been inadequate. A UN supported contingent of around 800 Kenyan police, working alongside Haiti’s National Police, is leading a mission against the gangs, who are supported by drug- and arms traffickers. So far, one Kenyan officer has been killed and two others have been seriously injured.

Violence has escalated since October last year, when gangsters attacked the town of Pont-Sondé, killing 115 people. In November, gang attacks forced more than 20,000 people to leave their homes in the Capital. Between December 6 and 11, at least 200 innocent people were killed by gangsters in Wharf Jérémie, one of the worst slums in Port-au-Prince. In the same month, a community self-defence group lynched 10 gang members in l’Artibonite, the response was not long in coming and approximately 100 men, women and children were wantonly murdered. On December 17, a gang attacked the Hôpital Bernard Mevs in Port-au-Prince, setting it on fire and on Christmas Eve, gangs attacked the Hôpital général, the Capital’s largest hospital, killing several patients, at least two journalists and a police officer. Since then, the killings and general abuse have not ceased. People are getting increasingly desperate. On March 20, when protesters demanding protection tried to reach the Prime Minister’s office, the police dispersed the crowd by firing tear gas. At least 85 percent of Port-au-Prince is currently controlled by armed, criminal gangs.

No airlines fly to Port-au-Prince anymore. US aviation authorities have indefinitely banned all flights . If you want to get out from the country the only open airport is in Cap-Haïtien and you have to fly by helicopter. The cost is USD 2,500 and you are only allowed to bring 10 kilos of luggage. By early 2025, the number of people forced to leave their homes as a result of gang violence had reached over a million.

All this on top of earthquakes, hurricanes, centuries of political oppression and catastrophic environmental degradation. Born as the world’s first republic ruled by former slaves, Haiti has for more than two centuries suffered from the racist contempt of the outside world and an overpopulation originally caused by the 800,000 slaves imported by the French to their colony of Saint-Domingue (which later became Haiti). A country which tropical soils could not even then feed them all. On top of the misery, Haiti was until 1947 forced to pay reparations for taking possession of the “property” that their French oppressors had usurped.

To place a human face on the current situation we interviewed a skilled Haitian worker living in the Dominican Republic. For obvious reasons he wanted to remain unidentified.

How old are you and for how many years have you been living in the Dominican Republic?

I am 43 years old and have been working here for 28 years.

How did you first come here and what did you work with then?

I bought a false passport and a visa, something that made my entry legal and began to work collecting coffee for 50 cents a day, later on I could earn the equivalent of one US dollar a day, by weeding fields and collecting tomatoes.

Why did you leave Haiti and do you still have a family there?

I come from a village outside of Thomassique, not far from the Dominican border. We are eight siblings, my five brothers still live there, as well as my two sisters. The soil does not yield as much as before, being constantly degraded by draught. My father opposed he Duvalier regime and the Tonton Macoutes [secret police/militia] wanted to kill him. He was in hiding for six years until he died when I was eleven. We were starving. When I was fifteen, I left for the Dominican Republic. Every other year I try to visit Haiti. I have two sons living there, 12 and 13 years old. They live with a brother of mine and go to school there. I also have a 14 years old girl , who for five years has been living with us here in the Dominican Republic. She lacks papers and I had to take her out of the public school. So far, I cannot afford a private one.

You are now working with masonry. What is your education?

I went to school up until the sixth grade. I had to quit to help my mother and siblings. In the Dominican Republic my earnings were hardly enough to sustain myself. However, a friend helped me to find a job where I learned to do masonry and produce tiles. I am now able to do any kind of skilled masonry.

How much do you earn?

I am no longer with the masonry workshop, earning better by collaborating with an engineer involved with the construction of private villas. It is not a steady work. I am paid per hour and if I work from sunrise to sunset, I can generally earn the equivalent of 15 US dollars. Covering a middle-sized kitchen with tiles would earn me around 30 dollars. However, I seldom find work for more than fifteen days a month. I have to send money for my children in Haiti and support my wife and daughter her in the Dominican Republic.

Is your wife working as well?

No, she cannot even leave the apartment.

Why not?

She does not have any papers and I cannot afford getting any, neither for her, nor for our daughter. They risk to be caught in the street and deported to Haiti. Paperless Haitians are rounded up and brought to a compound, when enough are assembled they are locked up in special, barred busses and brought to the border, where they are let off. Some are not even born in Haiti; they have to find their way as best as they can. The trip to the frontier means several hours without food or water, and no possibility to visit the toilet. Mothers caught in this manner have to leave their children behind, to care for themselves until someone brings them to the authorities. If you are caught, the police generally ask for the equivalent of 5 dollars to let you go, not all are carrying so much money.

Would you prefer to live in Haiti?

Of course, there you feel free. You are among friends and equals. Dominicans assume they are better than Haitians. They look down upon us and depict us as criminals. To consider all Haitians as enemies to Dominican wellbeing has for centuries been part of Dominican politics. I understand them … no one wants strangers living in their house. I have no problem with the Dominicans I work together with, they respect my skills. However, everywhere else I feel questioned and despised.

Do you have a work permit?

I have to renew it every year and to do so I have to pay a lawyer working with the Dirección General de Migración. Before you could do it on your own. The lawyer arranges all the papers for you, and computerizes them. It is big business; the papers do not exist in reality. It costs me 25 dollars every year. Without work permit you live in fear all the time.

What do you want most of all?

To find work in any country except here. In Haiti, I cannot support myself, but with my skills it is possible anywhere else. If I could afford it, I would travel to Mexico and cross the border into the US. I might also find work in Latin America.

After our interview, which was carried out in another town, the mason took the bus back to Santo Domingo. The driver noticed his work tools and assumed he carried money. When the other passengers had left the bus in Santo Domingo, the mason was detained by the driver and his assistant, who demanded more money. If the mason did not pay, they threatened to denounce him to the authorities. When he said he had a work permit the driver menaced him with a machete. However, a bystander noticed what was happening and convinced the assailants to let him go.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

In these turbulent and sad times, it is hard to keep quiet about abuses and violations of human rights taking place around the world; in eastern DR Congo, South Sudan, Ukraine, and Gaza. Among the most egregious examples of incomprehensible stances on such abuses is the behaviour displayed by the Trump Administration, not least the President’s behaviour against the lawfully elected president of Ukraine. Trump’s doubts about the validity of a nation’s desperate struggle against the forces of a dictatorial regime, which destroys their country and aims at taking over its richest territory.

A stance that may be considered in connection with USA’s bold declaration of being “the world’s greatest democracy”. A belief ingrained in most US citizens, who steadfast believe that this democracy is guaranteed by a rock-solid Constitution.

Former president Joseph (Joe) Biden has been among these believers, thought his faith has begun to waver:

We are still, at our core, a democracy. And yet history tells us that blind loyalty to a single leader and a willingness to engage in political violence is fatal to democracy. For a long time, we’ve told ourselves that American democracy is guaranteed, but it’s not. We have to defend it, protect it, stand up for it — each and every one of us.

Nevertheless, while trying to defend American democracy and oppose the dictatorial behaviour of the nation’s current president, it might be worthwhile to ask whether the US Constitution really will be able to defend democracy and human rights?

The venerated Fathers of the Nation, who in the summer of 1787 assembled in Philadelphia to write a constitution (ratified in 1789) actually assumed that the United States could not become a pure democracy. Just how democratic the nation should be was during this revolutionary era a deeply controversial issue, and it remains so today.

In those days the president, senate, and judiciary would be chosen by representatives, rather than the people. Only the House of Representatives would be directly elected, but those allowed to vote were only “property-owning adult, white men”. However, one crucial feature of the Constitution was that it could be “amended” and over the years more democratic features were included. In the two centuries following the Constitution’s ratification the original document has been “amended” 27 times. For example, it was in 1868 further “democratized” when a 14th amendment granted citizenship to all persons “born or naturalized in the United States”, including formerly enslaved people. The amendment provided all citizens with “equal protection under the laws.” In 1870, a 15th amendment established that the right to vote could not be denied by race. In 1913, a 17th amendment gave voters, rather than state legislatures, the power to choose their state’s senators, and in 1920, a 19th amendment granted women the right to vote. Only one amendment, the 18th, which established prohibition of alcohol, has been repealed by the united states.

A proposed amendment must be passed by two-thirds of the Congress, and then ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states. The same rule is applicable for the removal of an amendment. However, there are a number of legal deceptions that may be used to avoid applying a constitutional amendment. Famously did the US Supreme Court in 1883 allow southern states to ratify racist, discriminatory laws by declaring that the14th and 15th amendments only dealt with discrimination by the states, not by individuals. A judgement that was not overturned until, the applications of a Civil Rights Act in 1964 and a Voting Right Act in 1965.

Until then, several state legislations had denied Native Americans, Asians and others from human- as well as voting rights. This is just one example of how the US Constitution can be ignored through legal chicaneries, in particular if the Supreme Court’s objectivity has been thwarted by political affiliations.

Since taking office, Trump’s views of presidential authority appear to be far less restrained than those of his predecessors. He is trying to impede law suits against him personally, at the same time as he seeks to restrict birthright citizenship, withhold funding appropriated by Congress, and removing heads of independent federal agencies. It appears as if the current US President is counting upon a Supreme Court, which will not use the Constitution to hinder his irregular ventures.

The first ten amendments to the US Constitution are called the Bill of Rights and were ratified in 1791. The 1st amendment reads

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

A right that recently has been questioned, or “moderated”, by the current administration. Trump has over several decades threatened and sued his critics over comments made about him and has on several occasions referred to journalists as the “enemy of the people”, suing the CNN, ABC News, CBS News, and the publisher Simon & Schuster, for spreading, what he considers to be, lies about him.

Such behaviour has after Trump’s elevation to the presidency become the order of the day. The White House press team lately decided to determine who gets to enjoy access to press conferences, banning among others the global news agencies Reuters and Associated Press (AP). The announcement came a day after the Trump administration won a temporary ruling allowing it to bar the AP in retaliation for the outlet’s decision to resist Trump’s demand to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America”.

Another attempt at infringement of “free speech” has been when President Trump on the 4th of March stated that he plans to stop all federal funding for colleges and schools allowing “illegal” protests and that “agitators” would be imprisoned, or sent back to the country they came from, while “American students will be permanently expelled or, depending on the crime, arrested.”

Meanwhile, Elon Musk’s politically motivated Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is planning to, or already has shut down the CFPB, a federal regulatory agency enforcing financial consumer protection laws, the U.S. Agency for International Development (UASAID) and the Department of Education. DOGE has also announced drastic personnel layoffs at the Federal Aviation Administration, which in September 2024 fined Musk’s SpaceX, with over USD 600,000 for failing to follow license requirements for two rocket launches.

DOGE has so far been instrumental in firing personnel from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Internal Revenue Service, while proposing to drastically limit funding to Medicare, as well as the National Institute of Health, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Treasury Department.

Job-seekers hoping to join the Trump administration are facing a series of loyalty tests. White House screening teams are fanning out to government agencies to check for “Make America Great Again” bona fides and carefully checking applicants’ social media posts. Candidates are asked about the result of the 2020 election and the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol, two issues Trump consider to be tests of loyalty.

Such efforts bring to mind Joseph (Joe) McCarthy, who in the early 1950s went on the road for the Republican Party with a speech about alleged communists working secretly deep in the State Department and elsewhere in the federal establishment, stating that there were 205 communist “card-carrying members” within the State Department. Pressed for a list, McCarthy never produced one.

Press attention blew up McCarthy’s unsubstantiated claims and he soon became a thorn in the side of the Democratic party President Harry Truman. Even if McCarthy never discovered any communists in crucial roles, he and his allies destroyed the reputations of thousands of civil servants, academics and journalists. Some never recovered professionally, a few even committed suicide. To begin with, not many Republicans opposed McCarthy and his lies. One exception was the senator Margaret Chase Smith, who declared:

It is high time that we all stopped being tools and victims of totalitarian techniques – techniques that, if continued here unchecked, will surely end what we have come to cherish as the American way of life.

Many Republicans, eager to regain power, assumed that McCarthy and his accusations were crucial for an election win. However, the Republican 1952 presidential nominee and war hero Dwight Eisenhower did not need McCarthy’s lies to gain popularity. Nevertheless, after his victory Eisenhower made the mistake to grant McCarthy the chairmanship of a key Senate investigation subcommittee, paving the way for his height of power, fame and falsehoods. McCarthy’s crusade culminated two years later in a clash with the Defense Department over the promotion of a leftist Army dentist. A TVdebate concerning this issue exposed McCarthy as a compulsive liar and made him withdraw from public view. He died three years later, at the age of 48.

A recent movie, The Apprentice, shed some light on the role of legendary lawyer Roy Cohn, who for years was legal adviser, personal friend and promoter of Donald J. Trump. Roy Cohn began his career as an influential investigator for McCarthy’s subcommittee. Trump has often spoken of Cohn as his ideal of an attorney, utterly devoted to him, while teaching him to be concerned with nothing but winning.

Will Trump’s apparent abuse of the Constitution stir up any opposition within his own party? Why are Democrats, and so many others who confess their faith in the omnipotence of the Constitution, not perceiving their President as a threat to what it stands for? Not only the fate of the U.S. depends on this, but also the fate of so many other places, if not the entire world.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

On his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the World Health Organization (WHO) – a move experts say makes the U.S. and other countries less safe from infectious diseases and other public-health threats. It might thus be opportune to return to the global COVID 19 pandemic. Has the threat really gone away? Can something similar not erupt again?

Around the world, numerous scientific institutions store and experiment with deadly microbes and viruses. This is done for the benefit of humanity, but it might also have more macabre aspects. It has happened that deadly material leaked from laboratories; perhaps not too often, but the risk is always there. On 2 April, 1979, the city of Sverdlovsk (now Yekaterinburg), at the time with a population of over a million, was struck by an accidental release of anthrax bacteria, which officially killed at least 68 people (as in similar cases, this figure is likely to be a low estimate). Nevertheless, Soviet/Russian research on the development of chemical and biological weapons continued and, evidently, still does. The use of the radioactive nerve agent Novichok has drawn significant attention. Developed between 1971 and 1993, Novichok has reportedly been used on several occasions to poison and kill Russian dissidents.

A great amount of material from the infamous Japanese Unit 731 was after World War II brought to both the Soviet Union and the U.S. In the USSR it became the basis for the development of the Sverdlovsk facilities and in the U.S. it were brought to the Army Biological Warfare Laboratories at Fort Detrick in Frederick, Maryland, where it, just as in the USSR, were further developed. Strangely enough, the facilities at Fort Detrick were shut down in August 2019, only three months before the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 were reported from China. The reason for the closure was cited as “a risk of severe threats to public, animal, or plant health, as well as animal or plant products.” No further details were provided.

Unit 731 was a secret biological and chemical warfare research and development unit of the Imperial Japanese Army, where horrific human experimentation occurred – no one survived these experiments, which nevertheless was meticulously recorded by the researchers who performed them, leaving behind a vast documentation. Between 1936 and 1945, approximately 14,000 victims were murdered in Unit 731, established in occupied Manchuria, while at least 300,000 individuals died due to infectious illnesses originating from Unit 731 and spread across China.

So, what is currently happening within intensely guarded and well protected microbiological facilities around the world? First and foremost, vaccines and drugs are being developed to eradicate and cure a variety of often life-threatening diseases. However, like all research, this can also have its downsides. Ron Fouchier is known for his research on respiratory viruses; how they can mutate, and through zoonosis spread from animals to humans. His research is also evidence of how viruses and microbes can be manipulated and altered within a laboratory environment. In 2003, at the annual meeting of the European Scientific Working Group on Influenza, assembled microbiologists listened as Fouchier described how he had transferred avian (bird) influenza from one animal to another, thus making the virus significantly more contagious.

He mutated the genetic sequence of the avian virus in many different ways, until, as he later put it, “someone convinced me to do something really, really stupid.” He spread the virus by allowing it to mutate in the nose of a ferret and then implanted the animal’s nasal fluid into the nose of another ferret. After ten such manipulations, from one ferret to another, the virus spread by itself among the animals and within a few days killed most of them. Fouchier found five new mutations of the virus and then managed to combine them into a single super-virus, turning out to be far more deadly than the original avian virus. He had thus achieved something that could probably happen in nature, where a virus mutates when transferred from one animal to another and thus become increasingly deadly. What happens in nature can be done much faster and more efficiently in a laboratory. Fouchier’s virus is now securely stored in an underground facility in Rotterdam.

China is the country that so far suffered the most from biological warfare. When Unit 731 had been destroyed and some of its researchers captured by Russians and Americans, the Chinese might not have had much interest, or time, to focus on the scientific results of the Japanese Biological – and Chemical warfare programmes. The country was torn apart by violent fighting between Chiang Kai-shek’s republican forces and Mao Zedong’s communists. However, there were branches of Unit 731 in Chinese-controlled areas. Unit 731’s largest auxiliary facilities had been established in Beijing, Nanjing, and Guangzhou, and it is likely that Chinese forces succeeded in securing some of the material from these installations

After the war and the Communists’ victory, the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ facilities in Beijing became the centre for the country’s microbiological research and branches were soon established throughout China. Wuhan’s microbiological laboratory was founded in 1956 and initially focused on research concerning zoonotic transmission of viral diseases.

The so-called Hong Kong flu struck China in the summer of 1968 and spread to Hong Kong, where half a million people fell ill, and after the disease had spread worldwide more than a million people died. This served as a warning for the Chinese authorities, who, despite the general chaos reigning in the country, discreetly began cooperating with international epidemiologists. This cooperation deepened over the years. Wuhan’s laboratory developed an intimate collaboration and exchange with researchers from Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas, Canada’s National Microbiology Laboratory, and Centre international de recherche en infectiologie in Lyon, France.

The SARS virus, a group to which the deadly coronavirus belongs, first appeared in November 2002, causing a relatively mild epidemic, with about 8,500 cases, of which 800 died. It was a group of researchers from Wuhan’s Institute of Virology who found that China’s horseshoe bats were natural reservoirs for the SARS-like coronavirus. Wuhan’s researchers collected samples from thousands of horseshoe bats across China and isolated over 300 bat coronavirus sequences. In 2015, an international team, including two researchers from the Wuhan Institute, published their research results concerning the probability that a bat’s coronavirus could infect a human cell line. They had constructed a hybrid virus by combining a bat coronavirus with a SARS virus, which was then adapted to grow in mice and subsequently replicate human diseases. It was found that this hybrid virus could infect human cells.

We are still stuck with the question – where did SARS-CoV-2 originate? Can it be traced all the way back to Unit 731? Probably not. Did it come from a bat? It is very possible. Did it leak from Wuhan’s Institute of Virology? This continues to be an open question. The prestigious British scientific weekly journal Nature, stated in 4 December 2024 that most researchers now agree that SARS-CoV-2 finds its origins in animals. However, since the virus’ definitive origin has not yet been traced to any animal, some researchers continue to claim that the virus may have been developed in and then leaked – either by accident or intentionally – from Wuhan’s Institute of Virology.

In August of the same year, an editorial in the equally prestigious British medical journal The Lancet did in its monthly issue Lancet Microbe call for an end to all unscientific conspiracy theories about the virus leaking from Wuhan’s research laboratory, stating that “SARS-CoV-2 is a natural virus that found its way into humans through mundane contact with infected wildlife that went on to cause the most consequential pandemic for over a century. While it is scholarly to entertain alternative hypotheses, particularly when evidence is scarce, alternative hypotheses have been implausible for a long time and have only become more-so with increasing scrutiny. Those who eagerly peddle suggestions of laboratory involvement have consistently failed to present credible arguments to support their positions.”

The Lancet’s editorial writer continued to state that zealous attacks from amateurs might intimidate and even scare scientists, who are trying to objectively pursue their research.

“A worrying potential consequence of this saga is that it might have a chilling effect on the pursuit of answers in the future on both COVID-19 and new potential threats. With researchers unwilling to ask questions freely for fear of being persecuted when facts lead to inevitable refinement or revision of earlier conclusions.”

Accordingly, we have to let science continue to work undisturbed, though under supervision. However, this does not mean that we have to yield to unfounded conspiracy theories and leave global scientific cooperation. By leaving WHO, the U.S. is taking a first step on a dangerous road. This becomes even more worrisome while considering President Trump’s decision to nominate Robert F Kennedy Jr, a man without medical expertise and prone to believe in conspiracy theories, to become U.S. health secretary, overseeing everything from medical research to food safety and public welfare programmes. One of the mandates Trump will provide Kennedy with is to remove “corruption” from health agencies, whatever he might mean by that?

Main sources: Harris, Sheldon H. (2002) Factories of Death: Japanese Biological Warfare 1932-1945, and The American Cover-up. New York: Routledge, and Specter, Michael (2012) “The deadliest Virus”, The New Yorker, March 4.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

In anticipation of Donald Trump’s inauguration his gold-studded Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago, is at the heart of political power games, where influential businessmen like Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk are positioning themselves as key players in his orbit. Apparently unfazed by legal controversies and scandals, Trump is preparing for his return in collusion with already powerful men, who in their pursuit of personal gain and political influence reflect a disturbing trend of billionaire oligarchy merging with politics. A worrying development that might have significant consequences for the future of free speech and women’s rights.

Mark Zuckerberg

These actions are particularly troubling given Zuckerberg’s recent comments about gender equality during an interview with Joe Rogan, a podcaster known for promoting conspiracy theories and pseudoscience. Zuckerberg revealed his newfound admiration for a “positive view of masculinity,” emphasizing the need to balance support for women with the celebration of “aggressive energy.” Drawing on his martial arts experience, Zuckerberg described masculinity as a necessary and positive force in global culture. While such views might be dismissed if voiced by lesser-known figures, they are deeply concerning coming from one of the world’s most powerful tech magnates.

Equally troubling is Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, whose controversial views often spill over into his social media platform, X (formerly Twitter). Musk, with over 212 million followers, frequently makes headlines with his divisive opinions. In one instance, he reposted a tweet from 4chan, a notoriously unmoderated platform, which suggested that “women and low-T [testosterone] men” are incapable of free thought because they cannot defend themselves physically. The tweet stated that only “high-T alpha males and neurotypical people” are capable of making decisions, insinuating that men with higher testosterone levels are more fit for leadership. Musk’s comment to his re-tweet of such nonsense was that it was an “interesting observation,” thus signalling his tacit endorsement of pseudoscientific, misogynistic rhetoric. A discourse that plays into a growing conservative backlash against gender equality, is not only scientifically unfounded but deeply harmful.

Elon Musk

The global context further complicates the picture. Worldwide important strides have been made toward gender equality, though there are places where women’s rights remain circumscribed and others where they have experienced a backlash. Gender-based violence remains a tool of war, used to terrorize and displace entire populations. The United Nations’ upcoming Commission on the Status of Women in March 2025 will focus on the progress and setbacks regarding the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, a groundbreaking framework for advancing women’s rights. The commission will address the fact that no country has so far achieved full gender equality, and that threats to women’s rights are in some areas becoming ever more evident.

In this context, the views of Zuckerberg and Musk take on greater significance. Their platforms amplify regressive, misogynistic ideas that not only harm women but threaten to undo years of hard-won progress. Their influence could fuel a broader cultural shift toward the normalization of sexism, as their comments provide cover for a growing global movement against gender equality. Musk’s recent confessions about his drug use—he admitted to using ketamine, a powerful anaesthetic—further cast doubt on the rationality behind some of his statements. Columnist Arwa Mahdawi humorously suggested that Musk’s bizarre musings could be attributed to ketamine use or, more likely, his deeply ingrained misogyny – “perhaps he’s just high on misogyny: it’s one hell of a drug.”

The reckless and dangerous views espoused by Zuckerberg, Musk, and other members of Trump’s inner circle are far from benign. They threaten to worsen the already precarious position of women and girls globally, whose rights and safety continue to be under siege. We must confront the role these men play in spreading dangerous ideologies. Their influence is vast, and if left unchecked, it could further erode women’s rights worldwide, leading to a future in which gender equality is relegated to the past.

Ultimately, the rhetoric of Zuckerberg and Musk is not just a matter of personal opinion; it is a reflection of a broader societal problem. As these billionaires gain political power and control over public discourse, we must remain vigilant. The dangers they pose are not just theoretical; they are real and have real-world consequences for women’s lives. The world cannot afford to let their misogynistic views go unchecked. It is time to hold these men — and the systems that enable them — accountable before their reckless influence causes even more harm.

Main sources: Mahdawi, Arwa (2024) “Elon Musk is intrigued by the idea women can’t think freely because of ‘low T’,” The Guardian, 7 September; and Remnik, David (2025) “The Inauguration of Trump’s Oligarchy,” The New Yorker, 12 January.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

In 2021, the Senegalese novelist Mohamed Mbougar Sarr became the first writer from sub-Saharan Africa to be awarded the Prix Goncourt, France’s oldest and most prestigious literary prize.

Literature

His novel, La plus secrète mémoire des hommes, The most Secret Memory of Men, tells the story of a young Senegalese writer living in Paris, who by chance stumbles across a novel published in 1938 by an elusive Senegalese author named T.C. Elimane. This author had once been hailed by an ecstatic Paris press, but had then disappeared from view. Elimane had before every trace of him had vanished, been accused of plagiarism. After losing a legal process connected with the plagiarism charge, Elimane’s publisher had been forced to withdraw and destroy all available copies of The Labyrinth of Inhumanity. However, a few extremely rare copies of the novel remained, profoundly affecting anyone who happened to read them. The novel’s main protagonist (there are several others) eventually became involved in a desperate search for the illusive Elimane, who had left some rare imprints in France, Senegal and Argentina.

A reader of Sarr’s multifaceted, exquisitely written novel is confronted with a choir of different voices mixing, harmonizing and/or contradicting each other. The story turns into a labyrinth, where boundaries between fiction and reality become blurred and lose ends remain unravelled. Sarr moves in an ocean of world literature. It seems as if he has read everything worth reading and allusions are either in plain sight, or remain invisible. Ultimately, the novel investigates the limits between myth and reality, memory and presence, and above all the question – what is storytelling? What is literature? Does it concern the “truth”, or is it constructing a parallel version of reality?

A disturbing issue shimmers below the surface of the intriguing story. Why were two excellent West-African authors before Sarr severely scrutinized and condemned for plagiarism? Why were they accused of not being “African” enough? Are African writers doomed to linger within a shadowy existence as exotic curiosities, judged from the outside by a prejudiced literary establishment, which persistently consider African authors, except white Nobel laureates like Gordimer and Coetze, either as being exotic natives, or epigons of European literature?

The most Secret Memory of Men has a disturbing prehistory, echoing real-life experiences of the Guinean writer Camara Laye and the likewise unfortunate Malian Yambo Ouologuem.

At the age of 15, Camara Laye came to Conakry, the French colonial capital of Guinea, to attended vocational studies in motor mechanics. In 1947, he travelled to Paris to continue his studies in mechanics. In 1956, Camara Laye returned to Africa, first to Dahomey, then to the Gold Coast and finally to newly independent Guinea, where he held several government posts. In 1965, after being subject to political persecution, he left Guinea for Senegal and never returned to his home country.

In 1954, Camara Laye’s novel Le regard de Roi, The Radiance of the King, was published in Paris and at the time described as “one of the finest works of fiction to come out of Africa”. The novel was quite odd, and remains so, particular since its main protagonist is a white man and the story develops from his point of view. Clarence has, after in his home country having failed at most things, recently arrived in Africa to seek his fortune there. After gambling all his money away, he is thrown out of his hotel and in desperation decides to pursue a legend stating that somewhere in the inner depths of Africa a wealthy king can be found. Clarence hopes that this king might provide for him, maybe give him a job, and a purpose in life.

Laye’s novel becomes an allegory for man’s search for God. Clarence’s journey develops into a road to self-realisation and he obtains wisdom through a series of dreamlike and humiliating experiences; often harrowing, sometimes lunatically nightmarish, though the story is occasionally lightened by an absurd and alluring humour.

However, some critics asked if this really was an African novel. The language was beguilingly simple, but the allegorical mode of telling the story made critics assume that it was tinged with Christianity, that the African lore was “superficial”, and the narrative style “kafkaesque”. Even African authors considered that Laye “mimicked” European literary role models. The Nigerian author Wole Soyinka characterized Le regard de Roi as a feeble imitation of Kafka’s novel The Castle, implanted on African soil and within France suspicions soon arose that a young African car mechanic could not have been able to write such a strange and multifaceted novel as Le regard de Roi.

This unkind and even mean criticism became increasingly vociferous, deprecating what was actually an intriguing work of genius. The harassment continued until a final blow was delivered by an American professor. Adele King’s comprehensive study The Writing of Camara Laye did in 1981 “prove” that Le regard de Roi actually had been written by Francis Soulé, a renegade Belgian intellectual who in Brussels had been involved in Nazi- and Anti-Semitic propaganda and after World War II had been forced to establish himself in France. According to Adele King, Soulé had together with Robert Poulet, editor at Plon, the publisher that issued Le regard de Roi, concocted a story that his novel actually had been written by a young African, thus securing its success. To support her theory, Adele King presented an exhaustive account of Camara Laye’s life in France, tracing his various acquaintances and coming to the conclusion that Laye had been paid by Plon to act as the author of Le regard de Roi.

Among other observations Adele King stated that Laye’s novel was of an “un-African nature, with a European sense of literary form”, thus indicating Francis Soulé’s handiwork. This in spite of Soulé’s very meagre literary output (King mentions that he had in his ”youth dabbled in exotic writing”) and the fact that Laye wrote several other, very good novels.

Among other indications that Laye could not have written Le regard de Roi, King argued that the novel’s “Messianic message” sounded false, originating as it did from an African Muslim. She thus ignored that Laye came from a Sufi tradition where similar notions abounded and when it came to the “kafkaesque” flavour of the novel, which is far from being overwhelming – why could not a young African author living in France, like so many others, have been inspired by Franz Kafka’s writing?

Notwithstanding, through these and many other shaky assumptions King concluded that Le regard de Roi had been written by the otherwise almost unknown Francis Soulé and her verdict became almost unanimously accepted. It did for example in 2018 prominently appear in Christoffer Miller’s popular and otherwise quiet good book Impostors: Literary Hoaxes and Cultural Authenticity.

Another resounding condemnation of an excellent West-African author occurred in 1968 when the groundbreaking and original novel Le devoir de violence, Bound to Violence, after a short time of praise was smashed due to accusations of plagiarism. Le devoir de violence dealt with seven centuries of violent history of an African, fictious kingdom (actually quite akin to present-day Mali). In a feverish first-rate, free flowing language the novel does not shy away from depicting extreme violence, royal oppression, religious superstition, murder, corruption, slavery, female genital mutilation, rape, misogyny, and abuse of power. All intermingled with episodes of real love and harmony, but there is no doubt about Yambo Ouologuem’s opinion that a powerful, age-old and corrupt African elite enriched itself and prospered through its collaboration with an equally corrupt and brutal colonial power, all done for their respective gain.

Quite expectedly, Ouologuem arose violent reactions from authors adhering to the concept of négritude, denoting a framework of critique and literary theory developed by francophone intellectuals, who stressed the strength of African solidarity and notions about a unique African culture. Ouologuem provided the négritude movement with his own denigrating term – negraille, accusing négritude authors of ingraining servility and an inferiority complex in Africa’s black population. He accused such authors of depicting Africa as a ridiculous Paradise, when the continent in fact had been, and was, just as corrupt and violent as its European counterpart. Ouologuem also wondered why an African writer could not be allowed to be as critical, outspoken and politically improper as, for example, the French authors Rimbaud and Céline.

The final judgment that befell Ouologuem was delivered by the generally admired Graham Greene, who launched a lawsuit against Ouologuem’s publisher accusing the African author of plagiarizing parts of Greene’s novel It’s a Battlefield. Greene won the lawsuit and Ouologuem’s novel was banned in France and the publisher had to see to the destruction of all available copies of it. Ouologuem did not write another novel, he returned to Mali where he in a small town directed a youth centre, until he withdrew in a secluded Muslim life as a marabout (spiritual advisor).

Considering the framework of Ouologuem’s entire and quite mindboggling novel, Graham Greene’s reaction appears to be petty, if not outright ridiculous. The plagiarism was limited to a few sentences describing a French mansion, which in itself was quite absurd within its African setting, and the description is clearly quoted with a satirical intention (in his novel Greene described a slightly ridiculously decorated apartment of an English communist).

The condemnation of Laye’s, and in particular Ouologuem’s novels may be discerned as an inspiration to Mohamed Sarr’s novel. Sarr writes about a young African author finding himself in a limbo between two very different worlds, Senegal and France, while he has found home and solace in literature, a world within which he has discovered a real gem, his talisman – Elimane’s novel. However, the bewildered young man’s pursuit of the man behind the book turns out to be in vain, and so is probably also his search for himself in this labyrinth that constitutes our life and the world we live in.

Sarr’s novel reminds us of the fate of two other West-African authors before him, who were accused of not being “genuine”, of being “plagiarists”, thus Sarr also succeeds in asking us what is genuine in a floating globalized world?

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Thus wrote, not without reason, in 23 BCE the proud and self-conscious Horace. So far, he has been quite right – ancient monuments have crumbled, or disappeared completely, while his poetry still remains. However, you might ask – for how much longer? Latin is already dead, at least as a spoken language, while its connoisseurs are dwindling. Pessimists may contradict Horace’s optimism with Thomas à Kempis phrase from 1418: O quam cito transit gloria mundi, how quickly the glory of the world passes away. As a matter of fact, more and more people, in particular youngsters, have a diminishing interest in the written word, in particular in the form of longer texts like novels and newspaper editorials, preferring short messages and slogans that are easy to understand and preferably not longer than half a page.

Nevertheless, some human creations remain for a very long time. The most potent form of nuclear waste does, according to most scientists, need to be safely stored away for up to one million years, the time needed to ensure radioactive decay, i.e. actually a far longer stretch of time than the period that has passed since the first Neanderthals appeared on earth.

How may we be able to warn future generations about lethal dangers buried beneath Earth’s surface? Thousands of years from now, our descendants can probably not understand any of the writing systems currently in use. And how can we now adequately predict which future geological upheavals lay in store? Nuclear waste is drilled deep down into primeval rock, but can it really be guaranteed that cracks cannot occur, that atomic waste will not sip into underground water resources? Considering who little was expected from the effects of climate change just a few years ago, it makes you wonder about the safe future of our planet and the shortsighted damage we are doing to it.

In 2008, the Svalbard Global Seed Vault was inaugurated on the Norwegian island of Spitzbergen. It is intended to be a secure backup facility for the world’s crop diversity. More than 100 metres below earth, in the tunnels of an abandoned coal mine, the Seed Vault currently conserves 1,280,677 accessions, representing more than 13,000 years of agricultural history.

By the inauguration of this unique seed-bank it was said that the deep-frozen plant material would be safe from any temperature change and water damage, resting as it was under Arctic permafrost. However, already in 2016, an unusually large amount of water seeped in to the Vault’s entrance tunnel, 100 metres underground. The water flow was stopped just before it reached the precious plant material, though the incident indicated that the frozen permafrost no longer is a guarantee for safeguarding the Vault – Arctic temperatures are now rising four times faster than in the rest of the world making the permafrost melt at an unexpected speed. Improvements to the Vault have been made to prevent water intrusion, the tunnel walls have been made “waterproof” and above ground, draining ditches now surround the entrance to the Vault.

Filled with pride, hope and expectations Horace wrote that his poems would survive for thousands of years. Nevertheless, he could not have predicted how humans now are destroying our shared environment. Authors have for more than a hundred years warned us about what is currently happening. First it was mainly science fiction writers who produced terrifying dystopias about what could happen to our planet if we continue to abuse its natural resources, depleting its organic life, and destroying its life preserving beauty. This literary trend is still alive, particularly after the nuclear bombs that in 1945 wiped out Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the melt down of the nuclear reactor in Tjernobyl. One disturbing and well written example of such dystopias is the Russian author Tatyana Tolstaya’s novel The Slynx from year 2000.

After some kind of nuclear disaster, disfigured people survive in what was once Moscow. They depend on mice for food and clothing, and know almost nothing about the past. Most of them cannot read and write, though a handful of people who live in this nightmarish reality remember how life was before the Blast, before civilization collapsed and brought culture down with it. These people occasionally quote poetry and dream of bringing about a cultural renaissance, though the reader understands they are a dying breed and there is almost nothing left to resurrect. Books still exist, but anyone found with one of them is hunted down and severely punished, while their books are confiscated, all in the name of stopping “freethinking.”

Is a nuclear catastrophe necessary for us all to end up in such misery? The author Amitav Ghosh was born in Calcutta. He grew up in India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka and is currently living in New York. In his non-fiction book The Great Derangement, Gosh wonders why an extremely dangerous threat like climate change is not overshadowing cultural expressions. He emphasizes that the frightening effects of climate change are already with us. They are evident everywhere, though strangely enough people are still listening to dangerous climate change deniers, like the increasingly deranged Donald Trump. According to Gosh, depictions of the threat of climate change can no longer be banished to science fiction, but has to be convincingly expressed in all strands of art, literature, theatre, and movies. Gosh provides an example of this in his own novel Gun Island, which takes its starting point in Sunderbans, a huge West Bengali mangrove forest, currently threatened by polluting biochemical industries and rising sea levels. The novel deals with the vulnerability of climatological migrants and the ongoing, galloping destruction of human and animal habitats. As a story coloured by magic realism it ranges from Bangladesh, which climate change threatens with almost complete annihilation, to Venice, this dreamlike treasure house of amazing art that likewise appears to be doomed to disappear.

Gosh’s novel leads us back to Spitzbergen. Close to the Svalbard Global Seed Vault is another abandoned coal mine, even deeper than the one where the Seed Vault is accommodated. At the depth of 300 metres, we find the vaults of the Arctic World Archive (AWA), where governments, associations and private persons are welcomed, for a fee, to store what they assume to be world heritage. Down deep below, under permafrost (so far) we find copies and microfilm of a wide assortment of items that AWA is guaranteeing to safeguard for at least 2000 years. Here the Vatican has sent copies and microfilms of its vast collection of inestimable manuscripts, an organisation called Linga Aeterna is preserving recordings of 500 languages on the brink of extinction, the Polish Government has deposited copies of literary works and Chopin’s manuscripts. Here we find a wide collection of movies and rock music, as well as blueprints of architectural-, industrial, and car designs from the World’s biggest firms, etc., etc.

Thoughtful speculators and depositors are by AWA treated with advertising materials and movies reminding them of threats to the cultural heritage, like war and terrorism with footage showing the destruction of the immense Buddha in Bamiyan and how ISIS destroyed priceless cultural treasures in Palmyra and Mosul. Other disasters are highlighted, not the least those triggered off by climate change, which if nothing is done to stop it, will around 2050 have placed most of Florida, Bangladesh and the Maldives under water and completely inundated and destroyed Venice.

Spitzbergen is not the only place harbouring deposits of cultural heritage. In the salt mines of Hallstatt in Austria the so-called Memory of Mankind stores, within specifically designed, “indestructible” ceramic containers, huge amounts of microfilm and copies of valuable art and manuscripts. Libraries and archives around the world also shelter underground labyrinths, filled with books, magazines, and documents.

However, the question remains – for how long time will these enormous deposits be able to withstand the drastic changes that menace our Earth, and will future generations, if they now survive what threatens us all, be able to find these deposits of human endeavour, be interested in them, or even be able to understand them? Will our descendants be capable of benefitting from all that presumably has been preserved in these secluded places – or will they like the miserable creatures of Tolstoya’s depressing wasteland either despise all of it, or consider these items to be dangerous? Let us at least for the moment appreciate the written treasures left to us by poets like Horace and teach our children to appreciate what our ancestors have left behind, learn from it and also value, and enjoy what is written today.

Main sources: Gosh, Amitav (2016) The Great Derangement: Climate Change and the Unthinkable. University of Chicago Press. Gosh, Amitav (2019) Gun Island. London: John Murray. Horatius Flaccus, Quintus (1967) The Odes of Horace Translated by James Michie. Harmondsworth: Penguin Classics. Stagliano, Riccardo (2024) “A futura memoria”, Il Venerdi di Repubblica, 25 ottubre. Tolstaya, Tatyana (2016) The Slynx. New York Review of Books.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Bronisław Malinowski (1884 – 1942) did for several years conduct socio-anthropological research in the Trobriand Islands. Returning to England after World War I, he wrote several ground breaking books, among them Magic, Science, and Religion in which he assumed that people’s feelings and motives are crucial for understanding the way their society functions. Malinowski considered society to be intimately interlinked with individuality – i.e. an individual’s ideas and behaviour are created and formulated within the social circles s/he lives and vice versa. Consequently, an individual’s personality might influence an entire society, depending on the leading role s/he is granted.

Malinowski found that whenever Trobriand islanders planned to sail into turbulent ocean waters, they performed complicated rituals, but when they planned to sail in the calm waters of a lagoon, they did not perform any ceremonies at all. Accordingly, he came to the conclusion that people become more interested in magic and religion whenever they face a stressful situation:

Magic is to be expected whenever man comes to an unbridgeable gap in his knowledge, or in his powers of practical control, and yet has to continue in his pursuit. Religion is not born out of speculation or reflection, still less of illusion or misapprehension, but rather out of the real tragedies of human life, out of the conflict between human plans and realities.

What about our political leaders, are they confiding in religion and magic? Probably yes and no, though it cannot be denied that several of them make use of people’s fears and religious leanings. When Netanyahu on 27 September spoke to the United Nations General Assembly, he defined the UN as a

swamp of antisemitic bile, there’s an automatic majority willing to demonize the Jewish state for anything. In this anti-Israel flat-earth society, any false charge, any outlandish allegation can muster a majority.

This in spite of the fact that much of this rancour is based on Israel’s refusal to give up support to, and expansion of Jewish settlements, deemed illegal under international law, on Palestinian sovereign territory.

The Israeli Prime Minister quoted the Bible: “Blessed be the Lord, my Rock and my great strength, who trains my hand for war and my fingers for battle [Psalm 144]”, and stated that Israel accordingly would achieve “total victory in the war” and in accordance with the Book of Samuel: “The eternity of Israel will not falter”.

Netanyahu’s anger might be excused due to Hamas’ 7 October breaching of the Gaza-Israel Barrier and killing of 1,139 people, including 695 civilians, among them 38 children. Women were violated and hostages taken. The aftermath was terrible, when the Israeli Army in its hunt for Hamas is continuously destroying Gaza’s infrastructure, indiscriminately putting a whole population in danger and misery and has so far killed more than 43,000 individuals, among them 11,300 children less than five years old.

After Hamas deplorable attack Netanyahu did of course condemn it, but he went further than that by stating that Israel would deal with Hamas in a manner that would affect an entire population, i.e. the Palestinians of Gaza. By doing so he used the Bible declaring that: “You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. And we do remember.” What did God declare about the Amalekites?

“I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys (1 Samuel: 15-16).”

Is Netanyahu religious? I don’t think so. He picks some detail from the Scriptures and uses it for his own political reasons. He is not applying any of the strict Jewish rules, wears the kippah and recites prayers only when his job demands so. He doesn’t show up at synagogue services with any regularity and is known to work on the Shabbat. However, applying religion to politics is something entirely different from being religious, and this is something Netanyahu has in common with another demagogue, namely Donald Trump. I am quite sure that Trump’s Bible knowledge is almost non-existent, but this does not hinder him from hawking his God Bless the USA Bible for 60 USD, in support of his campaign (it’s printed in China). Like his Israeli counterpart Trump acts like a Doomsday prophet while depicting a grim world on the edge of a catastrophe. According to Trump, to avoid an economic collapse, or even a destructive World War, people have to vote for him. Like his American friend, who relies on votes of duped born-again Christians, Netanyahu depends on ultra-Orthodox Jews.

During his years in the US, where he went to school and university, became a business man and Isarel’s UN ambassador, Netanyahu did besides befriending Donald Trump’s father Fred, meet with Rebbe Menachen M. Schneerson (1902-1994), whom he on several occasions has referred to as “the most influential man of our time”.

Schneerson inherited the leadership of a small Hasidic group, almost annihilated during the Holocaust, and turned it into one of the most influential, global movements in religious Jewry. His writings fill more than 400 volumes. After fleeing pogroms in Ukraine, Schneerson lived in New York. He never visited Israel, though Israeli leaders like Sharon, Rabin, Peres, and not the least Netanyahu, visited him and sought his advice. Many of Schneerson’s adherents believe he was the Messiah.

Schneerson’s ideas can be easily discerned in Netanyahu’s policies and speeches. For example, when Netanyahu became UN ambassador Schneerson advised him:

There is an assembly hall there that has eternal falsehood, utter darkness. Remember that in a hall of perfect darkness, totally dark, if you light one small candle, its light will be seen from afar. Its precious light will be seen by everyone. Your mission is to light a candle for truth and the Jewish people.

Schneerson constantly hailed the Israeli Army as a God chosen medium through which He would send deliverance to the Jewish people and like Netanyahu he was a stout adversary to surrender any of the “liberated territories”, i.e. The West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. Schneerson stated that the Jewish settlements in occupied territory were “blessed cities” and had to be walled not only in a physical sense, but as a “spiritual” protection. Accordingly, Schneerson was, like Netanyahu, against the peace agreement with the Palestinians and a two-state solution.

Another warmonger claiming religious motivations for his belligerent acts is Vladimir Putin. Like other xenophobes he uses “culture” as a means to unify his acolytes. He has joined forces with a conservative Russian, religious elite to support the narrative of a Russia chosen to defend a specific brand of culture and religion. The Russian Orthodox Church is mobilised as a crucial part of Putin’s policy, to create a common sense of “Spiritual Security”.

Putin has been able to cultivate an enigmatic public persona – a hard and strong man. An image giving birth to rumours, legends and myths around him. Accordingly, it is hard to find proof of his personal, religious convictions, but there are several signs that he might at least be a superstitious man.

Putin has declared himself to be a deeply religious man. He carries on him a baptismal cross given to him by his mother and blessed by Jesus’ tomb in Jerusalem. Relatively early in his presidency, Putin spoke openly about his Russian Orthodox faith and formed a close bond with certain members of the clergy, among them Archimandrite Tikhon, for several years Father Superior of Sretensky monastery and now acting as Metropolitan in the Diocese of Simferopol and Crimea. Tikhon, whose secular name is Georgiy Shevkunov, is rumoured to be Putin’s personal confessor (духовник) and spiritual advisor. Both men have neither confirmed nor denied this, though it is generally known that Putin on his national and international trips often is accompanied by Father Tikhon, though Putin’s travels abroad has now become extremely rare due to an International Criminal Court’s warrant for his arrest as war criminal.

Father Tikhon, who studied film and literature before becoming a priest, has written several books imbued with an ultra-conservative conviction about Russia’s ingrained spirituality, as well as beliefs in faith healing. He is believed to be a spiritual healer himself. Some regime critics compare Tikhon to with the notorious mystic and faith healer Gregori Rasputin, said to have had a disastrous influence on the household of the last Tsar.

As part of his religious, nationalistic persona, Putin has made several highly publicised visits to the legendary Valaam Monastery on an island in Lake Ladoga, where he among other acts has immersed himself in icy water as part of an ancient Orthodox Epiphany ritual. A deed reminding of his Siberian immersions in deer blood and bare-chested rides. These stunts took place in Tuva, home of Putin’s friend and former Defence Minister, Sergei Shoigu. This year he once again visited Tuva, in connection with his first and only visit to a foreign country, neighbouring Mongolia. Sources close to Kremlin claimed that Putin’s third visit to Mongolia in a decade and his many travels to Tuva might be related to his specific attitude to Russian Orthodox mysticism and its connection to Shamanistic traditions. Mongolia and Tuva are considered to be home of the World’s most powerful shamans. Together with Sergei Shoigu, Putin is known to have participated in Shamanistic rituals.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, shamanism has experienced a revival. Similar to several influential church elders, many newly converted shamans have close ties to the authorities, so they may say not only what the spirits whisper to them, but what the officials want to hear. Shamanism is a religious practice that generally means that a shaman through a self-induced trance interacts with the “spirit world”, directing spiritual energies into the physical world and thus becomes able to heal ailments and predict the future. Putin is assumed to meet with shamans to become energised and seek spiritual advice about how to behave, in particular in connection with the war in Ukraine. Since the beginning of the war, invocations and spells have multiplied in the regions of Buryatia, Tuva, Irkutsk and Altai where shamanism is widespread. And according to their own account, there are currently 17 shamans participating in Ukrainian war actions.

As everything connected with Putin rumours are hard to confirm. However, there is no doubt that he, Netanyahu and Trump make use of religion for their own benefit and it is possible that they like Malinowski’s Trobriands are seeking spiritual protection when they venture out into stormy waters. At least they use religion to seduce their followers and in the case of Putin and Netanyahu to find support for their belligerent acts.

Main sources: Pfeffer, Anshel (2018) Bibi: The Turbulent Life and Times of Benjamin Netanyahu. New York: Basic Books and Zygar, Mikhail (2024) ”Gerüchte in Moskau lässt sich Putin von Schamanen für den Krige beraten?” Der Spiegel, 14 September.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Hungarian-Swedish microbiologist George Klein, who in 1944 escaped from a train destined to Auschwitz, once wrote that his father jokingly used to say that he had caused World War I. While working as a medical doctor in Bosnia he had cured a young boy called Gavrilo Princip from a deadly disease. As an adult Gavrilo shot and killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand, presumptive heir to the throne of Austria-Hungary, whose death became the immediate cause of World War I. Can a single person, knowingly or unknowingly, change the course of history? We talk about “Putin’s war” and “Trump’s USA”. Are individuals so important? Lev Tolstoy wrote in War and Peace that it was absurd to attribute historical events to acts of individuals. The French revolution could quite easily have produced another person like Napoleon. He insisted that the French emperor knew as little of what was happening in the battle of Borodino as the meanest soldier serving under him.

Yahya Sinwar

Yahya Sinwar, current leader of Hamas in Gaza, was in 1989 sentenced to four life sentences, of which he served 22 years. Before being jailed by the Israeli regime he had led a squad punishing, and often killing, Palestinians suspected of collaborating with Israel, or committing offenses against Hamas’ interpretation of Muslim morality, including homosexuality, marital infidelity, and the possession of pornography. Among others, Sinwar personally executed a barber who kept pornographic magazines in his barbershop and while in prison he arranged for the killing of a fellow prisoner’s sister, who had been unfaithful to his brother-in-law.

Sinwar regarded Israeli prisons as a place to learn Hebrew, as well as the psychology and history of his enemy. “Prison builds you. Especially if you are a Palestinian, because you live amid checkpoints, walls, and restrictions of all kinds. Only in prison do you finally meet Palestinians who have time for discussing and learning. You start thinking about yourself. About what you believe in, the price you are willing to pay.” In prison Sinwar wrote an autobiographical novel – The Thorn and the Carnation. In this novel Sinwar’s alter ego, Ahmad, is harassed by feelings of grief, shame, and humiliation: “Our dreams of returning to our homelands from which we were exiled began to crumble like the sandcastles we used to build as children.” Ahmad’s father dies as a “a martyr for freedom”, while his mother is described as an example of pious nobility. The Israeli Army dominates everything – there are curfews, interrogations, arrests, soldiers storming into houses and harassing people at will. Ahmed comes to the conclusion that only violence and terror can be used against the Israelis.

An Israeli prison dentist, Yuval Bitton, came to know Sinwar as a straightforward man, characterised by no nonsense, no rhetoric, a calculating and very cunning man. However, Sinwar was extremely ruthless, “ready to sacrifice twenty thousand, thirty thousand, a hundred thousand.” A man acquainted with cold-blooded executions, but “so far he did not have Jewish blood on his hands – only Palestinian.” Bitton found that imprisoned Hamas members had better teeth than other prisoners, due to their fervent religiosity they isolated themselves from other prisoners and did not smoke, while being careful about what they ate. Like George Klein’s father, Bitton assumed that if he had not followed his own strict morals, he could have changed the course of history. When he observed the Muslims praying, Bitton found that every time Sinwar rose up he staggered in a peculiar manner. He sent Sinwar to hospital, where he underwent an examination resulting in immediate brain surgery to remove a life-threatening tumour.

Bitton emphasized Sinwar’s appreciation of Jewish intellectuals: “He said that the Jews had once been people like Freud, Einstein, Kafka. Experts in mathematics and philosophy. However, they had declined to become experts in drones and extrajudicial executions.” Sinwar mirrored the opinion of other Hamas leaders, who in their propaganda did not refrain from using the notorious forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which purported to detail a Jewish plot for global domination. At a conference in 2021, the Hamas leadership expressed its intentions towards the Jewish, Israeli population, after a so far imaginary victory – “Educated Jews and experts in the areas of medicine, engineering, technology, and civilian and military industry should be retained for some time and should not be allowed to leave and take with them the knowledge and experience that they acquired while living in our land and enjoying its bounty, while we paid the price for all this in humiliation, poverty, sickness, deprivation, killing and arrests.”

Until 1948, Sinwar’s family lived in Tel Ashkelon, which is now part of southern Israel. During the war against the newborn state of Israel, they all fled south into the Gaza Strip. Born in 1962, Sinwar grew up in the Khan Younis refugee camp. As a young man he met with Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, a charismatic member of the Muslim Brotherhood. The sheik was almost blind, confined to a wheelchair and venerated as a religious and political leader. While studying Arabic at the Islamic University of Gaza, Sinwar grew increasingly close to Yassin and eventually became his personal aide-de-camp. In December 1987, an uprising was sparked after an Israeli vehicle had struck and killed four Gazan men. The day after, Yassin assembled a group of associates and founded Hamas, Ḥarakah al-Muqāwamah al-ʾIslāmiyyah, the Islamic Resistance Movement (in Arabic hamas means zeal, strength, or bravery). Sinwar was chosen to be Hamas’ commander in southern Gaza

The Israeli government held Sheikh Yassin responsible for giving his approval for the launching of rockets against Israeli cities, as well as for terrorist bombings and suicide operations. In 2004, the sheikh was killed when an Israeli helicopter gunship fired a missile at him while he was wheeled out from a mosque in Gaza City. The attack radicalized Sinwar, still in an Israeli prison, even further and after his release his grip over southern Gaza turned into a reign of terror, fuelled by religious fervour. Sinwar was respected in some quarters and feared in others. He reportedly carried out his duties with icy efficiency and without a trace of regret. In 2017, Sinwar was elected to be over-all chief of Hamas in Gaza and his military tactics became more aggressive, while he fostered a messianic style of leadership. Several Palestinian opponents declared that Sinwar’s effort to create myths around himself, while indicating he was chosen by God, was a dangerous move from logic to irrationality.

Sinwar’s policies were reinforced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “conception tactics”, intended to contain Hamas while weakening the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. He allowed Qatar to funnel billions of dollars into Gaza, supposedly for civic projects and governance, though with full knowledge that Sinwar was siphoning much of the money to buy arms, while expanding the Gaza metro, the system of tunnels and bunkers. Sinwar’s anger and general prestige soared when Trump’s son-in-law and special envoy, Jared Kusner, helped drafting the Abraham Accords, aiming at normalizing relations between Israel and Sunni-ruled states, sidelining Palestinian and Iranian leaders, who as a result intensified their cooperation, in spite of the fact that most Palestinians are Sunni Muslims, while Iran’s rulers are Shiites.

Sinwar became the main designer of the unleashing of the Al-Aqsa Flood, the most devastating attack on Israel in half a century and the cause of senseless destruction and the slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent civilians. He is still hiding with his fighters in bunkers and tunnels in Southern Gaza. Sinwar’s adversary is Benjamin Netanyahu, the longest serving prime ministers in Israel’s history. Netanyahu was born in Jerusalem 1949, but between 1956 and 1958, and again from 1963 to 1967 he lived in the US, attending high school there. Between 1967 and 1973 he served in a special forces’ unit. After leaving the military, Netanyahu returned to the US, studying architecture and political science at MIT, but his PhD studies were broken up by the death of his brother in the 1979 Entebbe raid, and he returned to Israel.

Between 1984 and 1988 Netanyahu was Israeli ambassador to the UN and became close friends with Fred Trump, father of Donald Trump. He was also influenced by Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, by many of his followers believed to have been the awaited Messiah. According to Netanyahu, Rabbi Schneerson was “the most influential man of our time”. Like his religious role model, Netanyahu is convinced that Isarel is a bulwark against “anti-Western nations”. He has been opposing peace negotiations with the Palestinians, stating that he would accept a Palestinian state if Jerusalem remains the capital of Israel, the Palestinians are disarmed and if they give up their demands for a right to return. He is also actively supporting Jewish settlements in occupied territories, stating that he approves of their “natural growth”. After winning the elections in 2023, Netanyahu’s government legalized nine new settler outposts in the occupied West Bank and in six months 13,000 housing units were constructed in the settlements, almost triple the amount advanced in the whole of 2022.

After the Hamas lead attacks on Israel in October 2023, Netanyahu has threatened to “turn all the places where Hamas is organized and hiding into cities of ruins”. He has been using a religious rhetoric by comparing Hamas to Amalek – “You must remember what Amalek has done to you … And we do remember.” In the Bible (for example in Deuteronomy 25) are Amalkites described as the Israelites arch enemies and they are by God commanded to “blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven”. In 1 Samuel 15, God orders the Israeli King Saul to destroy the Amalkites, by “killing man, woman, infant and suckling.” The religious rhetoric used by both Sinwar and Netanyahu, identifying opposing groups with an entire people – men, women and children – have throughout history had horrible consequences. It could suffice to remind about horrors befalling the Jewish people. As an example – a Polish youngster, Herschel Grynszpan, did in November 1938 shot and kill a German diplomat in Paris, out of frustration after the Nazi regime had dumped 18,000 Jews, among them his parents, on the Polish side of Germany’s border. As a revenge the Nazis incited German citizens to burn down 177 synagogues, severely damage some 8,000 Jewish business premises, while killing 100 Jews and send 30,000 Jewish men to concentration camps. It became much worse when war had broken out, with thousand of examples of mass killings triggered off as revenge for acts committed by a few opponents. One example of many – when 43 German and Romanian soldiers had been attacked and killed in Odessa in October 1942, between 18,000 and 20,000 Jews were rounded up and shot just outside the town, while a further 20,000 were massacred in nearby Dalnik.

To let hostile actions of opponents lead to the death of tens of thousands of innocent people. To equal a group of enemies with an entire ethnic population, have accordingly had horrendous consequences, damaging both perpetrators and victims. Sinwar and Netanyahu seem to be obsessed by ideas characterized by ethnic cleansing and a desire for revenge. If one, like Isiah Berlin, assumes that human crimes can be averted, how do you then stop individuals like Sinwar, Netanyahu, and Putin from inciting and carrying out their destructive schemes? Maybe it is impossible – a proverb says “you can’t teach old dogs to sit” – though human empathy, logic and decency require that we have to try to make sense prevail.

Main sources: Berlin, Isaiah (2014) “The misguided search for a single, overarching ideal,” The New York Review of Books, October 23. Klein, George (1992) The Atheist and the Holy City: Encounters and Reflections. Chicago: MIT Press. Remnick, David (2024) “Notes from Underground: The life of Yahya Siwar, the leader of Hams in Gaza,” The New Yorker, August 12. Stone, Dan (2024) The Holocaust: An unfinished History. London: Penguin Books.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

During the first half of the 20th century, antisemitism was endemic in Europe and eventually burst out in full force when Nazi-Germany and its collaborators between 1941 and 1945 systematically (and well-documented) murdered six million Jews across German-occupied Europe. In an environment mined by hostile public opinion, the Zionist Nahum Sokolow popularized the Hebrew term Hasbara. The word has no real equivalent in English, but might be translated as “explaining”, indicating a strategy seeking to explain actions, regardless whether or not they are justified. As a skilled diplomat, Sokolow based his widely publicized opinions on in-depth research of actual events, though he presented his findings in a manner that favoured his cause.

David Alfaro Siqueiros: Echo of a Scream. 1937

In 1948, more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs, about half of the former British controlled Mandatory Palestine’s predominantly Arab population, fled from their homes. At first they were attacked by Zionist paramilitaries and after the establishment of the State of Israel by its regular army, acting on direct orders from the newly founded nation’s leaders. Dozens of massacres targeted the Arab population and between 400 and 600 Palestinian villages were destroyed. Village wells were poisoned and properties looted to prevent Palestinian refugees from returning.

The New historians debunked several myths. For example, that the British Government tried to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state – it was actually against the founding of a Palestine state. The official version states that Palestinians fled their homes on their own free will, instigated to do so by surrounding Arab states. However, the majority of them were actually expelled, and/or fled out of a well-founded fear of the Israeli army. Furthermore, general opinion has been that the surrounding Arab nations at the time were united and more powerful than the newly established State of Israel – as a matter of fact, Israel had the advantage both in manpower and arms, while the Arab nations were divided by internal strife and did not have a coordinated plan to destroy Israel. The recurrent praise that the Israelis made the desert bloom and took over a land without a people for a people without a land, are according to Pappé unfounded clichés. Before the ethnic cleansing the vast majority of agricultural land was being cultivated by Palestinians. It is estimated that on the eve of the 1948 war, around 739,750 acres of agriculturally apt land were being cultivated by Palestinians, actually greater than the physical area which was under cultivation in Israel almost thirty years later.

The appropriation of Palestinian land occurred in conjunction with a Land Acquisitions Law allowing for a mass transfer of the entire Palestinian economy to the Israeli state. Practically overnight, the State gained control of a vast amount of fertile land, 73,000 houses, and 7,800 workshops. This dropped the average cost of settling a Jewish family in Palestine from 8,000 USD to 1,500 USD.

Furthermore, the whole issue whether Palestine belongs to “Jews” or “Arabs” is somewhat spurious. It is a myth that any region constitutes a closed environment. Trade, immigration, invasion and intermarriage are part of any nation’s history. Across the millennia, additions and losses have befallen people living in Palestina (it was the Romans who in 131 CE changed the denomination “Judea” into “Syria Palaestina”). Conquerors, like those of the Muslim faith, seldom replaced an entire native population, they only added to it. Many of the Palestinians of today are the Jews of yesteryears. Palestinian Arabs did not suddenly appear from the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century to settle in Palestine, most of those “Arabs” living there now are descendants of indigenous peoples who lived there before. People who, like most others, over time have changed their beliefs and traditions. For example, Sardinians eventually became Italians, but no one would suggest that Sardinians were kicked out and replaced by a foreign Italian people. We ought to separate political nationalist identities from the actual reality of a human being. Nationalism is a relatively modern concept, especially in the Middle East.

Likewise, the Jewish diaspora was not the result of a sudden expulsion of Jews from their Holy land. It was, just as current migration, a result of various factors, including refugees from war and repression, forced labour, deportation, overpopulation, indebtedness, military recruitment, and not the least opportunities in business, commerce, and agriculture. Before the Romans in 70 CE destroyed Jerusalem and its temple and in 131 forbade Jews to settle there, large and prosperous Jewish communities existed in provinces like Egypt, Crete, Cyrenaica, Syria, Asia, Mesopotamia, and in Rome itself. However, the destruction of the temple of Jerusalem motivated many Jews to formulate a new self-definition and adjust their existence to the prospect of an indefinite period of displacement, that eventually would culminate in a return to a mostly imaginary realm of Israel. In 1948, this religious dream became a reality through the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel. A development that by most the U.S. and European politicians was considered to strengthen a “Western” strategic, economic, and political presence in the Middle East, at the same time as the establishment of Israel could ease the burden of a bad conscience for not having done enough to hinder the extermination of Jews, combined with easing the pressure to resettle and compensate the victims.

Nowadays, the Sate of Israel does not only control the land granted to it by the British, but also territories inhabited by also areas like the West Bank, the Golan Heights and the Gaza strip. In Gaza, Israel maintains control of its airspace, its territorial waters, no-go zones within the strip, and the population registry. Pappé has stated that

“the tale of Palestine from the beginning until today is a simple story of colonialism and dispossession, yet the world treats it as a multifaceted and complex story – hard to understand and even harder to solve. Indeed, the story of Palestine has been told before: European settlers coming to a foreign land, settling there, and either committing genocide against or expelling the indigenous people. The Zionists have not invented anything new in this respect. But Israel succeeded nonetheless, with the help of its allies everywhere, in building a multilayered explanation that is so complex that only Israel can understand it. Any interference from the outside world is immediately castigated as naïve at best or anti-Semitic at worst.”

On October 11th 2023, Hamas-led fighters breached the Gaza-Israel barrier, attacking military bases and massacring civilians in 21 communities, killing 1,139 people, including 695 Israeli civilians, among them 38 children, 71 foreign nationals, and 373 members of the Israeli security forces, while taking about 250 Israelis as hostages. Incidents of great brutality and rape were witnessed and reported.

Israeli repercussion was swift and merciless. Israel has ravaged the Gaza Strip. Apartment buildings, mosques, schools, hospitals, and universities have been reduced to rubble. During their hunt for Hamas fighters Israel has deliberately targeted and destroyed civilian structures where civilians have sought refuge. On May 21st 2024, Israeli government offered its first estimate of the operation’s death toll, claiming its troops had killed 14,000 terrorists and 16,000 civilians. A week earlier the U.N. reported that approximately 35,000 individuals had died during the conflict, including 7,797 minors, 4,959 women and 1,924 elderly, the latter three groups with confirmed identities. Among the victims were 103 journalists and 196 humanitarian workers. At almost the same time, Save the Children reported that more than 13,000 children had been killed, while WHO stated that at least 1,000 children have had one or both legs amputated. On the 11th of August the death toll was estimated to be approximately 39,000 people.

The killing is continuing unabated, worsened by starvation. WFP recently reported that 1.1 million Gaza inhabitants are facing catastrophic hunger. In northern Gaza, one in three children under two years of age suffer from acute malnutrition. According to estimates by UNICEF, people’s daily nutritional intake is down to 245 calories, i.e. less than a can of beans. This is mostly attributable to an Israeli blockade that according to UNICEF since March 1 has stopped 30 percent of aid missions, letting in a daily average of only 159 of the required 500 aid trucks.

Even before October 11th people of Gaza had an intolerable existence, lacking sufficient access to electricity, potable water, food, and medical equipment. Unemployment rate was more than forty per cent, while children grew up in a world of intermittent war and persistent trauma, of barbed wire and surveillance. Israeli attacks continue while remains of Hamas’ military branch has become a drastically diminished insurgent force, which fighters pop up from the rubble to shoot at Israeli soldiers.

An entire population has been severely punished for the presence of a fanatical, political party, which according to polls conducted in September 2023 by the majority of Gazans was considered to be repressive and corrupt, but which they were frightened to criticize. Hamas’s support was estimated to be between 27 and 31 percent, though since many Gazans are unable to perceive a viable solution to Israel’s iron grip on their confined strip of land, they consider armed resistance to be the only way out.

In Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu’s two decades long regime has tried to sabotage a two-state-solution by weakening the Palestinian Authority on the West Bank, allowing for vast amounts of mainly Qatari money to reach Hamas, in exchange for maintaining a ceasefire and sowing division within Al-Fatah, the party governing the West Bank. Part of this policy has also been the increased support to 144 Israeli settlements within the West Bank, including 12 in East Jerusalem, and a discreet sustenance to over 100 “Israeli outposts”, i.e. settlements not authorized by the Israeli government. Over 450,000 Israeli settlers reside in the West Bank, with an additional 220,000 in East Jerusalem. Living in a settlement is made attractive through lower costs of housing compared to living in Israel proper. Government spending per citizen in settlements is double, in some cases triple, than what is spent per Israeli citizen in Israel proper.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that Israeli settlements on occupied territory is, according to international laws, illegal and established that Israel has “an obligation to cease immediately all new settlement activities and to evacuate all settlers from the occupied territories”. The Court is talking to deaf ears. A current expansion of settlements has involved the confiscation of Palestinian land and resources, leading to displacement of Palestinian communities while creating a source of tension and conflict. The UN Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) reported that from 1 January to 19 September 2023, Israeli settlers killed 189 Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and wounded 8,192. The violence increased after October 3rd, after that date 460 Palestinians have so far been murdered by settlers. On average, there are every day three cases of settlers attacking Palestinians in the West Bank, resulting in the killing and injuring of Palestinians, harming their property, and preventing them from reaching their land, workplace, family, and friends.

International ramifications are continuously unfolding – armed exchanges between Israel and Iran, between Israel and Hezbollah, Iran supported Houthi attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea, followed by Israeli counterattacks on Yemen, waves of pro-Palestine demonstrations across Europe, the U.S., and Arab capitals, combined with increased antisemitism. All this could for Israel mean its worst defeat ever, while at the same time it may for Palestinians prove to be more deadly and devastating than the Nakba.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Credit: China Daily 2017-08-09

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Jul 25 2024 (IPS)

Habits can change extremely fast, particularly within so-called “developed” nations, where children, even more than grownups are affected by life changing events. Gone are the times when kids could move around freely and invent games and adventures together with their friends. Far away from the scrutinizing control of parents and authorities they learned to interact with other kids, taking risks and solving problems. It could be tough and often quite merciless times, but educative, beneficent, and fun as well.

The presence of grownups in children’s worlds has gradually become more and more manifest. Prefabricated toys and gadgets are lured upon on children and quickly forgotten, while adults oversee and control not only schooling, but games and sport as well. Children’s scheduled leisure time hinders them from developing their brains in preparation for adulthood. Free, unsupervised play is disappearing, creating hypersensitive adults demanding not to be exposed to words, topics and ideas they perceive as unpleasant, or offensive. People are increasingly taking refuge within in a virtual reality, where they can find a space of their own among the millions of algorithms provided by Google, TikTok, YouTube, Facebook and Instagram. A never-ending flow of dopamine kicks, conveyed by short messages, reports, comments and publicity spots. A constant scrolling for things that might arouse interest and provide relaxation. On social media, boys watch hard porn even before they have experienced their first kiss, while young girls are fed with unrealistic beauty ideals and exposed to bullying and inappropriate approaches.

Much of the social changes behind the current, everyday existence might be traced back to 2014, when iPhone 4 was introduced. It was a small, clever, and handy device, with multitasking functions, including a front-facing camera and a huge variety of app folders. Furthermore, it provided access to Apple’s new Face Time video chat service. Selling over 600,000 pre-orders within 24 hours, the iPhone 4 was an immediate success. The benefits of a smartphone are apparent to any user. Taking photos, selfies, and making short videos have become part of our every day life, as well as keeping contact with family and friends all over the world. At any given moment we can in an instant find essential information. Smartphones have become an escape from boredom, opening up access to many worlds other than the one right in front of you. They are helping us to feel included and involved in society.

However, like any kind of delight, smartphones might also become an addiction. All around us we meet phone addicts – smombies, smartphone zombies, walking around hooked up to their small devices, oblivious of the surrounding world, risking accidents, harming not only others, but themselves as well. Any back-lit device, such as a smartphone, might seriously affect sleep cycles due to cells at the back of our eyes, which contain a light-sensitive protein picking up wavelengths of light. Such light-sensitive cells send signals to the part of the brain that regulates 24-hourly rhythms. Overuse of smartphones might not only lead to sleep deprivation, but also headaches, atrophy, and uneven nutrition.

Critics of excessive smartphone use have raised concerns about their mental effects, pointing out that while they make us pay attention to a vast amount of incoming information, while doing so at a superficial and limited level they disconnect people from what really matters. Without open spaces and mental rest, the nervous system never shuts down – making us wired and tired all the time. We are getting used to check our phones every minute – in the morning, during working hours, in the evenings, during weekends and vacations. Many of us become anxious and irritable if we cannot interact with our phones, constantly watching them, talking through them or fiddling with their apps. Some even use them to avoid interaction, evading conversations and eye contact.

There is an assumed correlation between social media and anger, anguish, and depression. Even for people who don’t use smartphones, they have created a changed social climate. The web has taken over press and opinion making. It has become easier to limit, control and maintain our own information sources. The smartphone world is dominated by a few large companies whose goal is to reinforce needs and addictions, as well as to collect and sell information, while doing so they even invade and expose our privacy. Lacking a smartphone might mean social marginalisation. At the same time much of the web has been brutalised; hate mongering, generalisations and prejudices are taking over from critical reviews and science-based information. Tech enterprises have been accused of exploiting our psychological shortcomings and exercising the biggest, uncontrolled experiment that humanity has ever been exposed to.

Our attention span is diminishing. A specific worry is that parents have largely been blind to how mobile phones have changed their children’s lives in such a fundamental manner that many of them have missed out on what it takes to grow up and become socially responsible, knowledgeable, and critical thinkers. Since early childhood, kids have been hooked to a screen, or a small rectangular box, often while plugging their ears. Many have during a large part of their lives become bereaved from face-to-face interaction and an actual presence of others; their scent, body language and facial expressions. Immersed in an odourless and abstract web-world they have been able to avoid the annoying interference of an authentic reality. The engagement of parents in their children’s wellbeing have thus been double-edged, at the same time as they have pampered them and tried to protect them from a harmful society, they have left their children at the mercy of a mind-numbing web world, far beyond their control.

Many children do not know how to make a summersault, read an entire novel, hike in the woods, fish, use a scissor, or a saw. They lack patience to watch an entire movie, to concentrate on a given task, or listening to a teacher. After a short while they reach for their smartphone and leave the real world behind, updating themselves on the activities of the Kardashian family, or follow an imaginary motorbike across a rugged landscape.

The Swedish governmental Mediemyndigheten, Media Authority, has since its initiation in 2005 monitored “media habits of young people from 9 to 18 years of age”, publishing its findings every second year. It did in 2023 establish that a majority of Swedish children at the age of nine have a smartphone of their own, while 70 percent of the fifteen years olds use their smartphones daily for at least three hours and has become more used to meet friends digitally, than physically.

The above might be perceived as a world-renouncing lament of an old man hostile to change. A techno-hostile alarmist and nostalgically tainted warning cry directed smartphone addiction and toxic social media. It might rightly be pointed out that throughout history, people have been warned about train travelling, reading of comic magazines, telephones, radio listening, TV watching, and a huge amount of other modernities. However, it is an undeniable fact that members of the so-called Generation Z, i.e. those born after 1995, in a great part of the world have been growing up with smartphones and become attracted by an alternative, thrilling and interesting world, which for many of them has created a dependency that often has proved to be unsuitable for both adults and children. It is quite possible that improved smartphones have among youngsters contributed to an alarming increase in mental illness – anxiety disorders, depression, anorexia, self-injury, and even suicide. Smartphones might have created an intensified awareness of appearance, comparisons with others, while sincere friendships have been superseded by superficial relationships, feelings of loneliness, status-seeking, rumour-mongering, demands for constant attention, stalking, bullying and a host of other harmful phenomena. Time spent within a world of fake news and make-belief is combined with an avalanche of demands on already stressed and immature child- and teenage brains, in which implanted opinions, mistakes and annoyances might become viral and a future burden.

Already twenty years ago, some medical expertise had found that children’s increased screen watching made them unconcentrated and might cause ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder), a neurodevelopmental affliction manifested through inattention, hyperactivity, impulsivity, and emotional imbalance, which impair children’s ability to cope with difficult situations.

In Sweden there is an ongoing debate whether smartphones have to be banned from schools and universities. Supporters of a law that makes this obligatory point to several facts. Foremost among them are concerns that smartphones might influence child development. The human brain is constantly developing, especially during childhood and adolescence, creating neural connections with a vital role in cognitive, emotional, and social functioning. It has actually been statistically established that children who spend more than two hours a day using electronic devices, including smartphones, had lower cognitive and language scores than children who spent less time on electronic devices. Excessive smartphone use can lead to changes in brain chemistry, including reduced grey matter volume in certain regions of the brain, associated with cognitive control, emotional regulation, and decision-making.

Smartphone use can of course not be forbidden, but it does not hurt to be reminded of dangers connected with their excessive use. When children got access to smartphones hey left behind their old, “stupid” mobile phones and their online time increased enormously. In those, not too distant, times we lacked knowledge of how to protect our children from companies which designed their products to create what could be a dangerous dependency. While protecting their children from the harmful influences of a real world, many parents under-protected them within a virtual reality. The American social psychologist Jonathan Heidt has stated that “the transition from a play-based to a mobile-based childhood has been a disastrous mistake – let’s bring our children home.”

Main sources: Haidt, Jonathan (2024) The Anxious Generation: How the great rewiring of childhood is causing an epidemic of mental illness. New York: Allen Lane, and Statens medieråd (2023) Ungar & medier 2023 En statistisk undersökning av ungas medievanor och attityder till medieanvändning. Stockholm: Statens medieråd.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Immigration policies are among the most hotly debated topics in Europe. Xenophobia, combined with curbing immigration, have become the main reason to why ever-increasing large crowds of voters are supporting populist parties.

A visit to World War I French war cemeteries might provide a different perspective on import and exploitation of labourers from poor countries in the South, indicating what their suffering have meant to European wellbeing. For hundreds, even thousands of years, Europe has been dependent on a forced and often badly treated labour force – slaves, serfs, indentured labourers, prisoners of war – people who have been captured, or hired, and then transported from areas outside Europe, a practise especially evident during World War I.

In Noyelles-Sur-Mernot, we find a Chinese cemetery, not far from the blood-soaked battlefield of Somme, where in 1916 approximately one million soldiers, during less than four months, lost their lives, or went missing. Here rests some of the 100,000 coolies who in China and Vietnam had been contracted by British and French armies to work, fight and die in the mud of the trenches.

Coolies, in Chinese written as 苦力, meaning ”bitter labour” or “bitter strength”, went everywhere, from the Arctic to the southern ends of the world. They built railways in the USA, in Alaska, in the jungles of Amazonia, in the Middle East and Siberia. They worked in Peruvian silver mines and the diamond mines of Natal (South Africa), in guano fields in Peru and on sugar plantations in Trinidad, Cuba, and the German Samoa.

Chinese workers were hired for pitiful amounts by professional contractors, obtaining advances from their customers and assuming the responsibility for discipline, travel, control, and supervision. After being sprayed head to foot with disinfectants and having their characteristic ponytails cut of, Chinese coolies were shipped off towards harsh work and/or battlefields. A long sea voyage, that could last more than four months, with diseases and insufficient food, killed many of them. Since Westerners found it difficult to distinguish one worker from another and to learn Chinese and Vietnamese names, coolies were deprived of their names and assigned numbers instead. Outside working hours coolies were not allowed into military canteens, or to mix with civilians, most of them lived in guarded and wired camps.

Coolies were generally considered to be replaceable and often treated in an inhuman manner. In the 1890’s, a Swedish foreign legionnaire, Bertil Nelsson, described a crossing of a mountain range in Tonkin (Vietnam):

“During these campaigns, a coolie’s life was valued only if he was able to carry his burden, otherwise he was finished off. If he fell down, a European soon came forward with stick in hand and whipped him until he rose up again. It was a repugnant spectacle to witness how poor blood-whipped wretches were trudging forward under heavy loads. Finally, the weaker of them stumbled and fell, again and again. It was harder and harder for them to get up on their feet again. Finally, their lifeless bodies lied there without a cry under the hard blows of a cane, without a tremor of the eyelids, not even when their noses had been crushed by brutal Europeans, or when a revolver was raised and fired into their skulls. Thus, it was demonstrated to the others that only death could free them.”

Not far from the cemetery of Noyelles-Sur-Mernot we find the cemetery of Chapellete, one of six Indian War cemeteries around Somme and Amiens. The British considered the Indian continent as an integrated part of their empire, recruiting 800,000 Indian soldiers and 500,000 coolies, bringing them to various war zones of World War I, at least 73,000 of them died.

This was not only a wartime procedure. Between 1896 and 1901, some 32,000 Indian, indentured labourers constructed a railway linking Uganda to the sea port of Mombasa, 2,500 labourers died during its construction. In the British colony of Natal approximately 200,000 Indians arrived as indentured labourers to work in mines and plantations. Between 1838 and 1920, 230,000 indentured Indian labourers arrived in British Guyana, mainly to toil in the plantations. During the same period more than 135,000 Indians arrived in Trinidad-Tobago. At the same time, the French contracted 30,000 Indians for work in Martinique, 20,000 to work in French Guyana, and no less than 500,000 were destined to Mauritius, whose descendants now constitute more than 65 % of the island’s population.

These were just a few examples to indicate how the colonial powers of France and Great Britain spread Indian and Chinese workers around the globe. The great majority of this generally harshly treated labour force remained where they had been brought, in spite of the fact that contracts and enforcement had stipulated they were supposed to be transported back to China and India.

Many Chinese, Indian and African coolies, as well as some Europeans, were “indentured labourers”. Since the sixteenth century an indentured servant was usually a labourer contracted to work, without pay, three to seven years in exchange for the cost of transportation, food, clothing, and a place to live. Indentures were quite common in Colonial America and different from slaves in the sense that their captivity was temporary and could be ended if they paid off the debts incurred for food and housing. An indenture could be sold. After arriving at their destination indentures were generally sold to the highest bidder. Like prices of slaves, their price went up or down depending on supply and demand. Indentured labour could also by authorities be used as a punishment, something that befell many European “vagrants” and minor criminals, who were sent off to the “colonies”.

Another French cemetery, this one from World War II, situated just outside Lyon, might also remind us of sacrifices endured by people subdued under colonialism. Two days after Marshal Pétain had announced France’s surrender to the Nazis, the 25th regiment of Tiralleurs Sénégalais tried in the small town of Chasselay to hinder the German army from entering Lyon. Tiralleurs Sénégalais was the all-encompassing denomination of sub-Saharan recruits, of whom most came from Senegal. During the days that followed, the Germans experienced heavy losses, before the French and Africans surrendered. Prisoners were divided into two: The French on one side, the Africans on the other. The latter were machine-gunned.

During World War I, 200,000 African troops were recruited by the French Army of whom 135,000 were deployed to Europe, where 30,000 were killed. During World War II, approximately the same number of Africans were recruited by France, of whom 40,000 were deployed to Europe.

During World Wars I and II, approximately, 4,500,000 African soldiers and military labourers were mobilized by the Brits and French, about 2,000,000 of them died. Inside Africa, during and before these wars several hundreds of thousands of porters were used to transport goods through an often roadless terrain. These porters were often recruited by force and compelled to carry their burdens far from home, harassed by diseases, the cruelty of their leaders and an unhospitable terrain. Furthermore, they were often infected by diseases, previously unknown to them, while spreading sickness themselves. During World War I, 95,000 African porters died while in British service, 15,650 under the Belgians, and 7,000 under the Germans. French and Portuguese porter deaths are unaccounted for, but assumed to be at least 20,000. Also unaccounted for are deaths among “civilians” caused by the spread of diseases and mass migration.

A work force similar to indentured labour made its appearance after World War II. During its aftermath several countries were in dire need of a numerous and effective labour force. As an example, in West Germany foreigners were allowed to work for a period of one or two years, before returning to their home country, making room for other migrants. For Turks, Tunisians and Moroccans, special rules applied – only unmarried persons could be recruited; family reunification was not allowed, a health check, and an aptitude test had to be passed. A Gastarbeiter, guest worker, could after two years not be allowed any extension. These harsh rules were mitigated over time and now more than 4 million persons with a recent Turkish migrant background live in Germany.

Communist East Germany also had a Gastarbeiter system, with workers arriving from Poland, Vietnam and Cuba. Contact between guest workers and East German citizens was extremely limited. After work, Gastarbeiter were usually restricted to their dormitories, or an area of the city which Germans were not allowed to enter. Furthermore, sexual relations with a German led to deportation. Women Gastarbeiter were not allowed to become pregnant during their stay. If they did, they were forced to have an abortion.

Similar systems have been used in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Workers from India, Bangladesh and Pakistan generally pay agents in their own countries, for travel and sponsorship during a limited time period. However, the receiving governments have currently begun to implement reforms to increase labour protection and remove elements of the Kafala (sponsorship) system, although these reforms have so far been insufficient to dismantle the system entirely. Currently, approximately 88% of the UAE population consist of expatriates, most of them migrant workers.

Not all migrant workers, i.e. persons engaged in remunerated activities in a state of which they are not nationals, have been recruited through systems similar to the Kafala, some are undocumented workers, but many continue to suffer from uncertainty and an overhanging threat of being expelled from work and livelihood. The number of international migrant workers is currently totalling 170 million. They constitute 4.9 % of the labour force of destination countries with the highest rate at 42 % in the UAE. Among international migrant workers, women constitute 41.5 % and men 58.5 %.

Whatever European anti-immigration parties may claim, the immigration of non-European labour is far from a new phenomenon. European war cemeteries, might serve as just one example testifying to the fact that Europeans have a lot to thank such “foreigners” for. Furthermore, Europeans also have reason to be ashamed of the misery their ancestors have caused such “alien workers”, as well as the fact that some are still exploiting and devaluing their contribution to the host countries’ economy and wellbeing.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

]]>

Antonio Berni, Unemployed, 1934

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Feb 1 2024 (IPS)

Karl Marx’s Manifesto of the Communist Party begins with the now worn-out phrase: “A spectre is haunting Europe – the spectre of communism. All the powers of old Europe have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre”. Nowadays the word “communism” could easily be substituted by “migration”. All over Europe, politicians claim that Europe is being destroyed by migrants. In country after country, ghosts of yesterday are awakened. Parliaments include xenophobic politicians who might be considered as inheritors of demagogs who once dragged Europeans into hate and bloodbaths.

Populists have successfully convinced voters that the greatest threat to their nations is neither inequality, nor climate change, but immigration. Politicized storytellers have found that fear of “the other” can be a means to gain power. Nevertheless, such a fear does not concern any “other” – respected professionals who move to another country are usually not labelled as “migrants”, neither are wealthy businessmen who acquire new passports as easily as they move their money around the world.

To obtain some insights to the often all overshadowing phenomenon of international migration, Jan Lundius recently met with Dr Omar Hammoud Gallego, a fellow at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Omar Hammoud Gallego

Hammoud Gallego: Like many of my colleagues and friends, I am the son of migrants. My parents came from different parts of the world and met, married and established themselves in a third country. However, this was not the main reason for me to focus on migration in my research. In 2015, while working for UNHCR in Colombia, where I was engaged in supporting internally displaced Colombians, I soon found out that there was a lack of serious, in-depth research about migration within Latin America. I began to read about regional migration and decided eventually to pursue a PhD on this topic.

IPS: Was it the specific situation in Colombia that made you shift your main interest from internal to regional migration?

Hammoud Gallego: Yes, over the last few years Colombia has received a huge influx of migrants and refugees from Venezuela (although they are recognised as refugees only in a handful of countries). A phenomenon that has not abided. More than 7,7 million migrants and refugees have left Venezuela as a result of political turmoil, socio-economic instability and an ongoing humanitarian crisis, roughly a quarter of the country’s population. While democratic backsliding in the country began with Hugo Chávez, the situation worsened considerably during the presidency of his successor since 2013, Nicolás Maduro. Most refugees, more than 6,5 million, are hosted in Latin American and Caribbean countries; close to three million in Colombia, one and a half million in Peru, and close to half a million in both Chile and Ecuador.

IPS: And the cause of this exodus is mainly political?

Hammoud Gallego: To a certain degree – yes. The Venezuelan government inept and corrupt handling of the economy and plummeting oil prices caused the output of PDVSA (the national oil company) to decrease substantially, leading to lower revenues for the government. As it happens with many countries with vast oil reserves, Venezuela developed into a rentier state, receiving most of its income through the export of oil. Since 2013, the country’s economy has suffered greatly. In 2018, the inflation was more than 63,000 percent compared with the previous year, while nearly 90 percent of the population lives in poverty. Furthermore, estimates by the UN and Human Rights Watch indicate that under Maduro’s administration close to 20,000 people have been subject to alleged extrajudicial killings.

IPS: Is the current situation in Venezuela still excruciating?

Hammoud Gallego: Yes, and the current geopolitical landscape seems to have favoured Maduro’s regime rather than debilitated him. The country is Russia’s most important trading and military ally in South America. Due to the energy crisis linked to Russia’s criminal invasion of Ukraine, the US government in October last year lifted sanctions on the Venezuelan oil and mining sector, which had been in place since early 2019. In spite of this influx of money and support, the situation continues to be severe and so far, few Venezuelans are returning to their country of origin. Many are instead making their way to the Darien Gap, through Panama and from there continue north until they reach the United States. Elections in Venezuela are scheduled for this year, but it is hard to know if Maduro will allow them to take place fairly and transparently.

IPS: How is UNHCR handling the Venezuelan refugee crisis?

Hammoud Gallego: The UNHCR is one of the few UN agencies which depends almost entirely on voluntary contributions. Every year UNHCR funding shifts depending on the outcome of its Global Appeal, the process in which it asks governments and some private donors to contribute to the support of refugees. In 2023, about 74 percent of these funds came from 10 donors only, with much of the funding earmarked for specific crises and only 15% of it consisted of multi-year funds. Commitments are constantly shifting and crises around the world compete for limited resources. For example, when a refugee crisis erupted due to war in Ukraine it meant that less funding was dedicated to Latin American countries hosting Venezuelan refugees, as well as UNHCR commitments in other parts of the world. However, there are many NGOs across the region that also make a concrete difference in the lives of many refugees. For instance, the NGO VeneActiva, which was founded and is led by Venezuelan migrant women and operates in Peru, is one of the best examples in the Latin American region of how civil society can step in and provide the support refugees need. Its digital platform contains key information that helps Venezuelan nationals to restart their lives in Peru. The NGO provides a variety of services, including psychological support and advice on how to regularise one’s migratory status.

IPS: You are currently living in the UK, a country where migration, like in other European nations, is high up on the political agenda. Can you provide us with some insights about how the migration issue is dealt with in the UK?

Hammoud Gallego: Over the last few years, the Conservative government in the UK has been facing a dilemma of its own making. The Brexit decision was supposed to lead to a decrease in immigration, and instead the opposite seems now to have been the case. Still, the lack of enough immigrants to fill in positions in the public sector, particularly in education, and health, and to take on seasonal work in agriculture and construction, has limited economic growth in the country. The health sector was exceptionally hard hit by both Covid and Brexit.

IPS: How is the governing political party affected by the migration issue?

Hammoud Gallego: Since 2010 the UK has had a Conservative-led government, with Conservative party leaders making migration a prime electoral issue. However, according to the latest polling data, it is estimated that 46 percent of voters would vote for the Labour Party in a general election, compared with 22 percent voting for the Conservative Party. Understandably, conservative politicians are worried about losing votes to the far right, and specifically to the Reform Party, and are trying to out-do the far-right by adopting absurd measures to deter the arrival of asylum seekers. One such scheme is the recent Rwanda asylum plan.

IPS: Could you elaborate on whether the Rwanda plan is a feasible project, or not, and why some Conservative politicians actually proposed such a solution for asylum seekers.

Hammoud Gallego: It is a proposal that foresees that some of the asylum seekers who arrive to the UK irregularly will be relocated to Rwanda for processing. Those successful in claiming asylum would remain in Rwanda. It is an absurd proposal based on two wrong assumptions. The first, is that most asylum seekers will know about the scheme. The reality is that the information most of them get, comes from unofficial sources, oftentimes from the smugglers that organise their journeys. Second, even if they knew about the scheme, it is unlikely that it will deter them. For most of them, the choice of a country depends on several factors: the language they speak, the network they have, etc… Also, on their way to the UK asylum seekers have often taken several risks, and suffered greatly, so the minimal risk of being sent to Rwanda will be seen as an acceptable risk for most of them. The reality is that what this plan will only push individuals not to apply for asylum once in the UK, and in many cases simply live in the country with an irregular status, akin to the reality of many Mexican and Central Americans in the US.

IPS: How do you view the future for asylum seekers and so called “economic” migrants?

Hammoud Gallego: It looks bad. I believe that climate change will exacerbate conflicts in many regions of the world, thus forcing people to move. Such challenge needs urgently to be dealt with, both internationally and locally, and it might already be too late. Investments in green energy are far too limited, viable resettlement programs are not in place, leaving asylum seekers no option but to embark on dangerous journeys. Also, one of the main myths surrounding economic migration is that as countries become wealthier, people will have less incentives to leave. The reality is that the poorest individuals in the Global South have always been the ones least likely to travel, as they lack the means to do that. The poor cannot afford to move. As countries become wealthier, the middle classes will seek to travel and migrate more.

IPS: What can be done for migrants who are already in place in Europe, and elsewhere?

Hammoud Gallego: Well thought-through integration policies forcefully implemented and sensible migration policies would be a good place to start. There are many examples of how integration can be conducted successfully. Nations like the UK are to a certain degree proof of this, with a prime minister of Indian origin, and the Mayor of London and First Minister of Scotland both sons of Pakistani immigrants. Considering sudden refugee crises, the way European countries responded to the Ukrainian crisis shows the way forward: let refugees move wherever best suits them, and you will avoid a humanitarian catastrophe. However, politics in Europe seems to be going in the opposite direction. In Germany, Sweden, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands and many other European nations anti-migration and nationalistic forces are gaining strength, not the least among young people who mistrust ageing and unrepresentative traditional parties. If everyone who voted in the election had been aged under 35, Geert Wilders’ Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV) might have won even more votes. In last year’s French presidential runoff, Marine le Pen won 39 percent of votes from people aged 18-24 and 49 percent of those aged 25-34, le Pen’s deputy is the 28 years old Jordan Bardella. Giorgia Meloni’s ruling Brothers of Italy was the preferred party among people under 35 years of age. I assume that the likely win of Donald Trump in the next US elections will boost European anti-migration politics.

IPS: What can immediately be done to address the issue of migrants and asylum seekers already in Europe, and maybe elsewhere as well?

Hammoud Gallego: If governments across Europe were to pursue sensible and evidence-based migration policies instead of replicating far-right talking points, it would be a start. Principled opposition politicians could, instead of focusing exclusively on migration to attract votes, focus more on those aspects of migration policies that might be improved, without resorting to a xenophobic rhetoric that normalises a polarising political discourse. Integration and inclusion are key for people coming to Europe. Integration is both a right and a duty, meaning that every member of a society has to adapt to and respect fundamental human rights, including democracy, the rule of law, freedom of speech and religion, as well as the rights to equality and non-discrimination.
Considering that migration has become a highly politicised issue it has been proposed that long-term immigrants ought to be given the right to vote, thus making their support more appealing to politicians and decision makers. A few countries, such as Chile and New Zealand, are allowing all residents to vote, hoping this would decrease polarisation and marginalisation, whether this will happen remains to be seen. Under all circumstances it would be desirable if we could live in a world where migrants were considered as fellow human beings, rather than as scapegoats for governments’ ineptitudes.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Michael Tjernström, Professor of Meteorology at Stockholm University, has had five expeditions on the research icebreaker Oden, where he has witnessed the impact of climate change on the Arctic. Credit: Michael Tjernström

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Dec 19 2023 (IPS)

Conflicting emotions greet the outcomes of COP28. After 28 years of climate conferences, an agreement has, for the first time, proclaimed that fossil fuels are the biggest culprit behind the warming of our planet and stated that it would encourage all nations to “accelerating action in this critical decade so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science.” The agreement calls for, among other things, a tripling of renewable energy by 2030, but also an increased pace in the work to develop technical solutions for the separation and storage of carbon dioxide, an extremely expensive and, so far, limited effort.

However, the agreement can unfortunately not be characterised as “decisive.” The text uses the phrase “transition fuels” as a code word for the fossil gas that causes carbon dioxide emissions, warming up Earth’s atmosphere. The draft text went through multiple iterations over the course of the negotiations, and one version, supported by oil and gas-producing nations, dropped a reference to the root cause of climate change entirely. However, an urgent pushback from the USA, EU, and small island countries saw fossil fuels put back in the text at the last minute, even though the final version lacked the concrete term “phaseout,” which many nations wanted to see.

Palliative formulations thus give rise to several loopholes, allowing fossil-producing countries to continue with, and even increase, their extraction of harmful fossil fuels. 2023 will be the hottest year on record globally, with extreme weather causing death and destruction in the wake of climate change. To mitigate the worst effects, global emissions must be halved by 2030, but so far, the curves continue to rise. Considering this, it has to be kept in mind that the climate meeting’s agreement is not legally binding but only a signal of a direction forward. It still remains uncertain whether COP28 will really result in the countries of the world advancing from words to action.

On this worrisome note, please read this IPS interview with Michael Tjernström, Professor of Meteorology at Stockholm University.

IPS: What is your opinion about the recently concluded COP 28?

Tjernström: The situation is bizarre. The climate system is one of the most complex issues we have to deal with as a society, even without involving its many interactions with human and social sciences. Accordingly, it is not strange that there are many things we don’t fully understand, but this we do know: The climate is warming up because we are accumulating carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels, and all else results from this! So, having a global climate meeting that cannot agree on having this stated in the final statement is like driving your car to the auto mechanics with an engine problem, but instead of getting that fixed, you get a haircut in the front seat to look better.

A view from the research icebreaker Oden. Credit: Michael Tjernström

That being said, this statement is better than nothing, but not by a whole lot. Sometimes I do think that it might have been better if the meeting had crashed and burned. After all, the Paris Agreement came after the Copenhagen fiasco; sometimes we need to fail in order to succeed.

IPS: This spring, you were part of a research team visiting the Arctic Sea onboard the Swedish icebreaker Oden. Why did you travel to the Arctic, and why did you use an icebreaker?

Tjernström: The Arctic is particularly sensitive to climate change. It is usually said that global warming is going twice as fast in the Arctic as in the rest of the world. However, recent studies indicate that the change might be four times as fast on average across the whole Arctic and up to seven or eight times as fast in some places, for example, around Svalbard and in the Russian Arctic Ocean. Despite the Arctic being so vulnerable, there are almost no other places on earth where the climate system is so under-observed. Over the Arctic Ocean, permanent observation stations cannot be established because of the ever-moving and deforming sea ice. Accordingly, it is most convenient to have an icebreaker as a base for observations and research in this hard-to-reach, inhospitable ocean.

IPS: How many members are there on such an expedition, and have you been doing this kind of research before?

Tjernström: This was my fifth expedition with the research icebreaker Oden. There were 75 people onboard, of whom about 40 were researchers, about 20 members of the ship’s regular crew, and 15 logistics staff. The latter two included kitchen staff, a medical doctor and a nurse, a helicopter pilot, a meteorologist and air traffic controller, several technicians, and even an artist. The artist—in this case, a painter—has a historical heritage. Ever since scientific expeditions were organised hundreds of years ago, it was important to have an artist as part of the team. In those days, photographic techniques did not exist, and a painter was necessary for the documentation of the findings. Ever since, it has been customary to have an artist onboard.

IPS: Is it inconvenient to stay on an icebreaker for several months?

Tjernström:. Yes and no; actually, mostly no, but it is a very special experience. We have electricity and heat, good food, a sauna, gym, library, laboratories, and a small movie theatre. Of course, it is sometimes difficult to live so close to others, but we generally have a good and cooperative mood. And we have lots of work to do! This is not a 9-5 job, with weekends free. And even if it was, there’s not much else to do.

IPS: What does your research consist of?

Tjernström: In a general sense, we try to observe the state of the climate system, but we also measure the processes that generate that state. We are, so to speak, taking the pulse of the current situation, though we are also trying to establish tendencies by taking samples and measuring climatological changes. The goal of our research is to improve our climate models, i.e., computer models describing the Earth’s climate system, essentially a virtual synthetic climate that can also be used to indicate future changes or processes. Climate models have some similarities to weather forecast models, but instead of delivering a ten-day weather forecast detailing a nearby development, a climate model provides a “forecast” of climate for maybe one hundred years into the future. The IPCC, a UN climate panel, uses the results from these models, among other things, to calculate the effects of climate change.

The main task of an Arctic expedition is to secure various measurements. We make comparisons between different weather conditions, observe the clouds and the aerosols, take samples to establish the salinity and temperature of the ocean, and examine the occurrence of microorganisms. We also set up measuring stations on the ice and took snow, ice, and water samples. One group drove a remote-controlled mini-submarine under the ice, and another mounted measuring instruments under a helicopter to study variations over larger surfaces. We also released weather balloons to measure atmospheric changes.

My main interest for the latest expedition was to study the effect warm air inflows have on the sea ice and snow cover. Actually, one can say there are only two seasons in the Arctic: either it freezes or it melts. We wanted to study how abrupt the shift from winter to summer can be, so Oden followed weather forecasts indicating where warm air flows were moving in. By measuring and studying the direction of air flows, we could study their effects on cloud formation as well as their impact on ice and the ocean. Such observations are now used to understand how the system works, and ultimately, this lays the foundation for the development of climate models.

IPS: Are climate models reliable?

Tjernström: Yes and no; it depends on the purpose. They are quite reliable for calculating future temperatures, but less reliable for precipitation changes. They are also fairly reliable for global averages, but the smaller the area of interest, the greater the uncertainty. One explanation for when the models work less well is when we lack adequate understanding of something, and that is often in part because we do not have sufficient observations.

Most Arctic measurements generally originate from late summer, in August or September, when there is relatively less sea ice and the ice is melting, making it easier for research vessels to work in the area. This time we came earlier than usual in the Arctic, in May and June, which is the beginning of the melting season, making it possible for us to more carefully investigate the nature and change in the system when the sea ice starts its annual melt.

IPS: When was your first research expedition to the Arctic, and have you noticed any changes since then?

Tjernström: My first trip to the Arctic took place in 2001, also on the research icebreaker Oden. If there is something that has really changed during the twenty years I have been doing this research, it is the nature of the ice. We notice this when we place our expensive instruments on the ice, because it is important to find proper multi-year ice for this. This is ice that has survived at least one melting season, and it is generally more durable. It is now becoming increasingly difficult to find ice that is thick and durable enough. There is also more meltwater on top of the ice, compared to the situation during my first expedition. While it is tragic to see how the ice is disappearing, it is important for me not to let emotions run away but to keep a cool head, to objectively and systematically collect observations, and to make as accurate calculations as possible.

IPS What about the wildlife up there? Did you see polar bears and seals?

Tjernström: We see polar bears on every expedition. Polar bears have an incredibly well-developed sense of smell, and an icebreaker is therefore a bear magnet. They are very curious animals as well as dangerous, and an icebreaker with 70 people onboard has a distinct smell. Anyone who needs it gets weapons training on the way up north, and we always have bear guards posted when we work on the ice. However, Arctic Ocean wildlife is vulnerable because it is based on the presence of sea ice all year. For example, there are seals that live their whole lives on the ice, and now it is constantly getting thinner and scarcer.

The Arctic’s food chains are becoming depleted, industrial fishing has taken a toll on the marine flora, and harmful microplastics, mercury, and man-made toxins are becoming increasingly common in the water. Polar bears are at the top of the food chain and are particularly vulnerable. They live on seals, which live on fish, and so on, all the way down to the microorganisms. And in the Arctic Ocean, there are no other top predators present. Pollution and climate change have an impact on everything.

IPS: Reportedly, due to the rising sea levels, Bangladesh, small island states, and megacities like Shanghai, Bangkok, Jakarta, Tokyo, and New York—which have sizable populations concentrated close to coastal plains or river deltas—are in danger. Is this threat real?

Tjernström: Sorry to say, it is. I am worried that, as an example, huge areas of Bangladesh and many low-lying islands are going to disappear, resulting in the loss of human lives. And this affects a large population around the globe living in coastal areas. As a matter of fact, the threat of melting land ice is, in the long run, even worse than the disappearance of ice in the sea. The melting of ice on land is a larger threat than the disappearance of sea ice. Even if we are able to stop greenhouse gas emissions right now, it will take hundreds of years before the inland ice sheets stop melting.

When land ice melts, the runoff significantly increases the amount of water in the oceans, contributing to global sea level rise. Sea ice, on the other hand, is like the ice cubes in a glass of water: when it melts, it does not directly change the level of water in the glass.

Our entire society needs to adapt to climate change. Our lifestyles need to change, and with increasing variations in rainfall and the fact that sea levels are rising, housing and harbours need to be rebuilt, as well as resilience to food and health crises. In wealthy countries, we cannot continue to throw away food and waste energy as we are currently doing. We live between hope and despair, but we can absolutely not give up and do nothing. We must study what is happening and find solutions. First of all, it is not enough to limit fossil fuel emissions; they must be stopped.

IPS: What made you become a climate scientist?

Tjernström: As with so much else that happens in life, it was actually mostly a coincidence. As a young man, I was drafted into mandatory military service as an army medic, which was not something I wanted to do. I then remembered an amazing lecture on how to make your own weather forecast, taught by my fantastic high school physics teacher. I discovered that one could do the mandatory military service as a meteorologist, so I made up a story that I was going to become a meteorologist by profession, got my orders changed, and ended up in the Air Force as a forecast office. After a while, I became increasingly fascinated by research and development. For a while, I continued to work with meteorology within the military forces, deepened my knowledge, and eventually got a PhD in meteorology at Uppsala University. Since then, I have also served at various universities in Sweden and the USA, and now, when I’m about to retire, I work at Stockholm University.

IPS: You are interested in photography and music. Do you think that art can contribute to an increased awareness of climate change?

Michael Tjernström: Definitely, literature and art, including photography and music, are other ways to describe reality. I believe that a researcher’s role should be combined with that of the populariser. Researchers ought to act as knowledge brokers, mediating between hope and despair. Frequently, I think of my role in this as “painting a picture” for people to understand. And from there, the distance to composing and taking a landscape photograph is not that far. Different but equally important parts of the brain are involved, and in this way, we are no different from environmentally conscious artists. We want to engage people and inspire them with a will to change a threatening existence and strive for a better future. But my main goal in life is to understand—nothing more than that.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Excerpt:

Klimt: Life and Death, Wikipedia

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Dec 6 2023 (IPS)

A dark cloud is hovering above human existence. It is a fairly illusory cloud haunting our minds and wellbeing, but also an actual, menacing, mostly invisible cloud that covers the Earth’s entire atmosphere. Saturated by greenhouse gases, this global threat increases with every year, threatening all life on Earth, causing increased flooding, extreme heat, draught, wild fires, rising sea levels, food and water scarcity, as well as diseases and mounting economic loss. This misery, caused by human greed, thoughtlessness, and self-aggrandizement, trigger human migration and armed conflicts.

If global temperatures keep rising and reach 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels, people will, worldwide and simultaneously, face the fatal and multiple impacts of climate change. A 2-degree rise in global temperatures is considered to be a critical threshold. In 2023, the average global temperature was on a third of all days at least 1.5 Celsius higher than pre-industrial levels, and the year is ending up as the hottest on record and – the year 2024 is expected to be even hotter.

Climate change poses a particular threat to children and youth and may potentially derail their normal development; affecting physiological systems, cognitive abilities and emotional skills in ways that may be irreversible. The emerging problems are manifold and the effects of these looming calamities make children and young people increasingly frustrated. Many youngsters feel threatened and betrayed by the behaviour of ruthless entrepreneurs and financiers, as well as poor and often corrupt governmental response to a disastrous climate change. Rampant climate anxiety motivates some young people to take action, not only through a recent surge in marches and the emergence of various environmental movements, but also in the form of violent and occasionally misdirected protests.

One of several means to draw attention to the threat of climate change are activists’ attacks on famous artworks. Since early 2022, artworks have been attacked all over Europe and the US. Mashed potatoes have been thrown on a Manet painting, chocolate cake smeared on statues, tomato soup on Van Gogh’s magnificent depiction of sunflowers, and oil-like substances thrown on several other paintings, like Klimt’s Death and Life. That painting is found in the Leopold Museum in Vienna, which presents some works form the dispersed Lederer art collection. The Lederer was a Jewish art collecting family, who among others financially supported the now renowned artists Klimt and Schiele. In 1938, the Gestapo expropriated all of Lederer’s possessions. Some of the confiscated Klimt paintings were by Nazi authorities stored in a castle, burned down by a German army unit just before the Soviet Red Army appeared. Seventeen Klimt paintings and frescoes perished in the fire, one of the few salvaged artworks was Klimt’s Death and Life, now smeared with a black substance

The spokesperson for one of several climate activist groups, Just Stop Oil, that attacks works of art has declared: “If things need to escalate then we’re going to take inspiration from past successful movements and we’re going to do everything we can.” What he meant by “successful movements” was among other incidents when a lady in 1914 slashed a Velasquez painting with a meat cleaver, protesting the arrest of the defender of women’s rights, Emeline Pankhurst. The enraged woman explained: “I have tried to destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history as a protest against the Government for destroying Mrs. Pankhurst, who is the most beautiful character in modern history.”

Angry members of Just Stop Oil shouted, as they were hindered from attacking paintings at the National Gallery in London: “What is worth more, art or life?” A member of the group stated after throwing soup on a van Gogh painting: “The cost-of-living crisis is part of the cost of oil crisis. Fuel is unaffordable to millions of cold, hungry families. They can’t even afford to heat a tin of soup.” A somewhat awkward statement by someone who demonstrated disrespect of food by throwing it on a masterpiece of world art. Another declared: “We’re not killing anyone, climate change will.”

Supporters of “climate action groups” have defended them by saying that so far, no piece of art has been “permanently destroyed”. However, it is at best a half truth. In May last year, a self-declared “environment activist” tried at the Louvre to smash the glass protecting Mona Lisa. When he was hindered from concluding his deed, he succeeded in smearing cake on the painting. Last month, two women did with hammers smash the glass protecting the same Velasquez painting that was slashed in 1914, screaming that they were intending to rip it to pieces once more.

Another member of Just Stop Oil defended the various actions of the group and warned that they could worsen: “The function of art is for people to be able to understand the world that they live in and reflect on the human condition, but big art isn’t fulfilling that function. That’s the reason for us to be in museums: to tell people that we are in the middle of an emergency, and it is the time now for you to face that emergency.”

She was right by stating one of art’s essential functions. Artistic works have existed for almost as long as humankind and is an expression of humans’ creative and imaginative abilities, involving technical proficiency, beauty, emotional power, and conceptual ideas. Art helps us to perceive the beauty of the world we live in, the happiness we find among other human beings, in nature and animals, in all creation. It inspires reflection, willingness to act, imagination and innovative thinking. How can defenders of the preservation of nature and human rights imagine that the destruction and profanation of art may amend climate change? I assume that the enclosed mind of such activists, like ISIS fanatics, believe that their specific message and destructive actions take precedence over everything else, not the least other people’s feelings and intention to defend the very same values those fanatics, in their twisted minds, declare they are supporting.

I understand the frustration, but not the means. Like spoke-persons for Just Stop Oil, leaders of ISIS could declare that their destruction of World Heritage was to grab the world’s attention by assuring extensive media coverage and international condemnation from those they considered to be their opponents and antagonists.

Instead of destroying art, “climate activists” would probably benefit from supporting and using it as a means to overcome humans’ tendency to value personal experience over scientific facts, assuming that everything will be alright by not acting in time. Art can be a persuasive means to popularize and make understandable data-based representations, making them vivid and accessible. Art can engage viewers and hopefully stimulate them to make an effort to hinder the worlds’ sloping down towards Armageddon.

Artistic endeavours to depict, present and make us aware of the dangers of climate change is increasingly becoming more common and engaging. This “Climate Change Art” assumes a wide array of forms and expressions. Often with an engaging, awareness raising component of personal commitment.

Crotchet Coral Reef https://crochetcoralreef.org/exhibitions/

The Institute for Figuring (IFF), which in 2003 was founded in Los Angeles by Margaret Wertheim and her twin sister Christin, is a non-profit organization generating projects at the intersection of art, science and mathematics. One IFF project is the so-called Crochet Reef, which all around the world engages professional artists, scientists and groups of amateurs. The Crotchet Reef has become one of the largest participatory art and science endeavours in the world. By creating giant installations mimicking living coral reefs and crocheted out of yarn and re-used plastic, harvested from debris in the Pacific Ocean, the project engages associations which members are learning and applying mathematics, science, handicraft, environmentalism, and community art practice, while promoting awareness of the effects of global warming. Project creations have all around the world been successfully displayed in galleries and museums.

More modest activities, but nevertheless quite extensive, are various happenings, like those of Eve Mosher, who draw a blue “high-water” line around Manhattan and Brooklyn, indicating areas that would be underwater if climate change predictions are realized. She has since drawn high-water lines around Bristol, Philadelphia and coastal cities in Florida. In 2018, Xavier Cortada placed signs in front yards throughout Miami, indicating each property’s height above sea level to illustrate how sea level rise would flood the owner’s land.

A sophisticated, renowned and multifaceted artist is the Danish-Icelandic Olafur Eliasson, who creates large-scaled installations employing elemental materials such as light, water, and air temperature to enhance the viewer’s experience and create an awareness of humans’ intimate connection with nature, how its changes are influencing us, both in a positive and negative manner. Eliasson has founded a “laboratory for spatial research” that engages a large team of architects, engineers, craftsmen, and assistants, working together to conceive and construct large-scale sculptures, installations and other artwork, highlighting what happens to and on our living planet.

Awareness of the dangers faced by or planet, its ecosystem and organic lifeforms, including humans, is on the rise. At all levels of human existence an ever-increasing creative power is making itself evident; in art, literature, religion and science. To vanquish the threats to our planet we have to leave destruction behind us and become more creative, more willing to cooperate with one another, more tolerant, more respectful. Destroying art, our common human cultural heritage, is an entirely wrong way towards a brighter future and just like the emissions of greenhouse gases it must immediately come to an end.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Research team in the Arctic. Professor Tjernström is standing on the left.

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Dec 4 2023 (IPS)

This year’s UN Climate Change Conference is taking place in Dubai from 30 November to 12 December. The so-called COP summits are organised every year and constitute a means for the global community to agree on ways to address the climate crisis, such as limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius, supporting vulnerable communities to adapt to the effects of climate change, and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.

More than 70,000 delegates are attending the COP28 in Dubai. Main delegates are the 47 representatives of the member states (called Parties), which constitute the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Business leaders, young people, climate scientists, Indigenous Peoples, journalists, and various other experts and stakeholders are also among the participants. Officially, COP 28 stands for the 28th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC.

UNFCCC was established in 1992 to combat “dangerous human interference with the climate system”, in part by limiting the greenhouse gas emissions that compromise Earth’s entire ecosystem, a prerequisite for human existence. Among other items on its agenda COP 28 will address progress made in accordance with the Paris Agreement of 2015, when 195 Parties of the UNFCCC agreed to keep the rise of global temperature to well below 2 °C (3.6 °F), compared to pre-industrial levels, and preferably limit the increase to 1.5 °C (2.7 °F).

To gain a scientific perspective of the meaning and influence of COP28, IPS asked Professor Tjernström about his views on climate change and what he assumes might be done to amend it. Michael Tjernström is since 2001 professor of Meteorology at Stockholm University. He has spent several periods at institutions such as CIRES, The Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) and The Earth System Research Laboratory (ESRL) and National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), all in Boulder, Colorado, USA. Professor Tjernström’s main research interests concern climate change in the Arctic. He has participated in several scientific expeditions to Arctic areas and is since 2011 a member of the International Arctic Science Committee.

Michael Tjernström

IPS: Professor Tjernström, can the outcomes of COP28 drastically affect current climate changes?

Michael Tjernström: The COPs are a necessary and essential factor when it comes to addressing climate change. A COP summit might be likened to a regular check-up visit to the dentist. It can be painful, but is necessary for good dental hygiene. The dentist might find that your teeth are in a very bad state and to save them, urgent measures have to be taken – caries has to be amended, maybe a bad tooth has to be extracted, dental bridges inserted, etc . The point is that the dentist is an expert and you have to trust him. However, the decision to save your teeth is all yours. In a similar fashion the COPs intend to amend already present damages to the climate, determine their causes and try to prevent a negative development. But it is up to the members to act.

IPS: How do you perceive the UN’s role in this endeavour?

Michael Tjernström: There is absolutely no other global organization other than the UN which would be able to organize and be in charge of such a process. No other national, international, political or private, organisation would be able to establish a global consensus and general awareness, as well as maintaining the perseverance, stamina, objectivity and legal strength to do so. An endurance against all odds, but nevertheless made possible through the UN’s established rules, combined with its global and local outreach. Of course, there are cracks and concerns, but the administrative structure and operations of the UN are firmly based on the commitment of its member states.

People, who in general are prone to criticize the UN system are often only perceiving the actions of the Security Council and how its commitment is crippled by the veto power of its five permanent members. However, this does not apply to the UNFCCC and its scientific support organisation, ICCP. As a scientist and propagator for awareness about climate change, I perceive the lack of understanding the great importance of the UN as a marketing problem. People are not aware of what this global organisation stands for, and even less so – its support of the global scientific community.

IPS: Will you attend the COP summit in Dubai?

Michael Tjernström: No, most scientists have through their research already made their fair contribution to efforts to combat climate change. The current state of research, results and warnings are comprehensively explained and diffused through the ICCP reports and scientists have thus no need to attend the COPs. Whether or not politicians listen to science or not is not determined by my presence at a COP.

COP summits are more politically than scientifically motivated. However, they are based on the factual basis provided by ICCP reports. The COPs mainly attract other stakeholders than scientists, such as government representatives, spokespersons for environmentalist pressure groups and lobbyists representing the interests of fossil fuel-based industries, as well as oil and coal producing companies. Many such lobbyists try to find a place among decision makers, while environmentalists might be looking for political scapegoats.

People and organisations are trying to highlight their own, often specific interests, some of them being based on doubtful assumptions and moral priorities. Environmentalists have often demanded that certain interest groups be excluded from COP summits, like those lobbying for the use of fossil fuels, interests of oil producers, as well as industrialists who, for the sake of their own profit, try to minimize the threat from global warming.

Nevertheless, it is important that influential stakeholders are present . The global outreach demands this. Everyone has to be allowed to have their voice and concerns heard, as well as being provided with an opportunity to be informed about scientific achievements, new environmentally friendly technologies, and the threats of global warming.

Industrialization based on non-polluting and zero emissions of greenhouse gases, as well as new eco-friendly technology, are essential for change and improvement. Environmentalism’s contributions are also important. Like most revolutionary movements radical environmentalists highlight political and capitalist motivational reasons and misconduct, while they demand change and sacrifice. Historically did socialists and suffragettes contribute to emancipation and justice. However, some revolutionaries have turned into fanatics, and some have concentrated on relatively minor but easily targeted issues while ignoring an overall picture. For example, opponents to air travel are maybe not fully aware of the fact that it actually contributes to only three percent of global greenhouse emissions, while private cars and other fossil-fuel based transportation means account for much more of carbon dioxide emissions . It might be stated that it would be more beneficial for the environment to limit the use of your car, than avoid travelling by air. Veganism may be considered as beneficial when it comes to emission of greenhouse gases, though methane emissions from ruminating animals constitutes less than five percent of greenhouse gas emissions. If we could stop throwing away a third of all the food we produce, this would be much more efficient and would also have other benefits. However, every effort to limit greenhouse emissions is worthy of attention, though decisive and comprehensive political actions are particularly crucial for achieving zero greenhouse gas emissions as quickly as possible. It is not enough to limit them; they must be eliminated.

IPS: But can COPs really have the impact you could wish for?

Michael Tjernström: In several respects, development is moving in the wrong direction, especially when it comes to acquiring knowledge. Many confide in badly informed, or even deceitful, social media and populist politicians. In certain circles a negative attitude to research and science is thriving. Science might by such groups be perceived as an essentially separate activity, practiced by an intellectual elite devoting itself to mutual admiration.

The COPs make participants aware of the fatal threat of global warming. But more than that, it also makes the general public aware and therefore participants can be held accountable for their actions, or lack thereof, and are through legally binding agreements forced to take social and economic measures to amend the ongoing destruction of natural resources, and the atmosphere.

IPS: What exactly is ICCP and what is its connection with the COPs

Michael Tjernström: Generally speaking, people are not knowledgeable, most don’t know what ICCP is. The task of ICCP, i.e. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is to advance scientific knowledge about climate change caused by human activities and it does so by examining all relevant scientific literature on the subject. This comprehensive review and dissemination of scientific insights and research results include natural, economic and social impacts and risks. ICCP also covers possible responsive options. IPCC does not conduct its own original research, its mandate is to survey the research situation, while aiming at being objective and comprehensive, and only openly published results that have already been reviewed by experts can be used. Thousands of scientists and other experts then volunteer to review the findings and publications of ICCP, before its key findings are compiled into a Synthesis Report intended for policymakers and the general public. Experts have described the work of ICCP as the biggest peer review of the global scientific community. COP28 will discuss the 6th ICCP Synthesis Report, issued in March 2023.

Most climate-related risks assessed in the Fifth Synthesis Report, issued in 2014, are in the Sixth Report deemed to be higher than earlier predicted and projected long-term impacts are worse than they were assumed to be in 2014. The Sixth Synthesis Report highlights that climatic and non-climatic risks will increasingly interact, creating compound and cascading risks, which will be extremely difficult to manage. The confidence of the conclusions has also been gradually increasing across the reports.

The development of climatological research is quite fast, the lag in actual efforts to halt global warming is mainly to be found in decisive decision-making. The original ICCP reports contain tens of thousands of pages that few decision-makers can assimilate. The summary for policy makers is reviewed and edited by several stakeholders. Efforts may thus be made to mitigate alarming findings and adapt them to political concerns. However, changes and adaptions are carefully wetted in order to secure that none of them contradict actual and fact-based research results, predictions and warnings.

IPS: Do you perceive yourself as a pessimist, or as an optimist?

Michael Tjernström: I am both hopeful and worried. As a researcher I cannot allow myself to fall victim to paralyzing dystopias. As a scientist I contribute to the measurement of climatological processes, while taking the pulse of the current situation, but also looking for trends and measures to mitigate, and perhaps even hinder, a worrisome development. Accordingly, a scientist has to be a kind of optimist even in the face of despair. Furthermore, I consider that my role as a researcher has to involve the popularization and dissemination of research results. A role I appreciate and feel comfortable with.

It is reasonable that we in the West, who so far have contributed by far the most to the ongoing climatological damage, also take our responsibility when it comes to mitigation and adaptation. We have the technological, historical and scientific prerequisites to make amends for all the damage we have caused and should therefore also go into the breach for the realisation of necessary improvements, while contributing to the economic means to do so.

But the picture is complicated. China is making great progress in climate research, but is at the same time contributing to the world’s largest emissions of greenhouse gases in total, and is number two in the world in per capita emissions, yet is still claiming they should still be treated as a developing country and indeed has a large poor population in the face of a rapidly growing middle class. Africa is lagging behind in its industrial development and consequently have limited emissions, but must nevertheless already now end its dependence on fossil fuels.

We in the West live well and safely and could without any major problems dismiss a lot of the gratuitous comfort we currently are enjoying. The drama is undeniable, even when the Paris Agreement was signed it was by some researchers pointed out that the 1.5 target was unattainable in reality. There is much talk about tipping points, when much of the existing ecological balance suddenly collapses, and that this might happen at a two degree rise in global temperature. But contributing factors are manifold and I don’t believe it will be happening in the near future. There is no really compelling evidence for most of these suggested tipping points. The most important thing is to immediately stop the burning of fossil fuels. In spite of all, I assume that much can and will be done to stop the worrisome development.

IPS interchange with Professor Tjernström was quite extensive and informative. In a following article we will return to Professor Tjernström describing his own research and thoughts about current, and future climatological changes.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

In 1968, the tobacco company Philip Morris introduced a new cigarette brand called Virginia Slims. Under the slogan “You’ve come a long way, baby” it was exclusively marketed to women. The advertising campaign exploited the civil rights movements of the 1960s, indicating that those cigarettes were enjoyed by strong, independent, and liberated women. A blatant lie – why would “independent” women choose to poison themselves with a commodity which each year causes more than 480,000 deaths in the US alone – nearly one in five deaths? Another question arising from this deceitful ad is: “How far have women come on their way to independence and liberation?”

What is the global status of women today? Progress has been made, but this cannot fool us to believe that there is no difference to the plight of men and women. War is raging in Ukraine and Palestine, with all that this encompasses of human suffering and fake news. Israel and Hamas, Russia and Ukraine, are accusing each other of atrocities and for sure – abominable acts are committed by every warring faction. This is what happens in war – people are traumatized, mutilated, tortured, and killed. Nevertheless, the image of war we obtain from our daily news does in a way remind of tobacco ads. The crowning absurdity of war and cigarettes is ignored – they actually cause death and immense suffering. Crimes against humanity are presented as depending on which side perpetrators and victims find themselves, as well as their respective supporters, who generally are not suffering from the horrors of violence and displacement.

War is not healthy and it is far from normal. It makes people abnormal, and its fatal effects linger. Furthermore, war is affecting men and women in different ways. It is driving up domestic violence, as stress levels raise when traumatized men return to their families after long spells on the front lines, finding their domestic situation changed.

War veterans returning from Germany after World War I committed more crimes against women than ever before. The same happened after World War II in the US and the Soviet Union, a country where as late as 1959 there were still 20 million more women than men due to male casualties from war and repression. This is just one indication that war is extremely gendered. Police reports of domestic violence spiked in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Many women and children fled the war and some of those who stayed behind bore the brunt of male frustration. Battered women confess: “With all due respect to our military, we may indeed find ourselves in a situation where a veteran returning from war will be respected and sympathized with to such an extent that such a minor offense as domestic violence may well be forgiven on all levels.” This occurs in Russia as well, and all over the world in countries suffering from armed conflicts. All levels of human interaction are affected by an unavoidable process of “militarization”, meaning that belligerent values become dominant, lingering long after armed aggression has ceased.

In modern warfare civilian casualties by far outnumber those of armed combatants. Defenceless civilians suffer human rights violations, while women are subjected to specific gender related abuses. Women and girls targeted by sexual violence often face insurmountable obstacles if they try to seek justice. Many suffer from social stigma, worsened by the fact that women and girls tend to have a disadvantaged social position . This despite the fact that women constitute the backbone of most communities. Their ideas, energy and involvement are crucial for maintaining resilience during conflicts, as well as they are important during the rebuilding of society in the aftermath of war. To ensure lasting peace, it is thus essential that women’s specific exposure to violence is recognized and that they are allowed to play an essential part at all stages of a peace process.

Combatting soldiers often find themselves surrounded by civilians who they consider to be their enemies, or even worse – inferior beings. It is quite common that soldiers are by their commanders’ eagerness to increase their fierceness are given licence to ignore normal boundaries of civil behaviour. Women might be perceived as upholding and embodying “enemy culture, and support”. Destroying the enemies’ domestic security and sense of cultural/ethnic belonging might become a military goal and violence against women thus becomes legitimized.

Attacks on women may sometimes focus on their role as mothers. During the Nazi regime’s ruthless extermination of Jews, Roma and Sinti, as well as several other ethnic groups, the elite troopers of SS considered their victims to be vermin “unworthy of life”. The leader of these ruthless exterminators, Heinrich Himmler, reminded them that not only grown-ups, but their children as well had to be killed: “Otherwise they will grow up and revenge themselves on their parents’ murderers”. Similar arguments have been used by other perpetrators of massacres on ethnic minority groups; killing children, destroying foetuses and mutilating women’s sexual organs to “eliminate guerrilla spawn”.

Young women and girls have been abducted and forced to become sex slaves, while children and youngsters have been forced to become “warriors”. Children are easier to influence and threaten than older people, who furthermore might be needed to supply troops and guerrillas through their agricultural work and other activities. China Keitetsi, a former child soldier from Uganda now living in Denmark, wrote in her book Child Soldier: “When I was nine years old, I came into the National Resistance Army. When I got there, there was not only me. There were many children. Some were only five years old. I thought at first it was exciting, it was like a game, they were marching left, right, and I wanted to be a part of it. The moment I became a part of it, that meant that all my rights were over, I had to think, to feel, according to my instructor.”

In more than 150 countries there are currently child soldiers within government and opposition armed forces and an estimated 30 percent are girls. China Keitetsi remembers :“We were bodyguards to our bosses, we cooked, and we looked after them, instead of them looking after us. We collected firewood, we carried weapons and for girls it was worse because we were girlfriends to many different officers. Today, I can’t think how many officers slept with me, and at the end it became like I don’t own my body, it’s their body. It was so hard to stay the 24 hours a day thinking which officer am I going to sleep with today.”

The widespread use of rape is common in any armed conflict. Rape is employed to intimidate, conquer and control women and all members of their communities. It is used as a form of torture to extract information, to punish and intimidate. Wartime rape is committed by a wide range of men. Even those mandated to protect civilians tend to sexually abuse women and girls under their care. Women may be targeted for rape not just because they are women, but also because of their social status, ethnic origin, religion or sexuality. In Rwanda, it is estimated that between a quarter and half a million rapes were committed during the 100 days of genocide between 7 April and 15 July 1994.

Rape is often accompanied by extreme brutality. Women and girls often die during the attack, or later of their wounds. This is particularly true of young girls. Other medical consequences include transmission of HIV and serious complications in reproductive health. Fear, nightmares and psychosomatic body pain are just some of the problems experienced by survivors. Sometimes women are raped in front of others, often family members, to deepen their sense of shame. Some rape survivors state they would rather die than let what has happened become public.

Widowhood and/or separation increase during armed conflicts and it is often women who have to flee and bring their children with them, since men and boys are targeted to be killed or forcefully recruited by warring factions. Homes are destroyed and entire families uprooted. The loss of the family home brings about specific problems for women, including rise in domestic violence, enormous practical and financial difficulties and a harmful dependency on strangers. Women and girls in flight may be forced to offer sex in return for safe passage, food, shelter and/or documentation. Government officials (such as immigration officials or border guards), smugglers, pirates, members of armed groups and male refugees have all been known to abuse refugee women in transit. Desperate women may be forced into illegal activities, putting them at risk for repercussions from authorities.

If homes have been destroyed and families evicted, women are particularly hard hit because of their responsibility for providing shelter and food for their families. Even in assumed “safe havens”, like refugee camps, women and girls are at risk of sexual exploitation by those who control access to food and supplies, and if they venture out of the camps to find water, food and fire wood, perpetrators may be lurking, ready to attack them.

A slogan like “You’ve come a long way, baby” is, to say the least, offensive to millions of women suffering hardship from war and displacement. The list of historical and current abuse and suffering of women in war is immense and constantly updated. Some examples:

During World War II women were by the Imperial Japanese Army forced into sexual slavery. Estimates vary with numbers ranging from as low as 20,000, to as high as 360,000 to 410,000 ( according to Chinese sources). In Europe, large numbers of women were during World War I “recruited” to “field brothels” by both warring factions and the practice was continued in the eastern territories occupied by the German army and its auxiliary forces. Even the horrific concentration camps were equipped with brothels.

During World War II, the eastern front was a veritable hell. German officers and soldiers were violating women and girls, while military commanders did not attempt to put an end to such atrocities. The Russian vengeance was horrible. The exact number of German women and girls raped by Soviet troops during war and occupation is uncertain, but historians estimate their numbers are likely in the hundreds of thousands, and possibly as many as two million. During the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War, Pakistani military and so called Razakar paramilitary raped between 200,000 and 400,000 Bengali women and girls. There are no exact figures on how many women and children who were systematically raped by Serb forces in various concentration camps, estimates range from 20,000 to 50,000. In Eastern Congo, the prevalence and intensity of rape and other sexual violence is described as the worst in the world. A 2010 study found that 20 percent of men and 30 percent of women reported conflict-related sexual violence and the brutal bloodshed has not yet abated.

We may all agree that war is horrible and women and girls are suffering from its effects. However, we also have to admit that violence against women take such horrific proportions due to the fact that in most countries women are even in peacetime victims of misogyny, religious/traditional contempt and subjugation, unequal rights and a wide range of other types of discrimination. In war, injustices and mistreatment are multiplied many times over. One means to avoid the horrors of war would be to guarantee equal rights to women and men, ensuring that laws are enacted for that purpose, followed to the letter and that those who violate them are duly punished. Only then can women be said to have come a long way.

Main Sources: Keitetsi, China (2005) Child Soldier: Fighting for My Life. Johannesburg: Jacana Media. Lamb, Christina (2020) Our Bodies, Their Battlefield: What War Does to Women. Glasgow: William Collins. Wiiliams, Jessie (2023) “’This War Made Him a Monster.’ Ukrainian Women Fear the Return of Their Partners”, Time, March 13.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Some time ago I watched the Indian blockbuster RRR (Rise, Roar, Revolt). It received universal praise for direction, screenwriting, cast performances, soundtrack (which won an Oscar) and thrilling action sequences. RRR is filled with gore; bodies beaten, pierced and torn apart. An overblown combination of Quentin Tarantino and Bollywood, far away from Satyajit Ray’s emotionally moving films, as well as Bollywood’s romantic comedies and mythological dramas. RRR never pauses for breath. The two male protagonists are supermen, not exposing many recognizable human traits, even if they might occasionally sing and talk about love. Hard to understand, since the few women of the story are cut-out clichés.

This to date most expensive Indian movie is actually a jingoistic show of patriotic pomp. A quasi-historical tale hiding the fact that the Republic of India (Bhārat Ganarājya) is a multi-faceted conglomerate, including concepts like Bhakti, love and devotion and Ahimsa, non-violence applied towards all living beings. Instead it appears to be a tribute to “Modi-land”, a politically constructed ideal chimera, based on the concept of Hindutva (Hinduness),where Hindu identity is considered as the essence of Bharat (India).

India was on 20th April declared as being the world’s most populous nation with 1,428 million inhabitants, of which more than 80 percent define themselves as Hindus, making religion a useful tool for political campaigning. However, the Hindu faith has countless variants and the nation is a subcontinent with 20 official languages and a plethora of customs and cultures.

The RRR movie fits well into the current Prime Minster Narandra Modi and his Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, BJP’s embrace of its interpretation of Hindu Pride, Hindutva, was strengthened and supported by a growing economy. Nevertheless, there are cracks in the political fresco depicting a harmonious India, not the least widespread anti-Muslim prejudice. From fear of Muslims and neighbouring Pakistan many people take their refuge in BJP. Almost 15 percent of the Indian population are Muslims, meaning that The Republic of India has the third largest Muslim population in the world.

Playing the religious card and claiming an unprecedented economic growth Narandra Modi is now probably the most popular leader in the world. In the 2014 general elections BJP became the first Indian political party since 1984 to win a majority and becoming able to govern without the support of other parties. The G20 summit coincided with Modi’s aims to raise New Delhi’s global clout following nearly a decade-long tenure in power in which he has positioned himself as a leader intent on shedding the country’s colonial past – emphasizing the need to “liberate ourselves from the slavery mind-set.”

A view apparent in RRR, which is rooted in a vision of a genocidal racism of British colonialists. The British Governor of the Princely State of Hyderabad (today’s Telangana) might be equalled to any murderous Nazi-SS officer and is together with his sadistic wife flaunting dehumanizing prejudices against indigenous people. Muslims act as treacherous collaborators with the British and their subjugated Deccan Mughal Prince is an enthusiastic supporter of the Britsh Raj. To liberate a girl kidnapped by the villainous Governor-wife, the Hindu hero Raju disguises himself as a loyal Muslim officer serving the British Raj and as such he does not hesitate to kill and torture fellow Hindus, while planning a Hindu revolt and liberating the confined girl.

All this fits well into BJP’s efforts to depict the Indian subcontinent’s 4 500 year long history as being developed within a Hindutva frame. This in spite of the historical presence of thousands of kingdoms, diverse peoples, different religions, being the birth place of at least three world religions, and with the powerful presence of Christianity, Parsism, and not the least Islam – blending into the creation of a unique and rich Indian culture.

A common trait among leading BJP politicians seems to be that their chauvinistic Hindutva vision has convinced them that everything that do not conform with their simplistic view of “Bhārat culture” might be considered as intrusion/pollution of Hindu past and present. The splendours of the Mughal culture is exorcised from school books and Muslim rulers like Akbar are referenced as cruel invaders. The names of Muslim sounding towns are changed; Allahbad has become Praygray, Aurangabad is Chhatrapatri Sambhaji Nagar, and Osmanabad has become Dharashiv, while the official name of the Indian Republic now has been established as Bhārat Ganarājya.

Anything awkward in the history of this utopian Hindu Bhārat is swept under the carpet, or whitewashed, like the legacy of untouchability and exclusion, misogyny and intolerance. There is also an apparent discomfort with BJP’s rather tarnished history. For example, Nathuram Godse who murdered Mahatma Gandhi in 1948 was an esteemed member of the Hindu supremacist Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) organisation, which still is the ideological fountainhead of the BJP. He killed Gandhi because the Mahatma’s insistence on a secular India, integrating members of all religions and castes (the entire caste system was declared to be illegal).

In spite of Modi’s popularity it is generally agreed that BJP is considered as a North Indian, Hindi-speaking and upper-caste party, even if BJP has declared that “the caste system is responsible for the lack of adherence to Hindu values and the only remedy is to reach out to the lower castes.” The major themes on the party’s agenda has been banning cow slaughter and abolishing the special status given to the Muslim majority state of Kashmir, as well as legislating a Uniform Civil Code in conformity with “Hindu values”. Most of the people living in Kashmir do not vote for BJP and neither do those of the Sikh dominated Punjab, while non-Hindi speaking people in Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Kerala are reluctant to share BJP’s ideology and prone to consider the party as adhering to Ethnic democracy, meaning that it is supported by a prejudiced majority.

The RSS organisation was in 1925, founded on the claim that India was a Hindu nation and Hindus were thus entitled to reign over the Nation’s minorities. The RSS’s original base was higher-caste men, but in order to grow it had to widen its membership and lower-caste recruits were accepted, among them a young Narendra Modi, who soon became a pracharak—the group’s term for its young, chaste foot soldiers. He rose quickly in the ranks. RSS is by BJP often described as the party’s “scout branch”, but it is more than that – it is a uniformed paramilitary organisation in which young men obtain physical fitness through yoga, weapon- and martial arts exercises, taught Hindutva ideology, as well as partaking in activities encouraging civic awareness, social service, community living, and patriotism. Pracharaks are full-time functionaries, renouncing professional – and family lives while dedicating their lives to the cause of the RSS.

Modi rose in the RSS ranks and in 1987 he entered its political branch – BJP. When Modi joined the party it had only two seats in Parliament. It needed an issue to attract sympathizers and found one in an obscure religious dispute. In the city Ayodhya it was among local Hindus rumoured that a mosque had been built above an ancient temple dedicated to the god Ram, a Vishnu avatar. In 1990 a senior member of BJP called for the demolition of the mosque. Two years after, a crowd led by RSS partisans completely razed the mosque.

This happened when economic liberalization under the BJP’s regime was resulting in increased economic growth, urbanization, and consumerism. A new, affluent middle class developed, becoming the core electorate of the BJP. In a rapidly changing world persons were searching for an identity, several found one in Hindu nationalism, turning to gurus, and sectarian movements, participating in yoga classes and watching saffron-clad ideologists on TV. The Ayodhya incident and the following bloody clashes between militant RSS members and Muslims, triggered by press campaigns, and Pakistan supported terrorist attacks, enabled the BJP to capitalize on a growing Hindu nationalism. BJP membership soared, and already by 1996, it had become the largest party in Parliament.

Like his good friend Donald Trump, Narandra Modi has by his enemies been provided with several characteristics they consider to be dangerous. He is reluctant to give press conferences and in-depth personal interviews, but based on those and some knowledgeable acquaintances he has been described as a person having all traits of an authoritarian, narcissistic personality, and in addition he practices a puritanical rigidity, having a constricted emotional life, and an enormous ego, which apparently covers up an inner insecurity. Like Trump, Modi is also prone to reveal harmful conspiracy theories, like India being targeted by a global conspiracy, in which every local Muslim is likely to be complicit.

When Modi served as chief minister in the Gujarat state a train with pilgrims and RSS militants was returning from Ayodha. When it stopped at the station of Godhara quarrels erupted between the pilgrims and Muslim food vendors, resulting in a fire that burned 58 Hindus to death. Independent investigators deemed the tragedy to be a tragic accident, though RSS consider it to be a Muslim terrorist attack. Horrific lynchings of Muslim men and women followed, Narendra Modi was accused of condoning the violence that allegedly was supported by police and government officials accused of providing rioters with lists of Muslim property owners. Officially 1,044 persons were killed, while The Concerned Citizens Tribunal estimated that 1,926 persons had been lynched. Parallel to accusations of having been knowledgeable about politicians and administrators’ crucial role in the lynchings, Modi-collaborators were accused of corruption and even extra-judicial killings.

Apart from these unresolved incidents Modi’s reforms during his time as Gujarat minister have benefitted his political career. His regime supported the establishment of new industries, reformed the bureaucracy, and made huge investments in electricity and infrastructure. The state’s growth rate boomed as subsidies were provided to politically connected conglomerates and state-owned players.

The “Gujarat model” has been a prerequisite for Modi’s fame as India’s great modernizers. However, even if Modi after his election victory in 2014 pledged to add 100 million manufacturing jobs, India actually lost 24 million of those jobs between 2017 and 2021. COVID-19 was blamed for the failure, but 11 million jobs had already been lost before the pandemic hit. This might be compared with similar, but much smaller economies, like those of Bangladesh and Vietnam, which manufacture employment doubled between 2019 and 2020, while India’s share barely rose by two percent. Currently, Vietnam exports approximately the same value in manufactured goods with its 100 million people, as does India with its 1.4 billion. Modi’s huge investments in logistics and transport has so far not provided the expected results. Indian investors tend to offshore their profits and demonstrate a preference for financial assets. Private investment was in 2019-20 only 22 percent of GDP, down from 31 percent in 2010-11. One obstacle to investment is India’s profoundly unequal society. Modi’s economic strategy puts wealth before health. The Modi government is reluctant to prioritize investments in primary health care and education.

In 2019, the Modi government declared “war on pollution” but allocated a scanty USD 42 million. Female employment have been dropping for over three decades, with only 7 out of 100 urban women now employed. Modi’s tactics to blame minorities for economic shortcomings, social ills and other problems that could be amended by more effective policies may prove to be disastrous and lead to unmitigated violence. One example is his government’s crackdown on Sikh separatist movements and alleged extra-judicial killings of Sikh militants in Britain and Canada, which has reawaken and militarized Sikh opposition and soured diplomatic contacts with Canada. Likewise is the Government’s move to revoke the Constitution’s Article 370, which granted some autonomy for Kashmir, India’s only Muslim-majority state, likely to fuel Muslim anger and desperation and so is the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, making religion a criterion for obtaining Indian nationality. Only non-Muslim refugees from Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and Pakistan are eligible for citizenship. Added to this are new laws passed to make interreligious marriages more difficult.

The extreme Hindu pride violence depicted in RRR might be more of a source for worries than admiration for its stunning visual effects and joyous patriotism. It is doubtful if Indian unity can be realised through State homage to an idealized Hindu past, combined with an obvious marginalization of minorities. Instead of being impressed by Indian moon landings, prosperity for the wealthy and adoration of “great” leaders, it might probably be more constructive to look into and address pollution, waste, inequality, poverty, poor health, and education. History proves that harassing minorities cause general human misery. It might be much more beneficial to study history through a scientific/objective lens than as BJP and RRR adhere to invented traditions, i.e. cultural practices and ideas perceived as arising from people in a distant past, though they actually are quite recent and consciously invented by identifiable political actors.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Northern and Southern Trade Routes. Credit: European Space Agency

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Sep 12 2023 (IPS)

While climate change is relentlessly progressing, threatening life on earth, world leaders continue to meet while planning for a future where this immense menace to human existence remains a minor item on the agenda.

Recently, the BRICS countries held their 15th annual summit in Johannesburg. BRICS, an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, was in 2010 established as a collaboration group for these expanding economies. This year’s summit was of a particular interest since the G7 nations (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Great Britain and the US) have been very critical of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, while BRICS nations have been less so.

Xi Jinping arrived in Johannesburg on his second international trip this year, after visiting Moscow in March. Xi was expected to deliver his remarks alongside other leaders, but his speech was actually read out by his commerce minister. It made thinly veiled attacks on the US, describing an unnamed country as “obsessed with maintaining hegemony, [it] has gone out of its way to cripple the emerging markets and developing countries.”

Since Vladimir Putin currently faces an arrest warrant for war crimes issued by the International Criminal Court, he was only present on wide screen. He also talked about “hegemony” while repeating his questionable reasons for the brutal attack on Ukraine: “Let me point out that it was the attempts by some countries to preserve their global hegemony that paved the way to the deep crisis in Ukraine. It started when an anti-constitutional government coup took place in this country with the help of the Western countries. This was followed by the unleashing of a war against people who refused to accept this coup. It was a cruel war, a war of extermination …”

Putin and Xi try to depict their nations’ politics as a counterpoise to the hegemonic strivings of the US and the EU. There are several signs that they consider themselves and their nations to be companions in the struggle.

During their meeting in Moscow this year, Xi said he hoped Putin would be victorious in next year’s presidential elections, since his “strong leadership had made good progress in development and rejuvenation”. Putin responded by stating that “Russia stands ready to continue to deepen bilateral, practical cooperation, step up communication and collaboration in international affairs and promote world multi-polarity and greater democracy in international relations.” A declaration sounding deceptive given what has happened in Xinjiang and Hong Kong, as well as in Chechnya and Ukraine. Nevertheless, Xi’s speech in Johannesburg was quite to the point when he declared: “We gather at a time when the world has entered a new period of turbulence and transformation. It is undergoing major shifts, division and regrouping, leading to more uncertain, unstable and unpredictable developments.”

So far, Beijing’s support to Russia has been pragmatic. Apparently following the guideline of “What’s in it for us”. Nevertheless, Russia is an unpredictable partner, recently demonstrated by the mysterious developments around Prigozhin and his Wagner Group. There are no signs that Xi’s support to his “dear friend Putin” is wavering. Even if Xi has not explicitly endorsed Russia’s war in Ukraine, there are no direct indications that he disapproves of it. Chinese TV continues to mainly show Russian media coverage of the Ukraine invasion and Xi has criticised the “expanding of military blocs” (read NATO) while continuously condemning “the abuse of international sanctions”.

Between June 2022 and June 2023, exports from China to Russia had increased by USD 4.55 billion (90.9 percent), from USD 5billion to USD 9.55 billion. China is currently Russia’s largest trade partner and Xi and Putin have pledged to boost trade to USD 200 billion in 2023, hailing their “no limits” partnership. During this year alone Chinese imports of crude petroleum from Russia has increased by USD 1.74 billion, or 69,8 percent, compared to last year, while import of coal briquettes increased with USD 444 million or 193 percent. No good news for climate change, especially considering that greenhouse gas emissions by China are currently the largest of any country in the world, with a yearly contribution of 13 gigatonnes – 25 percent of global emissions.

At the BICS summit, Putin mentioned that a new world-transforming initiative has begun in the far North: “the relevance of accelerated development of transcontinental routes such as the North-South corridor, which will connect Russian ports in the northern seas and the Baltic Sea with sea terminals in the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean, [these routes] will in the future facilitate annual transit of up to 30 million tonnes of cargo.”

What is happening in the far North? By the beginning of this century the scientific community coined a new phrase: “What happens in the Arctic does not stay in the Arctic”. Variations of that quote have been used to describe the effects of climate change, but now it is also increasingly involving financial endeavours and geopolitics.

Quite recently, actually in 1996, it became evident that climate shifts are both violent and extremely rapid – the Greenland Ice Sheet began to lose mass at an unprecedented speed. There were also reports that the permafrost was rapidly melting. In 2001, it was obvious that the retreat of the sea ice had become uncontrivable, leaving huge areas of the Artic Sea free of ice cover. This will probably have catastrophic consequences, not only for the Arctic flora and fauna, but for the entire world. As an example, around 15 percent of the Northern Hemisphere is covered by permafrost containing enormous amounts of dead biomass, which presently, at an ever-increasing speed, is emitting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, thus accelerating global warming. Strange effects of permafrost melting can be seen in Siberia, where methane build-ups under the tundra surface litter vast areas with bizarre earth mounds, which occasionally explode, leaving holes in the ground as deep as sixteen-story buildings.

However, this disastrous development also give rise to greed and exploitation. What Putin meant by a North-South corridor that will connect Russian ports in the northern seas with ports in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean is the realisation of an important phase of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which is a Chinese global infrastructure development strategy adopted in 2013, meaning huge investments in more than 150 countries . It was thus no coincidence that China at the BRICS summit pushed for the inclusion of six more nations: Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Argentina. All these countries, except for Argentina, are directly affected by the maritime part of the BRI mentioned by Putin. Shipping lines through the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean will be connected with a northern route through the now increasingly ice-free Northeast Passage between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

Huge projects connected with this initiative have already been initiated. New deep-water harbours are constructed outside Arkhangelsk and Vladivostok. Arkhangelsk is the largest city on Russia’s northern, European coast, while the port of Zarubino, south of Vladivostok, is close to China. Both harbours are ice-free the year around.

Furthermore, China and Russia are developing the huge Payakha oilfield at the Taymyr peninsula, in the northernmost part of Eurasia. Apart from establishing strategic connections along the Northeast Passage’s shipping line, the joint Russia-China BRI is now constructing a pipeline from Siberia to Vladivostok, while linking up Russia’s railway network and river systems with new developing sites in the North.

Russian shores cover 53 percent of the Arctic Ocean’s coastline and with the ice and tundra melting, problems are arising for the EU and the US. Closer contacts with the Middle East, Africa and China are probably beneficial for a Russia which is increasingly distant from the West, a cumbersome situation that makes Russian development and exploitation of the Arctic realm a priority. Diplomatic efforts have been made to improve relations with the governments of Greenland and the Faroe Islands, which still are under Danish sovereignty, in the sense that military security rests with the Danish Government, though they are semi-independent islands and are free to trade and foment investments on their own. While Russia now is crippled by the European condemnation of the Ukrainian invasion, Arctic nations like Iceland, Norway, Finland and Denmark dominated islands are free to open up to Chinese investment and trade agreements, thus also indirectly serving Russians interests.

China is interested in polar science, infrastructure, and natural resources, while Greenland is eager to attract foreign investment. China is Greenland’s largest foreign investor, with USD 2 billion in yearly investments accounting for more than 12 percent of the island‘s GDP. While Russia is exploiting its part of the Arctic and China is entering the game, the EU and the US are worried, and not the least NATO, whose spokesperson declared: “Whoever hold Greenland will hold the Arctic. Greenland is the most important strategic location in the Arctic and perhaps the world.”

Apart from the most extensive Arctic shoreline, Russia also has the advantage of the Lomonosov Ridge, which is a shallow underwater ridge stretching from the Russian mainland and across the North Pole. According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, states have the exclusive right to exploit resources on and in the continental shelf, if the seabed is more than 370 kms wide and constitutes a “natural prolongation” of the territory of the nation claiming it. The Lomonosov Ridge is actually connected to Russian territory and in February 2013 the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf approved most of Russia’s seabed claim in the Arctic Ocean.

Russia is currently increasing its military power in the Arctic – to enhance homeland defence, protect shipping lines and secure the exploitation of the Arctic’s natural resources. This while China is trying to purchase ports, airfields and other infrastructure that might support their investments in the Arctic.

NATO, in particular Canada and the US, are alarmed by this development and voices are raised claiming that these nations are far too late for participating in the race for the Arctic. NATO already hosts the Thule Airbase on Greenland, while the US and the Danish Ministry of Defence have a declared interest in the new international airports under construction in Nuuk and Ilulissat and in using Greenlandic ports as support bases for the US Navy. The US and the EU are trying to convince Greenland, Iceland and the Faroe Islands to remain within the West’s economic and military realm and limit their interest in cooperating with China and Russia.

Meanwhile, global warming in the Artic is continuing with an ever-increasing speed, while greenhouse gases continue to gather over the Northern Hemisphere. We are all moving towards a disastrous tipping point, where in a sudden blow the entire world ecosystem could change for the worst and make the earth almost uninhabitable. This while humans continue to fight each other and world leaders squabble about who is going to rule over the Arctic and dominate the world. “What happens in the Arctic does not stay in the Arctic”.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Swedish Prime Minister Ingvar Carlsson and Robert Mugabe walking hand in hand in 1989
 

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Proverb of unknown origin

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Jul 12 2023 (IPS)

The war in Ukraine continues unabated; young men are sacrificed on battlefields, towns laid waste by aerial attacks, the threat of nuclear disasters is looming. People within an often formerly friendly inclined Europe are now wondering if Vladimir Putin has gone insane. The war in Ukraine is generally called “Putin’s war” and in April 2021 Putin signed a legislation providing him the right to run for two more consecutive terms, thus he could stay in power till 2036.

Nazi Germany was equalled with Hitler, the Soviet Union with Stalin, Communist China with Mao, and now Russia with Putin. Another example of the identification of an entire nation with a totalitarian ruler was Zimbabwe under Robert Mugabe. A president who apart from participating in the invasion of a neighbouring country led his nation into a bloody civil war.

When I in the year 2000 was working for the Swedish International Development Cooperation (Sida) it was questioned why the Swedish Government every year granted SEK 140 million (USD 15 million) in development aid to Zimbabwe, a country governed by a scorned Robert Mugabe. At that time, Zimbabwe’s GNI had in one year shrunk by 13 percent, among other things due to unbudgeted expenses for the country’s participation in a war in the DR Congo (from 1998 to 2003 Zimbabwe’s participation in this war cost USD 1 million a day). A badly managed land reform had drastically reduced agricultural production. Even before the crisis 75 percent of the population was unable to meet necessary needs of food, clothing, schooling, health care and housing. Unemployment was over 60 percent, while 25 percent of the adult population was infected with HIV/AIDS.

Misery was blamed on Mugabe’s misrule, but Swedish support to Zimbabwe continued during his reign. Since Swedish aid was initiated in the early1980s Zimbabwe had by the year 2000 received SEK 5 billion (approximately USD 460 million). Economic support currently amounts to USD 28 million per year.

Swedish relations with Robert Mugabe indicate difficulties opinion leaders face while analysing the power game of other nations. For fear of being seen as harbouring neo-colonial attitudes “experts” often withheld critical judgment and were apt to name various leaders as ”hopes for Africa”. Unfortunately personal benefits from supremacy may prove to be a fatal temptation , several heroes of yesterday have after their seizure of power turn into despots.

In the case of Zimbabwe (which at the time was “Rhodesia” governed by a white minority party, the Rhodesian Front) it was reasonable to oppose a regime that kept the majority of a nation’s population out of power because of the colour of their skin. Swedish debate has often been characterized by two different worldviews, either that the world consists of democracies and dictatorships, with the former being on the good side, or that an enduring conflict subsists between the “West” and the “Rest”, where “West” is seen as the villain. According to the latter understanding , it did not matter if Zanu (PF), the party of Robert Mugabe, actually pursued one-party rule, any opposition towards the “ancient colonial world order” was OK.

It was thus more justifiable to support an armed struggle than the democratic consensus policy proclaimed by another Zimbabwean liberation group, Zapu, headed by Joshua Nkomo. The influential Pierre Schori, international secretary of the Swedish Social Democratic Party and close assistant to Prime Minister Olof Palme, supported the “eloquent and radical” Mugabe:

I think that it had to do with personal contacts. […] In the case of Zimbabwe, we did not choose between Zapu and Zanu, but I think that when Joshua Nkomo came to Sweden it was often through the churches, while Robert Mugabe was more of a pure freedom fighter.

Mugabe spoke fluent English, with an “exquisite” Oxford accent. He liked “open conversations and intellectual debates”, and in spite of an aversion to English colonialism he was an admirer of “Anglophone culture” and a fan of cricket, attesting that it “civilizes people and creates good gentlemen.”

Mugabe had been arrested in 1963 and was after 1966 transferred to a cell he shared with Zanu’s leader Ndabaningi Sithole. Mugabe remained in custody for a further eight years, devoting his time to studies. He gained a masters in economics, a bachelor of administration, and two law degrees from the University of London. Amnesty International’s Swedish Group 34 had as its lot to support the imprisoned freedom fighter. One member of the group later stated;

– He took advantage of the opportunity to study in prison and asked us to get literature. So we members shared the expenses and sent books to him. […] At that time, Mugabe was considered as a good guy. He was very fond of children and always remembered all our children’s names and greeted them in his letters. In addition to the books, Mugabe also asked for help with items such as a pair of pyjamas and tubes of toothpaste. Before his release, I and Eva Moberg [a well-known journalist], who had started the group, went and bought a suitcase, which we sent to him with his wife Sally.

In 1958, Mugabe had moved to Ghana to gain a teacher’s certificate at the Achimota College where he met his first wife, Sally Hafton. During Mugabe’s imprisonment Sally first moved to London, where she taught at the Africa Centre. She also lived for several years in Sweden, mostly in the village of Heby, north of the university town of Uppsala. She kept close contact with the members of Amnesty Group 34. Mugabe appreciated that Sally was staying in Sweden, which he considered to be a “safe country”. Sally worked as a nanny, learned Swedish and campaigned for Zimbabwe’s freedom struggle, both in Sweden and England. In Sweden, she became a frequently seen and well-liked person.

Mugabe was released in 1974 and resolved to leave Rhodesia for Moçambique. However, Samora Machel, who in 1975 became Moçambique’s president, was suspicious of Mugabe, whom he considered to be immature and belligerent. Furthermore, Machel suspected that Mugabe’s quick rise to power was due to machinations to get rid of Sithole as head of Zanu, a “prison coup” that might have been supported by Rhodesia’s white leader, Ian Smith. Machel put Mugabe under house arrest in Quelimane, far from the Zimbabwean guerrilla camps. It was rumoured that Machel was jealous of Mugabe’s intellectual achievements, preferring more down-to-earth men, especially the Zimbabwean guerrilla commander Josiah Tongogara. Contrary to Machel, Mugabe had never been an active fighter. When Machel in 1980 attended Mugabe’s inauguration as Zimbabwe’s president, he was well aware of Mugabe’s intention to form a one-party government, giving his Shona supporters absolute power. Machel addressed Mugabe:

To ensure national unity, there must be no Shonas in Zimbabwe, there must be no Ndebeles in Zimbabwe, there must be Zimbabweans. Some people are proud of their tribalism. But we call tribalists reactionary agents of the enemy. […] Zimbabwe is the jewel of Africa. Don’t tarnish it!

Some of Mugabe’s Swedish acquaintances were suspicious of him:

He considered himself to be a superior teacher, a professor. He had six different degrees, he was a learned and well-read man. Therefore, he believed that he was right in everything, and if he was opposed, he went mad.

Politicians and journalists declared that Mugabe could be charming and nice, but it was also alleged that he was a loner; admittedly a hard-working man, a voracious reader and not much given to laughter, but above all – a single-minded and extremely complex person, not easily captured by conventional categories. Some even claimed they considered him to be devoid of ordinary warmth and humanity; emotionally immature, homophobic and xenophobic. The last time a Swedish friend met with him, Mugabe told him:

When we are elected presidents, we suddenly get enormous power in accordance with the constitution that we took over from the colonial power. We can fill positions for relatives, friends and party sympathizers. We live well and have a different life than the vast majority of our citizens. But when we leave the presidential palace, we have nothing, there are no presidential pensions.

Mugabe coveted absolute power and when he obtained it, he hold on to it. Zanu came to act as yesterday’s colonial rulers. Even if power relations had changed, perceptions of power were the same. The Swedish Government did not lack documentation warning about Mugabe’s ambitions, nevertheless its conclusion was that he was Zimbabwe’s strongest leader and moreover “pro-Sweden”, accordingly Swedish aid could not be terminated, and even had to be increased.

Already in 1977, Mugabe declared that “any man who maliciously plants contradictions within our ranks will be struck by the Zanu axe” and he was even more ruthless towards his former brothers in arms – Zapu, and its leader Joshua Nkomo.

Zanu’s power base was among the Shona people, while Zapu found its strongest support among the Ndebeles in Matabeleland. Furthermore, the Cold War was reflected in the two parties’ relations to the outside world. Zapu received Soviet support, while Zanu relied on China, which wanted to undermine Soviet influence in Africa.

In early 1983, the North Korean-trained Fifth Brigade, a unit subordinated to the presidency, began a crackdown on dissidents in Matabeleland. Over the following two years, thousands of Ndebele and Kalanga were accused of being “Zapu-traitors”, detained, marched to “re-education camps”, tortured, raped and/or summarily executed. Although there are different estimates, the consensus of the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) is that more than 20,000 people were killed.

Swedish aid workers were knowledgeable about these atrocities. Nevertheless, Swedish aid continued to be delivered to Zanu-controlled Zimbabwe. The former head of Sida’s aid office in Harare played down the events, declaring that “the civilian population in Matabeleland has been stuck between warring factions.” He advised against using aid as a means of pressure to get Mugabe to stop the mass killing.

After the 93 years old Mugabe finally was removed from power, Zimbabwe continued to spiral down the abyss, while Swedish support is uninterrupted. The country is now ruled by Emmerson Mnangagwa, who once was a close ally to Mugabe. A brutal man who in 1983 described Government opponents as “cockroaches and bugs requiring DDT to be removed.” In 1998, Mnangagwa was put in charge of Zimbabwe’s intervention in the DR Congo wars and accused of “swapping Zimbabwean soldiers’ lives for mining contracts.” Mnangagwa does not further human rights, instead his government has deepened Zimbabwe’s economic struggles, enabled endemic corruption, fuelled instability, and targeted human rights activists and journalists. It is estimated that Zimbabwe may lose up to half the value of its annual GDP of USD 21.4 billion due to corrupt economic activities. Money laundering is among the murky deals said to be carried out under Mnangagwa’s aegis. Under diplomatic cover, criminals send unaccounted cash in exchange of equivalent amounts in Zimbabwean gold, and then sell it for seemingly legitimate money.

Swedish support to Mugabe and his successor might be considered as an effort to alleviate the plight of Zimbabwe’s citizens, but it might also be interpreted as being based on simplifications of a complicated reality and furthermore relying on one man’s power. When Mugabe’s abuse of sovereignty led to massacres, they were minimalized by those of those who had bet on him and the misrule of his successor is hardly noticed.

The world is now wondering whether the majority of Russia’s population will continue to support its strong man. If Putin’s nation will be weaken or strengthened by such encouragement. The stakes are high and predictions are generally gloomy.

Main sources: Yap, Katri P. (2001). Uprooting the weeds: Power, ethnicity and violence in the Matabeleland conflict. Ph.D Thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam and various Swedish newspaper articles.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, May 8 2023 (IPS)

The World changes, though prejudices and misconceptions remain. In 1996, political scientist Samuel Huntington published The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, in which he predicted that people’s cultural and religious identities would become the primary source of conflict in a Post–Cold War World. Huntington’s allegations have been contradicted by a number of critics, among them American Palestinian professor Edward Said, who lamented their extreme cultural determinism, which omitted the dynamic interdependency and interaction of cultures. Said’s own Orientalism depicted a generalised “Western view” of Arab cultures as “static and undeveloped”, while European culture was considered to be “developed, rational, flexible, and superior.” Literature and movies have depicted Arabs as exotic men riding camels and horses through the desert, and their women as dangerously seductive objects of male desire. Eventually, the exotic men turned in to being terrorists, and/or depraved oil-rich magnates, while Muslim women were presented as veiled, enigmatic, and oppressed.

Are there no counter-images to such a one-sided view, for example an Arab film industry? Since the inception of a film industry in Europe and the US it has generally been assumed that local movie production arrived in the Middle East much later than in “the West”. As a matter of fact, already by the beginning of the 20th century both screening and production had been brought into most Arab countries. Eventually, Egyptian film production came to dominate Middle Eastern movie industry, while it established affiliated companies in Lebanon. Iraq, Jordan, Iran, Israel, and more recently the United Arab Emirates and Palestine, followed suit.

Films serve as visual entertainment for huge audiences and in a vivid manner reflect social attitudes. They thus constitute a great medium for inspiring societal change. Of course, films might serve as a means for propaganda and indoctrination, but this does not hinder them from proving helpful in making people inclined to change a status quo. There are now signs that a pervasive socio/economic change is taking place in Saudi Arabia, where a growing film industry has become part of what appears to be an overhaul of hitherto domineering ideologies

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the only nation in the world named after a dynasty. It was founded in 1932 by King Abdul-Aziz bin Abdul Rahman Al Saud, though the strength of The House of Saud can be traced back to 1745, when a local leader established a politico-religious alliance with the Wahhabis, a religious affinity honouring a Salafiyya interpretation of Islam, i.e. what is believed to be the faith of the “pious predecessors of the first three generations.” The House of Saud offered obedience to the Wahhabis, while promising to propagate their faith during a fierce struggle against Turkish and foreign influences.

Initially, Saudi Arabia did not refute the idea of movie theatres and allowed improvised cinemas, but all films were heavily censored and supposed to be screened privately. In 1982, Fahd bin Abdulaziz Al Saud became the fifth king of Saudi Arabia. Actively trying to base his authority on Wahhabism, he increased Government support to the conservative religious establishment; spending millions of dollars on religious education, strengthening separation of the sexes and the power of Muatawwa’ūn, a religious branch of the police.

Between 1983 and 2018 the only movie theatre to be found in the country was at a Science and Technology Centre, which only screened “educational” films. If Saudis wished to watch films it had to be via satellite, or DVD. In the meantime, Saudi Arabia grew into the largest economy in the Middle East. Its citizens benefit from free education and health care, along with subsidized food, electricity and housing. However, the economy relies overwhelmingly on oil. The country exports almost nothing else and imports almost everything. A welfare state has been built on the expectation that oil revenues would remain at historic levels, though prices are falling and oil will eventually run out. Furthermore, seventy per cent of the population is under thirty years of age and many demand increased personal freedom.

When King Fahd died in 2005 he was succeeded by King Abdullah Al Saud. Contrary to his predecessor, the new king realised that Saudi youth had to be better educated. As soon as he came to power, Abdullah implemented a scholarship program sending young Saudi men and women abroad for undergraduate and postgraduate studies. More than 70,000 Saudis began studying abroad in more than 25 countries, with the US, Great Britain, and Australia as main destinations. Educated and emancipated women also became considered as an asset for development. The King established a governmental department to promote women’s higher education and in 2011 women were allowed to vote in municipal council elections. The year after, women athletes competed in the Olympics and in 2013 domestic violence became a criminal offence.

However, still no movie production and screening were allowed in the country. The trend towards increased openness, innovation, efforts to limit religious bigotry and enlarged women’s rights continue under the current king, Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud. Its most visible propagator is Mohammed bin Salman, colloquially called MbS. He is Crown Prince, i.e. Salman bin Abdul-Aziz’s heir, though MbS is already the country’s Prime Minister and de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia.

Already during King Abdullah’s reign, semi-clandestine initiatives were made by a budding movie industry. Wadja became the first feature-length film made by a female Saudi director. In 2012 it was entirely shot within the Kingdom. Written and directed by US-educated Saudi citizen Haifaa al-Mansour it told the story of a spirited 10-year old living in Riyadh. On her way to school she passed a shop window with a green bike. However, its price was high and girls riding bikes were frowned upon.

Wadja deals with feelings of school girls, though it mirrors a society where grown women are regimented as if they were still in school. Behind closed doors the beauty and wit of Wadjda’s mother were unmasked, though she seemed to be barely aware of it. Her main concern was that her husband intended to take a much younger woman as second wife. Wadjda set about to earn cash to buy the bicycle. Her target was a school prize, awarded to the student expressing most devotion in learning and reciting passages from the Quran. Wadjda feigned orthodox goodness and her efforts at memorization impressed her teacher. She won the competition, though staff and students became shocked when Wadjda announced her intention to use the prize to buy a bicycle. The headmistress was furious and against Wadjda’s will donated the prize money to charity.

Despite an apparent sentimental depiction of a little schoolgirl’s desires, Wadjda emphasized her longing for freedom and self-realization, as well as fear of emotional abandonment when her father took a second wife. It is not only a film about a young person’s awkward relationship with an authoritative society and distressed parents – her longing for a bicycle of her own actually became emblematic of an entire people’s striving for freedom.

Wadjda was shot in a country where zealous clergy forbade cinemas and with a totalitarian regime with zero-tolerance of female film directors. al-Mansour had most of the time to work from the back of a van, as she could not publicly mix with men of her crew. She generally had to communicate via walkie-talkie and watch the actors on a monitor.

Haifaa al-Mansour spent seven years on finding adequate funding. It was the Saudi Arabian billionaire businessman Al Waleed bin Talal Al Saud who finally agreed to contribute. Al Waleed is a grandson of Abdul-Aziz, the first king of Saudi Arabia, and among other altruistic initiatives he financed the training of the first Saudi female commercial airline pilot, declaring that he was disposed to give “full support of Saudi ladies working in all fields.”

In November 2017, Al Waleed and other prominent Saudis were arrested during an “anti-corruption drive”. Some 200 detainees were brought to the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Riyadh and subjected to coercion and abuse. Some, among them Al Waleed, were released after paying heavy fines. MbS not only attacked the old, extremely wealthy oligarchy, but also religious leaders who uphold Wahhabi doctrines. He openly declared that there are no static schools of thought, nor any infallible persons. In another statement MbS acknowledged that the Saudi state had not been “normal” for the past 30 years and that it was his intention to introduce social, religious, economic, political changes and a new educational policy, asserting a “Saudi national identity” within what he called a post-Wahhabi era.

Without interrupting or limiting his totalitarian powers MbS prohibited the Muatawwa’ūn to “stop, follow, arrest, punish, and ask people for their ID.” Muatawwa’ūn had until recently 4,000 officers, assisted by thousands of volunteers, and an additional 10,000 administrative personnel. It imposed strict segregation between the sexes, controlled that women wore the hijab, and forbade the sale of dogs and cats, as well as toys like Barbie dolls and Pokémon items.

Most of these restrictions are now abandoned. Women are allowed to drive cars and can chose not to wear the hijab. Women above 21 years can obtain passports and travel abroad without permission from their male guardians. It has become legally possible for women to independently open their own businesses and bank accounts, while mothers are authorised to retain immediate custody of their children after divorce. Women have now access to operas, concerts, cinemas and sports events.

This is part of the Government’s Saudi Vision 2030, aiming at diversifying the nation’s economy through heavy investments in non-oil sectors, including “green” technology, tourism, local expenditure and entertainment. In Riyadh, construction has begun of The Mukaab, a gigantic structure, which will include an armada of hotels, shopping malls, several cinemas and an “immersive” theatre. In the Northwest, Neom I is under construction – a high-technology megalopolis, with robotic services and even an artificial moon. The Line, a zero-carbon city stretching 170 kilometres across the desert. Qiddiya, a gigantic amusement park just outside of Riyadh. Trojena, a luxury ski resort in the Tabouk Mountains. The Red Sea Project, which is intended to be a string of luxurious hotels along the Red Sea shores.

Saudi Arabia has now 60 high-tech cinemas with approximately 500 screens in operation, as well as an increasing local production of TV entertainment. In accordance with Vision 2030 a General Entertainment Authority has been established. Its current chairman is bin Salman’s old friend Turki Al-Sheikh, known for his lyrics, sung by several Arab artists.

The film The Cello is expected to premiere in Riyadh this year. It is based on a novel by Turki Al-Sheikh that takes place in several locations, foremost in the 18th Century Italian town of Cremona, but also in present time. After being filmed in Prague, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Vienna, the movie stars world famous actor Jeremy Irons, as well as a great number of movie celebrities from Europe, Syria, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. In The Cello a young man purchases a cursed cello, built by a Cremonese master luthier, builder of string instruments, who butchered and cut up his entire family, using parts of their blood and bones to make a cello.

The cutting up of people in Turki Al-Sheikh’s The Cello might remind viewers of the murder and dismemberment of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, allegedly carried out by Saudi officials in Turkey. However The Cello may have an intended, or unintentional, so called Boris Bus effect. i.e. changing the subject of the gruesome murder of a journalist into the making of a wondrous instrument. Boris Johnson managed to redirect Google searches from past embarrassing and deceitful bus ads about Brexit into a description of his hobby of making toy buses with painted, happy passengers on board.

Bin Salman’s occasionally brutal and draconic measures might be interpreted as residues from hundreds of years of despotism. They will hopefully mellow, or even disappear, if Arabian society is allowed to continue on its already beaten path towards an open and democratic society, allowing for women’s emancipation, free speech and general wellbeing. A trend already evident within the Saudi Arabian film industry, which does not shy away from controversial subjects and where almost forty per cent of crew and directors currently are women.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Map of Eastern Bloc, 1948.

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Mar 6 2023 (IPS)

Putin’s regime recently suspended Russia’s participation in a nuclear arms agreement with Washington. After the decision Putin declared that the move was a retaliation for the US’s, France’s and Britain’s “targeting” of Russia with nuclear weapons. He was forced to take action to “preserve our country, ensure security and strategic stability”:

“the West lied about peace, but was preparing for aggression, and today it admits it openly, no longer embarrassed. And they cynically use Ukraine and its people to weaken and split Russia.”

Such rhetoric finds fertile ground in Latin America and Africa, which suffer from a long tradition of Western exploitation carried out under the false flag of peace keeping, democratization and progress. On 26 February, Putin added that a:

“new world is taking shape, being built only on the interests of just one country, the United States. […] I do not even know if such an ethnic group as the Russian people will be able to survive in the form in which it exists today.”

The statement is part of a recurrent discourse suggesting that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is an act of self-defence, an answer to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization/NATO’s expansion. In 2004, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia were added to NATO; in 2009 they were followed by Albania and Croatia, in 2017 by Montenegro and in 2020 by North Macedonia.

In 2014, after Ukraine’s corrupt president Viktor Yanukovych had been ousted, pro-Russian unrest erupted in eastern and southern parts of the country. Unmarked Russian tanks and troops moved into Crimea, taking over government buildings, strategic sites and infrastructure. Meanwhile, armed pro-Russian separatists seized government buildings in the Donbas region.

In 2014 the Donbas was the industrial heartland of Ukraine with 35 per cent of the country’s mining, 22 per cent of its manufacturing industry, providing 20 per cent of energy supply and 18 per cent of water supply. Recently vast amounts of natural gas have been detected underground.

The separatists received considerable support from Russia and Ukrainian attempts to retake separatist-held areas were unsuccessful. In October 2014, Ukraine’s new government made joining NATO a priority. Putin at once declared that the Russian involvement in Crimea and Donbas was a reaction to NATO’s threatening expansion.

Part of Putin’s discourse, repeated by influencers all over the world, is that during a summit in 1990 when Mikhail Gorbachov accepted the reunification of Germany within the framework of NATO, he was given an assurance that NATO would not expand further. The Historian Mary Elise Sarotte has recently tried to disentangle the thorny issue, underlining that no written document of the promise exists. Gorbachov later declared that:

“the topic of NATO-expansion was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. [What was agreed] was that NATO’s military structures would not advance in the sense that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR, after German reunification. Everything that could have been and needed to be done to solidify that political obligation was done. And fulfilled.”

During a 2007 Munich Security Conference, Putin declared himself to be a stout defender of democracy, nuclear disarmament and international solidarity. Contrary to the US, which had “promised” that NATO was not going to expand beyond the borders of Germany. Putin stated that:

“unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centres of tension. […] a situation in which countries that forbid the death penalty even for murderers and other, dangerous criminals are airily participating in military operations that are difficult to consider legitimate. And as a matter of fact, these conflicts are killing people – hundreds and thousands of civilians! […] As Franklin D. Roosevelt said during the first few days that the Second World War was breaking out: “When peace has been broken anywhere, the peace of all countries everywhere is in danger.” […] I think it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself, or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust. And we have the right to ask: Against whom is this expansion intended?

The answer is beyond doubt. However, as a proverb states “Evil cannot with evil be defended.” Can Russia’s brutal attack on Ukraine actually be defended by alluding to the encroachment and support to brutal dictatorships that “democracies” like the US, France and Britain have been guilty of around the globe?

Putin repeatedly refers to “history”. He labels Ukrainian leaders as Nazis, while stating that Ukraine has always been part of Russia. Glaring exaggerations – if not outright lies.

History tells us that Russia’s past, like that of other nations, has its hidden skeletons. In 1939, the Soviet Union annexed more than 50 per cent of Polish territory. From 1939 to 1941 about one million Polish citizens were arrested, or deported; including approximately 200,000 Polish military personnel held as prisoners of war; 100,000 Polish citizens were arrested and imprisoned of whom approximately 30,000 were executed. The total loss of lives was 150 000.

On 30 November 1939 the Soviet army attacked Finland. The war ended after three months. The Soviets suffered severe losses and made little headway. To avoid more bloodshed Finland ceded 9 per cent of its territory. In spite of superior air force and heavy tanks the Soviet losses had been considerable – 168 000 dead or missing. The Finns lost 26 000 dead or missing.

In the previously independent Baltic States the Soviets had during 1940-41 carried out mass deportations. They became even more extensive after Soviet Union finally conquered the area. In March 1949, Soviet authorities organised a mass deportation of 90,000 Baltic nationals. The total number deported from 1944 to 1955 is estimated at over half a million: 124,000 from Estonia, 136,000 from Latvia, and 245,000 from Lithuania. The estimated death toll among Lithuanian deportees had between1945 and 1958 been more than 20,000, including 5,000 children.

When the Soviet Union fell apart and archives were declassified it was revealed that, between 1921 and 1953, 799,455 executions had been officially recorded. Approximately 1.7 million prisoners had died in Gulag camps, some 390,000 were reported dead during forced resettlements in the 1930s, and during the 1940s at least 400,000 persons died during deportations.

After World War II, the Soviet Union subdued several nations in Eastern Europe, introducing a political system aspiring to gain total control of all citizens and backed by an extensive, repressive apparatus.

Opposition was initially essentially liquidated, while steps towards an authoritative communism were enforced. The General Secretary of a nation’s Central Committee became the most powerful figure, while a Politburo held sway over a party machine lacking a popular foundation, since it in accordance to Leninist ideology favoured a group of three to fourteen per cent of a country’s population. Members of this exclusive group enjoyed considerable rewards, like access to shops with a selection of high-quality foreign goods, as well as special schools, holiday facilities, well-equipped housing, pensions, permission to travel abroad, and official cars with distinct license plates.

Suppression of opposition was a prerequisite for retaining power. Citizens were kept under surveillance by political police with raw power and violent persecution of dissidents. In East Germany were Stasi, Volkpolizei, and KdA, in Soviet Union the KGB, in Czechoslovakia STB and LM, in Bulgaria KDS, in Hungary AVH and Munkásörség, in Romania Securitate and GP, in Poland Ministerstwo Bezpieczeństwa Publicznego, Słuźba, and ZOMO. Nevertheless, people occasionally revolted.

During one day in 1953 an uprising took place in Berlin. It was violently suppressed by tanks and soldiers of the Soviet German forces. More than 150 persons were killed, or missing.

In 1956, a two day protest in Polish Poznan resulted in more than 100 deaths. About 400 tanks and 10,000 soldiers under the command of the Polish-Soviet general Popalavsky suppressed the demonstration. Among the dead was a 13-year-old boy, Romek Strzalakowski, eventually hailed as a patriotic martyr.

During two weeks in November 1956, USSR troops killed 2,500 revolting Hungarians, while 200,000 sought political refuge abroad. Some 26,000 Hungarians were put on trial by the Soviet-installed János Kádár government, of those 13,000 were imprisoned.

During the night between 20 and 21 August 1968, a period of political liberalization in Czechoslovakia came to an abrupt end when Eastern Bloc armies under Soviet command invaded Prague. The invasion comported with the Brezhnev Doctrine, compelling Eastern Bloc states to subordinate national interests to a Soviet right to intervene. A wave of emigration followed, with a total eventually reaching 300,000.

The pattern of Soviet invasions of neighbouring states has continued, for example in Georgia and Moldova. In 1991 Tjetjenia declared itself independent and in 1994, 40 000 Russian soldiers invaded the recently proclaimed Tjetjenien Republic. After a year of harsh fighting the capital Grozny was conquered, but another war erupted in 1999. The rebels were vanquished after an effective but exceedingly brutal war. Tjetjenia is now governed by a Moscow-allied clan leader.

Estimated losses of the two wars are 14 000 Russian and 16 000 Tjetjenien soldiers killed, while at least 25,000 civilians were killed and 5,000 disappeared.

One month before the Russian attack on Ukraine, Kazakhstan plunged into political unrest. At the request of President Tokayev, Russian forces headed an intergovernmental Eurasian military alliance, CSTO, which invaded the country. After “pacifying” the protests, CSTO forces evacuated the country after a month.

Considering this history, paired with the Russian destruction of Syrian and Ukrainian towns, it is somewhat difficult to consider Russia as threatened by NATO’s expansion. It is actually not so strange that Russia is feared by its neighbours and that Finland and Sweden are seeking membership in NATO.

The Swedish government is currently supporting an expansion and restoration of Sweden’s once comprehensive, but now neglected network of nuclear shelters, introducing obligatory conscription of youngsters fit for military service, and strengthening the defence of Gotland, a strategically important island located in the middle of the Baltic Sea.

After World War II, the Soviet Union usurped an enclave which actually ought to have belonged to either Poland or Lithuania – Kaliningrad, situated by the Baltic coast and equipped it with the highest density of military installations in Europe. It became headquarter of the large Russian Baltic fleet. In Kaliningrad, Russia has recently built up a formidable military presence encompassing nuclear weapons and tens of thousands of soldiers.

Not being a supporter of policies and actions United States has exercised in Latin America, the Caribbean, and Africa, cannot overshadow the fear that most Europeans nurture while facing the powerful giant of the East, which, admittedly, does not have an impressive record when it comes to protecting human rights.

Some sources: Putin, Vladimir (2007) Speech delivered at the MSC http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/copy/24034 Sarotte, Mary Elise (2022) Not One Inch: America, Russia and the Making of Post-Cold War Stalemate. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Pucci, Molly (2020) Security Empire: The Secret Police in Communist Eastern Europe. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Pope Francis with a child on his shoulders - graffiti in Rome

“The Roman curia suffers from spiritual Alzheimer [and] existential schizophrenia; this is the disease of those who live a double life, the fruit of that hypocrisy typical of the mediocre and of a progressive spiritual emptiness which no doctorates or academic titles can fill. […] When appearances, the colour of our clothes and our titles of honour become the primary object in life, [it] leads us to be men and woman of deceit. […] Be careful around those who are rigid. Be careful around Christians – be they laity, priests, bishops – who present themselves as so ‘perfect’. Be careful. There’s no Spirit of God there. They lack the spirit of liberty [..] We are all sinners. But may the Lord not let us be hypocrites. Hypocrites don't know the meaning of forgiveness, joy and the love of God.”
                                                                                                                                                Pope Francis I

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Feb 8 2023 (IPS)

When the Pope Emeritus Benedict XIV/Ratzinger died on the last day of 2022 it did not cause much of a stir in the global newsfeed. Maybe a sign that religion has ceased to play a decisive role in modern society Nevertheless, religious hierarchies are still highly influential, not least for the world’s 1, 4 billion baptized Catholics, and a pope’s policies have a bearing not only on morals, but also on political and economic issues. By contrast, there are more Muslims in the world, 1.9 billion, though adherents are not so centrally controlled and supervised as Catholics and hierarchies do not have a comparable influence on global affairs.

When Benedict abdicated in 2013 he retained his papal name, continued to wear the white, papal cassock, adopted the title Pope Emeritus and moved into a monastery in the Vatican Gardens. It must have been a somewhat cumbersome presence for a new, more radical pope, particularly since Benedict became a symbol of traditional values and served as an inspiration for critics of the current papacy.

By the end of his reign, John Paul II was suffering from Parkinson’s disease and Cardinal Ratzinger was in effect running the Vatican and when he was elected Pope in 2005, his closest runner-up was Cardinal Bergoglio from Buenos Aires. What would have happened if Borgoglio, who eventually became Francis I, had been elected? Would he have been able to more effectively deal with clerical sexual abuse and Vatican corruption?

When Joseph Ratzinger became pope, he had for 27 years served John Paul II by heading the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), investigating and condemning birth control, acceptance of homosexuals, “gender theory” and Liberation Theology, a theological approach with a specific concern for the poor and political liberation for oppressed people.

Under Cardinal Ratzinger the CDF generally overlooked an often shady economic cooperation financing Pope John Paul II’s successful battle against Communism, while covering up clerical sexual abuse and marginalizing “progressive” priests. Several Latin American liberation theologians agreed that John Paul II in several ways was an asset to the Church, though he mistreated clerics who actually believed in Jesus’s declaration that he was chosen to “bring good news to the poor, to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free.” John Paul II and his “watchdog” Joseph Ratzinger were considered to have “armoured fists hidden in silk gloves.”

Ratzinger censured and silenced a number of leading “liberal” priests, like the Latin American Liberation theologian Leonardo Boff and the American Charles Curran, who supported same sex marriages. Both were defrocked. Under Ratzinger’s CDF rule, several clerics were excommunicated for allowing abortions, like the American nun Margaret McBride, and the ordination of women priests, among them the Argentinian priest Rómulo Braschi and the French priest Roy Bourgeois.

Ratzinger/Benedict wrote 66 books, in which a common theme was Truth, which according to him was “self-sacrificing love”, guided by principles promulgated by the Pope and implemented by the Curia, the administrative body of the Vatican:

“Today, having a clear faith based on the Creed of the Church is often labelled as fundamentalism. Whereas relativism, that is, letting one be tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine, seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.”

A strict adherence to Catholic Doctrine meant bringing the Church back to what Benedict XVI considered as its proper roots. If this alienated some believers, so be it. Numerous times he stated that the Church might well be healthier if it was smaller. A point of view opposed to the one expressed by Francis I:

“Changes need to be made […] Law cannot be kept in a refrigerator. Law accompanies life, and life goes on. Like morals, it is being perfected. Both the Church and society have made important changes over time on issues as slavery and the possession of atomic weapons, moral life is also progressing along the same line. Human thought and development grows and consolidates with the passage of time. Human understanding changes over time, and human consciousness deepens.”

Benedict XVI allowed the issue of human sexuality to overshadow support to environmentalism and human rights. He wanted to “purify the Church” in accordance with rules laid down in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, published in 1992 and written under direction of the then Cardinal Ratzinger. The Catechism might be considered as a counterweight to “relativistic theories seeking to justify religious pluralism, while supporting decline in general moral standards.”

Pope Benedict endeavoured to reintegrate hard-core traditionalists back into the fold, maintaining and strengthening traditional qualms related to sexual conduct and abortion. He declared that modern society had diminished “the morality of sexual love to a matter of personal sentiments, feelings, [and] customs. […], isolating it from its procreative purposes.” Accordingly, “homosexual acts” were in the Catechism described as “violating natural law” and could “under no circumstances be approved.”

Papal condemnation of homosexuality may seem somewhat strange considering that it is generally estimated that the percentage of gay Catholic priests might be 30 – 60, suggesting more homosexual men (active and non-active) within the Catholic priesthood than within society at large.

In 2019, Frédéric Martel’s In the Closet of the Vatican sent shock waves through the Catholic world. Based on years of interviews and collaboration with a vast array of researchers, priests and prostitutes, Martel described the double life of priests and the hypocrisy of homophobic cardinals and bishops living with their young “assistants”. He pinpointed members of the Catholic hierarchy as “closet gays”, revealed how “de-anonymised” data from homosexual dating apps (like Grindl) listed clergy users, described exclusive homosexual coteries within the Vatican, networks of prostitutes serving priests, as well as the anguish of homosexual priests trying to come to terms with their homosexual inclinations.

According to Martel, celibacy is a main reason for homosexuality among Catholic priesthood. For a homosexual youngster a respected male community might serve as a safe haven within a homophobic society.

By burdening homosexuality with guilt, covering up sexual abuse and opaque finances the Vatican has not supported what Benedict proclaimed, namely protect and preach the Truth. Behind the majority of cases of sexual abuse there are priests and bishops who protected aggressors because of their own homosexuality and out of fear that it might be revealed in the event of a scandal. The culture of secrecy needed to maintain silence about the prevalence of homosexuality in the Church, which allowed sexual abuse to be hidden and predators to act without punishment.

Cardinal Robert Sarah stated that “Western homosexual and abortion ideologies” are of “demonic origin” and compared them to “Nazism and Islamic terrorism.” Such opinions did in 2020 not hinder Pope Emeritus Benedict from writing a book together with Sarah – From the Depths of Our Hearts: Priesthood, Celibacy and the Crisis of the Catholic Church. Among injunctions against abortion, safe sex, and women clergy, celibacy was fervently defended as not only “a mere precept of ecclesiastical law, but as a sharing in Jesus’ sacrifice on the Cross and his identity as Bridegroom of the Church.” This in contrast to Francis I, who declared:

“It is time that the Church moves away from questions that divide believers and concentrate on the real issues: the poor, migrants, poverty. We can’t only insist on questions bound up with abortion, homosexual marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. It is not possible … It isn’t necessary to go on talking about it all the time.”

The current pope is not condoning abortion, though does not elevate it above the fight against poverty, climate change and the rights of migrants, which he proclaims to be “pro-life” issues in their own right. In 2021, Francis I stated that “same-sex civil unions are good and helpful to many.” He is of the opinion that Catholic priests ought to be celibate, but adds that this rule is not an unchangeable dogma and “the door is always open” to change. Francis propagates that women ought to be ordained as deacons; allowed to do priestly tasks, except giving absolution, anointing the sick, and celebrate mass and he has recruited women to several crucial administrative positions within the Vatican. Furthermore, he ordered all dioceses to report sexual abuse of minors to the Vatican, while notifying governmental law enforcement to allow for comprehensive investigations and perpetrators being judged by common – and not by canon law.

Just hours after Benedict’s funeral on 5 January Georg Gänswein’s memoir Nothing but the Truth — My Life Beside Benedict XVI, was distributed to the press. Gänswein, who was Benedict’s faithful companion and personal secretary, writes that for the Pope Emeritus the Doctrine of the Faith was the fundament of the Church, while Francis is more inclined to highlight “pastoral care”, i.e. guidance and support focusing on a person’s welfare, social and emotional needs, rather than purely educational ones.

In 2013, Gänswein entered in the service of Benedict XIV. He was professor in Canon Law, fluent in four languages, an able tennis player, excellent downhill skier and had a pilot’s licence. He was also an outspoken conservative and often critical of Francis I.

Shortly before his abdication, Benedict XVI appointed Cardinal Gänswein archbishop and made him Prefect of the Papal Household, deciding who could have an audience with Pope Francis I, while he at the same time was responsible for Benedict’s daily schedule, communications, and private and personal audiences. The Italian edition of the magazine Vanity Fair presented Gänswein on its cover, declaring “being handsome is not a sin” and calling him “the Georg Clooney of the Vatican”. Six years before Donatella Versace used Gänswein as inspiration for her fashion show Priest Chic.

There was an air of vanity and conservatism surrounding the acolytes of Benedict. Gänswein writes that working with both popes, the active one and the ”Emeritus” was a great challenge, not only in terms of work but in terms of style. Benedict XIV was a pope of aesthetics recognising that in a debased world there remain things of beauty, embodied in a Mozart sonata, a Latin mass, an altarpiece, an embroidered cape, or the cut of a cassock. The male-oriented lifestyle magazine Esquire included Pope Benedict in a “best-dressed men list”. Gänswein states that when Pope Francis in 2022 restricted the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass “I believe it broke Pope Benedict’s heart”.

Pope Francis is now 86, not much time remains for him as sovereign of the Catholic Church. Hopefully he will be able to change the Curia by staffing it with people who share his ambition to reform the Church by navigating away from doctrinal rigidity, vanity and seclusion towards inclusion, tolerance, human rights, poverty eradication and environmentalism.

Main sources: Gänswein, Georg (2023) Nient’altro che la verità. La mia vita al fianco di Benedetto XVI. Segrate: Piemme. Martel, Frédéric (2019) In the Closet of the Vatican: Power, Homosexuality, Hypocrisy. London: Bloomsbury.

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Sweden, Dec 15 2022 (IPS)

During November, soldiers of the March 23 Movement (M23) have been approaching Goma in the eastern territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), close to the Rwandan border. About 180.000 people are now leaving Goma, a city with a million inhabitants. Many stakeholders are involved in the conflict and there is an apparent danger that the overall carnage that affected the Congolese eastern border areas fifteen years ago will resume. At the same time, war is ranging in Ukraine, which name likely comes from the old Slavic term for borderland.

Disputed border areas have often been hotbeds for horrific and widespread wars. World War I began with border conflicts between the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Serbia, while World War II was ignited through German allegations of Czech and Polish mistreatment of Germans living on their side of the border. Tensions are constantly brewing along borders between India and Pakistan, Israel and Palestine, Ethiopia and Sudan, Armenia and Azerbaijan – just to mention a few border conflicts present all over the world.

Throughout history, borderlands have suffered from looting, massacres and ethnic violence, generally triggered off by incursions from neighbouring countries, causing chaos and destruction. Borderlands are generally speaking a result of clearly defined borders between European nations, established after the Westphalian Peace Agreements in 1648, ending the Thirty Years’ War, a conflagration between religious factions that devastated Germany, killing 30 per cent of its population.

Before mid-17th century, European borders were quite diffuse. A royal realm had its heartland, a centre from which it could expand through wars, treaties and negotiations. In medieval Europe the more or less undefined areas between different sovereignties were called marks, or marches, words deriving from an Indo-European term meaning edge. A mark/march often served as a buffer zone, more or less independently governed by a marquis/margrave.

As a result of the Westphalian Peace, national borders became demarcated by border markings and lines drawn upon maps. Such boundaries were eventually introduced to the rest of the world. In Africa, border demarcations became common after the Berlin Conference, 1884-1885, when leaders of fourteen European nations and the United States agreed upon a “partitioning” of Africa, establishing rules for amicably dividing resources among Western nations. Notably missing was any representative from Africa.

One of the proclaimed aims of the Berlin Conference was to bring “civilization” to Africa, in the form of free trade and Christianity. Accordingly could King Leopold II of Belgium, by playing the part of a beneficent monarch, succeed in convincing his counterparts that he would personally bring order, faith and prosperity to the heart of Africa. Congo was thus formally recognized as Leopold’s personal possession. An extraordinarily rich territory, with ivory, minerals, palm oil, timber and rubber, was used by Leopold to increase his personal wealth. Missionary stations and trade routes were established, while slave labour extracted the natural resources. If production targets were not met, the autochthonous population risked severe punishment, ranging from having their families held hostage in concentration camps, to torture, the severing of a hand, and eventual execution.

Between 1900 and 1930, European colonial powers completed cartographic surveys of African territories. However, surveys focused solely on land control while disregarding the impact recently established borders might have on the well-being of the original population. Local communities suffered limitations to their daily activities and nomadic practices. Traditional life, administrative structures, and economic safety were negatively affected. Furthermore, colonial rule tended to instigate conflicts. Imposed borders gradually set off hostile relations among borderland dwellers and eventually enabled post-independent governments and political elites to use such divisions for political means.

The sheer size of the territory, which eventually became the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), made its governance extremely challenging. This vast nation is about the same size as Western Europe and has 10,500 kilometres of external borders. In the middle of the country is an almost impenetrable and vast jungle area. Border control is largely non-existent, providing neighbouring countries with an opportunity to exert influence into remote peripheries. For many Congolese, it is easier to reach the capital of a neighbouring state than travelling to the capital city, Kinshasa.

As in other areas of the world, people on both sides of Congolese borders exchange goods, spouses, languages and customs. Nevertheless, in spite of all this mixture and exchange, most people living along borders generally continue to be aware of their roots in different cultural settings. Even if they might share a lingua franca, several of them tend to maintain their original language and specific customs. Border communities thus find themselves in a precarious balance, which might be upheld for centuries but also runs the risk of becoming swiftly overturned by armed attacks from national armies, warlords, or hordes of bandits and uprooted former soldiers, as well as massive influxes of refugees.

During the so called First– and Second Congo Wars, and their aftermath, approximately 5.4 million died between 1994 and 2008, deaths mainly caused by disease and malnutrition, though massacres committed by all the warring factions also killed staggering numbers of civilians. Nine African nations and around twenty-five armed groups were involved in the wars. The mayhem began in April 1994, when about 1.5 million Rwandans settled in eastern DRC. These refugees included Tutsis fleeing Hutu mass murderers, and eventually one million Hutus fleeing the Rwandan Patriotic Front’s (RPF) subsequent retaliations.

The shooting down of a plane carrying Rwandan President Juevénal Habyarimana, a Hutu, served as catalyst for a genocide lasting for approximately 100 days. Between 500,000 and 1 million Tutsis and politically moderate Hutus were in Rwanda killed during well-planned attacks, ordered by an interim government. This genocide ended when the Tutsi commanded Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) gained control and took over the Rwandan Government, making approximately two million Hutus fleeing across the border into neighbouring Zaire. Estimates of the number of Hutu civilians killed in subsequent revenge massacres by the RPF range from 25,000 to 100,000.

Rwandan incursions into Zaire occurred after years of Congolese internal strife, dictatorship and economic decline. Zaire, as the country was called at the time, was in 1994 a dying State. In many areas, increasingly corrupt state authorities had in all but name collapsed, with infighting militias, warlords, and rebel groups wielding local power.

International response to the Rwandan genocide had been lame and limited, though this time international opinion reacted immediately. Massive relief support was directed to refugees in eastern Zaire. In the meantime, several, heavily armed Rwandan gėnocidaires, genocide perpetrators, organized themselves among Hutu refugees. In their attacks on Banyamulenge, a Tutsi minority who for centuries had been living in Congo, the gėnocidaires were often joined by local militia. Banyamulenge were resented by several Congolese agriculturists, who suspected them of planning to take over their land.

Currently it is the rebel group M23, which is the main aggressor. The rebel group was in 2012, according the UN, created and commanded by the Rwandan army. The Rwandan Government did in 2013 officially cease its support to M23; its members surrendered and were transferred to a refugee camp in Uganda. However, M23 reappeared in 2017, evidently with renewed Rwandan support. The Congolese mayhem is just one example of what might happen in border areas when control and peaceful interaction between neighbours collapse under the pressure of foreign interventions and enter a bloody, anarchic chaos.

Like in central Africa, Ukraine border conflicts have at several occasions triggered massacres and bloody chaos. For more than 500 years, Ukraine was divided and ruled by a variety of external powers, including the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Cossack Hetmanate, Poland, the Tsardom of Russia, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany

From the beginning of the last century to 1921, millions fled Ukraine, including more than 2 million Jews. Ukrainians were killed en masse by Austrians, Poles and warring political factions, while approximately 110,000 Jews were murdered during so called pogroms. Worse was yet to come when Nazi invaders within the same areas murdered approximately 1.7 million Jews. In Nazi-occupied Ukraine, 5.7 million locals died between 1941 and 1945. And now, during Russia’s aggressive invasion, the suffering and slaughter of innocents have been resumed.

The curse of borders, between nations and people, continues to haunt us. To safeguard the future – for our earth and children – we have to learn that general well-being depends on collaboration between nations and peoples, regardless of ethnicity, gender, and ideologies. Wars, like Russia’s ruthless attack on a sovereign nation and the central African mayhem, are crimes against humanity and must be stopped through peaceful solutions. Time is running out and cannot be wasted on armed conquests and bloodshed.

Sources: Stearns, Jason K. (2011) Dancing in the Glory of Monsters: The Collapse of the Congo and the Great War of Africa. New York: PublicAffair and Veidlinger, Jeffrey (2021) In the Midst of Civilized Europe: The Pogroms of 1918-1921 and the Onset of the Holocaust. London: Picador.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM, Nov 16 2022 (IPS)

Like most armed conflicts the Ukrainian war intends to establish hegemony over a certain area, in rivalry with other usurpers. Russian propaganda pinpoints the US and EU as Russia’s main adversaries, while Ukraine is portrayed as a pawn in these nations’ international yearnings. Such a scenario is not new.

The Great Game was a political and diplomatic confrontation between British – and Russian Empires, which continued for most of the 19th and parts of the 20th centuries. Britain’s role was eventually taken over by the US. The Great Game mainly affected Mesopotamia (Iraq), Persia (Iran), and Afghanistan, though it had, and still has, repercussions on a wide range of neighboring territories.

Britain originally feared that the Russian Empire’s ultimate goal was to dominate Central Asia and reach the Indian Ocean through Persia, thus threatening Britain’s Asian trade links and its domination of India.

Britain posed as the World’s first free society, declaring its adherence to Christian values, respect for private property, and democratic institutions. Claims bolstered by an advanced industry, fueled by steam power and iron, as well as an ever increasing use of oil. English leaders assumed their nation had a God-given task to spread “civilization” and that such a worthy cause permitted them to exploit the earth’s natural resources, as well as the world’s labor force. Similarly to the Brits, the Russians, the Yankees, and the French considered themselves to be “civilizing forces”.

The quest for dominion was carried out in a traditional manner – pitching internal fractions against each other and let them do most of the fighting. Nevertheless, this strategy eventually led to direct clashes between “world powers”. Britain strived to convince the Russian army that it did not have a chance against the British war machine. The UK, France and Italy felt threatened by a growing influence of Germany and the Austro-Hungarian and Russian Empires. Accordingly, these nations supported an increasingly weakened Ottoman Empire, intending it to remain a buffer zone blocking Russia’s expanding war fleet from the Mediterranean Sea and the Indian Ocean.

As part of this policy, Britain and France provided arms and money to anti-Russian insurgents in Chechnya, thus contributing to an enduring tradition of Chechen terrorism against Russia. After a minor scuffle between the Russian – and Ottoman Empires, Russia occupied the Principate of Wallachia (Romania), prompting France and Great Britain to attack Crimea with a huge military force.

The Crimean War (1853-56) proved that the Tsar’s army was no match for the allied forces. Russia was humiliated and its expansion towards the European mainland and meddling in Persia and Afghanistan were halted. Instead people living on the steppes of Central Asia and Siberia continued to be subdued and forced to join the Russian Tsardom.

The Crimean disaster had exposed the shortcomings of every institution in Russia – not just the corruption and incompetence of the military command, the technological backwardness of the army and navy, or the inadequate roads and lack of railways that accounted for the chronic problems of supply, but the poor condition and illiteracy of the serfs who made up the armed forces, the inability of the serf economy to sustain a state of war against industrial powers, and the failures of autocracy itself.

The meddling of imperialists in other nations’ affairs was gradually worsened by efforts to secure fossil fuels for their own benefit. Refined petrol was originally used to fuel kerosene lamps and became increasingly important when street lighting was introduced. After 1857, oil wells drilled in Wallachia became very profitable, inspiring a search for new oilfields in the east. In 1873, the Swede Robert Nobel established an oil refinery in Azerbaijan, adding Russia’s first pipeline system, pumping stations, storage depots, and railway tank cars. At the same time, Calouste Gulbenkian assisted the Ottoman government to establish the oil industry in Mesopotamia. Gulbenkian eventually became the world’s wealthiest man.

Profit from these endeavors increased through assembly-line mass production of motor vehicles, introduced by Henry Ford in 1914. However, the main reason for gaining control of oil was belligerent. The English First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill, realized that if the British navy was fuelled by oil, instead of coal, it would be irresistible: “We must become the owners or at any rate the controllers at the source of at least a proportion of the supply of natural oil which we require.” In 1914, Churchill feared that this could be too late – the Germans were already on their way to conquer the Middle Eastern oil fields. Together with the Ottomans they were finishing the Berlin-Baghdad railway line, which would it make possible for the German army to transport troops to the Persian Gulf and onwards to Persian oilfields.

Germany and its allied Ottoman Empire lost World War I and the Berlin-Baghdad railway never reached the Persian Gulf. In accordance with the so-called Sykes-Picot Agreement Arab territories of the former Ottoman Empire were divided into French and British “spheres of influence”. In 1929, the newly formed Iraq Petroleum Company (IPC), a joint endeavor of British, French and American oil interests, brokered by Gulbenkian, received a 75-year concession to exploit crude oil reserves in Iraq and Persia, and eventually in what would become the United Emirates.

Access to oil continued to be a major factor in World War II. The German invasion of USSR included the goal to capture the Baku oilfields, which had been nationalized during the Bolshevik Revolution. However, the German Army was defeated before it reached the oil fields.

The Germans had pursued a relatively benign policy towards the USSR’s Muslim population of Caucasus and neighboring areas. This was after the war taken as an excuse for Stalin’s treatment of “treacherous ethnic elements”. Forced internal migration had begun already before the war and eventually affected at least 6 million people. Among them 1.8 million kulaks, mainly from Ukraine, who were deported from 1930 to 1931, one million peasants and ethnic minorities were driven from Caucasus between 1932 to 1939, and from 1940 to 1952, a further 3.5 million ethnic minorities were resettled.

Nearly 8,000 Crimean Tatars died during these deportations, while tens of thousands perished subsequently due to the harsh exile conditions. The Crimean Tatar deportations resulted in the abandonment of 80,000 households and 360,000 acres of land. From 1967 to 1978, some 15,000 Tatars succeeded in returning legally to Crimea, less than 2 percent of the pre-war Tatar population. This remission was followed by a ban on further Tatar settlements.

In 1944, almost all Chechens were deported to the Kazakh and Kirgiz Soviet republics. Accordingly, the Russian presence in Caucasus and Ukraine increased and so was Russian control of these areas’ natural resources, including wheat, coal, oil and gas.

After World War I, Britain had first tried to halt the Bolshevik penetration of Iran and did in 1921 support a coup d’état placing the UK-friendly general Reza Shah as leader of the nation. When Britain and USSR eventually became allies against Nazi Germany they did together attack Iran and replaced Reza Shah with his son Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Reza Shah had become “far too Nazi-friendly.”

Following a 1950 election, Mohammad Mosaddegh became president of Iran. He was committed to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, AIOC (successor of the IPC mentioned above). In a joint effort the Secret Intelligence Services of the UK and the US, MI6 and CIA, organized and paid for a “popular” uprising against Mosaddegh, though it backfired and their co-conspirator, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, fled the country. However, he did after a brief exile return and this time a coup d’état was successful. The deposed Mosaddegh was arrested and condemned to life in internal exile.

Mosaddegh’s internally popular effort to remove oil revenues from foreign claws inspired other Middle East leaders to oppose Britain and France. In 1956, the Egyptian president Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal Company, primarily owned by British and French shareholders. An ensuing invasion by Israel, followed by UK and France, aimed at regaining control of the Canal, ended in a humiliating withdrawal by the three invaders, signifying the end of UK’s role as one of the world’s major powers. The same year, USSR was emboldened to invade Hungary, quenching a popular uprising.

In 1960, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was founded in Baghdad. This was a turning point toward national sovereignty over natural resources. The US Iranian protégé, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, eventually came to play a leading role in OPEC where he promoted increased prices, proclaiming that the West’s “wealth based on cheap oil is finished.” The US was losing its ability to influence Iranian foreign and economic policy and discretely began to support the religous extremist Khomeini, who initially claimed that American presence was necessary as a counterbalance to Soviet influence. However, after coming to power in 1979 Khomeini revealed himself as a fierce opponent to the US. The US and some European governments thus ended up supporting the brutal Saddam Hussein’s war on Iran. The Iraqui leader, heavily financed by Arab Gulf states, suddenly became a ”defender of the Arab world against a revolutionary Iran.” The war ended in a stalemate,with approximately 500,000 killed.

Ukraine is one last example of how a country has ended up in a siutaion where a superpower use its military force to impose its will upon it, while implying that other nations have similar intentions. Times are constantly changing and hopefully Russia will realise, like the UK once did, that it cannot maintain its might and strength through armed invasions, but instead have to rely on diplomacy and peaceful negotiations.

Russia seems to be stuck in a time capsule where foreign greed and meddling in other nations’ internal affairs resulted in ruthless wars and immense human suffering. As the German philosopher Hegel stated in 1832:

What experience and history teach is this — that people and governments never have learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Excerpt:

In his treatise On War, the Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz (1780–1831) stated that war is “merely a continuation of policy with other means”. With his experience from the Napoleonic Wars von Clausewitz knew that totalitarian regimes could end up conducting huge and ruthless military campaigns. Furthermore, he assumed that to win a war it is necessary to mobilize and indoctrinate the inhabitants of an entire nation. Such an endeavour is called total war, a term that actually can be applied to Putin’s war in Ukraine.

Putin came to power during the turbulent times following the collapse of the Soviet Empire. His image as a forceful personality convinced many that Putin could make Russia “safe for democracy and business”. In June 2000, Bill Clinton proclaimed that Putin was “fully capable of building a prosperous, strong Russia, while preserving freedom and pluralism and the rule of law.”

Soon business flourished, satisfying foreign investors eager to enjoy Russia’s vast deposits of natural riches. At the same time, fear of terrorism was boosted by explosions in heavily populated residential areas. Putin’s answer to these assumed terrorist threats was in accordance with von Clausewitz´s advice to use “force unsparingly, without reference to the quantity of bloodshed.” The pursuing escalation of the war in Chechnya, pinpointed as the origin of terrorism in Russia, made Putin a nationalist hero, while his characteristics as teetotaler, capable administrator, quick learner and talented actor made him assume the role of a Hollywood-inspired saviour/hero. He single-highhandedly flew planes and rode bare-chested through the wilderness surrounding Siberian rivers. Media lionised him as a rough and strong judo/black-belt champion capable of leading an entire, long suffering nation onto a straight path to prosperity.

Some worrisome signs were nevertheless written on the wall. In 2004, Putin declared the collapse of the Soviet Union as” the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the twentieth century.” Meanwhile, his acolytes were amassing the spoils from the collapsed Soviet Empire. Putin supported and protected those oligarchs who backed him, while bankrolling his inner circle.

In Munich 2007, Putin bared his teeth and claws in a speech given at an international Security Conference. He declared that the US was a predatory nation prone to apply an ”almost unconstrained hyper-use of force – military force – in international relations [.-..] plunging the world into an abyss of conflicts.” This revelation was in 2008 followed by Russia´s military assault on neighbouring Georgia.

General elections were rigged, while some political opponents ended up dead, like Boris Nemtsov, who in 2015 was killed on a bridge close to the Kremlin. Alex Navalny, Putin’s most prominent and fearless opponent, was arrested and imprisoned for thirteen years. Out of jail, he was in 2020 poisoned on a flight to Siberia. Close to dying, he was brought to Germany for expert treatment. After recovering, Navalny went back to Russia, where he was immediately put on trial and imprisoned.

Non-compliant oligarchs were and are routinely harassed. First to be rounded up were those who controlled independent media, like Vladimir Gusinsky and Boris Berezovsky. Both fled the country. In 2013, Berezovsky died ”in suspicious circumstances”. Another oligarch, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who had funded independent media, was already in October 2003 arrested on board his private jet and imprisoned for ten years.

Putin can now unopposed claim that the belligerent attack on Ukraine was necessary for protecting the Motherland. Subdued Russian media affirm that ruthless Ukrainian leaders have transformed their nation into a pawn in the cynical game of a Superpower intending to subjugate, or even annihilate, the Russian Federation.

It appears as if Putin is not only dedicated to make “Russia great again”. Another goal of his seems to be to enrich himself and his cronies. As a means to cover up his greed, Putin poses as upholder of “strict” morals, based on “pro-life” and traditional “family” values, as well as heroic patriotism and religious fundamentalism. Twenty years after coming to power Putin could declare: “The liberal idea has become obsolete. Liberals cannot simply dictate anything to anyone just like they have been attempting to do over recent decades.”

In spite of the Ukrainian war and his disrespect for human rights, Putin remains an icon for right-wing nationalists. A symbol of defiance to Western Liberal Establishment’s alleged encouragement of mass immigration and affinity to ”multiculturalism”, conceived as attempts to undermine morals and national identities.

As a counterweight to such assumed measures, backward looking politicians around the world pay homage to nostalgic notions, like a lost Great Chinese Tradition, a Russian Empire, Hindu pride before the arrival of Islam, a Global Britain, the Ottoman Empire, etc. This trend is occasionally joined with a global system where ruling elites consider themselves to be unrestrained by international norms, traditional modes of state governance, and democratic decision processes. Some world leaders try to pull the wool over the eyes of their followers by packaging their intents within populist opinions, like despise for political correctness, globalism, investigative journalism, LBTQ rights, feminism and environmental NGOs. A dangerous trend that, if unchecked, might as in the case of Putin´s Russia lead to socioeconomic conflicts degenerating into total war.

In the US, a strengthened adherence to illiberalism was fostered by Donald Trump. Under his watch US politics began to shift from rule-based order to one where might and wealth make right, a message boosted by media like Fox – and Breitbart News. Trump behaved like a wannabe despot, trying to apply authoritarian tactics at home, while paying homage to thugs and dictators abroad. Before him, US presidents had pledged their adherence to human rights, democracy, and freedom of speech. Nevertheless, their governments occasionally supported despots and dictators, not linking concerns for human rights to security, economy and financial affairs. A Realpolitik, which to “friendly” despots indicated that the US did not care so much about repression and corruption within the fiefdoms of their friends. Such behaviour was based on strategic reasons, while Donald Trump appeared to embrace authoritarians because he actually admired them – Dutete, Xi Jinping, Orbán, Erdoğan, Kim Jung-un, and not the least, Putin.

The former US president´s homage to ideas similar to those of Putin and his pose as a nationalistic superman might be connected with his obvious narcissism and appeal to nationalistic extremists. However, his senseless bragging is also combined with greed. A wealth of investigating reporting has demonstrated links between organized crime and corrupt rulers/oligarchs with the Trump Organization’s overseas business connections.

Money is also part of Russian foreign relations. Populist, chauvinistic parties like Italian Lega Nord (currently known as the Lega) and the French Front National (currently Rassemblement National) have received intellectual and economic support from Russia. This support to European political parties may be considered as a Russian effort to secure support for Putin’s policies abroad, as well as locally.

Germany’s former chancellor, Angela Merkel, a fluent Russian speaker far from being a friend of Putin, dismissed him as a leader using nineteenth-century means to solve twenty-first century problems. For sure, Putin’s attack on Ukraine mirrors age-old use of devastating warfare as a radical solution to complicated sociopolitical problems. It seems to be a stalwart application of the two-hundred-years-old advice provided by von Clausewitz:

Philanthropists may easily imagine there is a skillful method of disarming and overcoming an enemy without causing great bloodshed, and that this is the proper tendency of the Art of War. However plausible this may appear, still it is an error which must be extirpated; for in such dangerous things as war, the errors which proceed from a spirit of benevolence are just the worst. As the use of physical power to the utmost extent by no means excludes the co-operation of the intelligence, it follows that he who uses force unsparingly, without reference to the quantity of bloodshed, must obtain a superiority if his adversary does not act likewise. By such means the former dictates the law to the latter, and both proceed to extremities, to which the only limitations are those imposed by the amount of counteracting force on each side.

Putin´s Ukrainian war neglects human suffering and has now disintegrated into a bloody power struggle, where Russia “to the utmost extent” makes use of its military strength, while being supported by “the co-operation” of a propaganda striving to engage the entire Russian population in the war effort.

The Ukrainian war not only concerns the protection of Mother Russia from a “predatory West”, its ultimate goal is to control a hitherto sovereign nation’s politics and natural resources. Putin’s declared support to an allegedly discriminated Russian minority in Luhansk and Donetsk seems to be a subterfuge for grabbing an essential part of Ukraine’s economic resources.

During early 2000s, privatization of state industries yielded a so called Donbas Clan control of the economic and political power in the Donbas region. These oligarchs were supported by Kremlin and a rampant corruption soon took hold of an area dominated by heavy industry, such as coal mining (60 billion tonnes of coal are waiting to be extracted) and metallurgy.

Before Russia in 2014 backed separatist forces in a ferocious civil war, this particular area produced about 30 percent of Ukraine’s exports and a huge amount of gas reserves in the Dnieper-Donets basin was beginning to be extracted. In those days, the most prominent oligarchs in the Luhansk and Donetsk regions were Putin proteges – Rinat Akhmetov and Viktor Yanukovych, the latter had become Ukraine’s President, though his attachment to Russia and conspicuous corruption led to his fall through the Maidan Uprising in 2013, starting point for Ukraine’s transformation into a prosperous nation.

The Maidan Revolution caused a wave of insecurity sweeping through the former Soviet Empire, shaking up corrupt “counterfeit” democracies/dictatorships like Belarus, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. Small wonder that the authoritarian leaders of these nations are stout supporters of Putin’s war in Ukraine.

While reading von Clausewitz’s On War it is quite easy to relate it to Putin’s politics that undeniably have resulted in war as a “continuation of policy with other means.” It is not the first time in history that authoritarian regimes have plunged entire nations into a blood-drained pit of war. All of us have to be be aware that support of authoritarian regimes might lead us all down into Hell.

Main Sources: Klaas, Brian (2018) The Despot´s Accomplice: How the West is Aiding and Abetting the Decline of Democracy. London. Hurst & Company. von Clausewitz, Carl (1982) On War. London: Penguin Classics.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau