Monthly Archives: May 2021

The New York Times

When the government ordered women in her mostly Muslim community to be fitted with contraceptive devices, Qelbinur Sedik pleaded for an exemption. She was nearly 50 years old, she told officials in Xinjiang. She had obeyed the governments birth limits and had only one child. It was no use. The workers threatened to take her to the police if she continued resisting, she said. She gave in and went to a government clinic where a doctor, using metal forceps, inserted an intrauterine device to prevent pregnancy. She wept through the procedure. I felt like I was no longer a normal woman, Sedik said, choking up as she described the 2017 ordeal. Like I was missing something. Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times Across much of China, authorities are encouraging women to have more children, as they try to stave off a demographic crisis from a declining birthrate. But in the far western region of Xinjiang, they are forcing them to have fewer, as they tighten their grip on Muslim ethnic minorities. It is part of a vast and repressive social reengineering campaign by a Communist Party determined to eliminate any perceived challenge to its rule, in this case, ethnic separatism. Over the past few years, the party, under its top leader, Xi Jinping, has moved aggressively to subdue Uyghurs and other Central Asian minorities in Xinjiang, putting hundreds of thousands into internment camps and prisons. Authorities have placed the region under tight surveillance, sent residents to work in factories and placed children in boarding schools. By targeting Muslim women, the authorities are going even further, attempting to orchestrate a demographic shift that will affect the population for generations. Birthrates in the region have already plunged in recent years, as the use of invasive birth control procedures has risen, findings that were previously documented by a researcher, Adrian Zenz, with The Associated Press. While authorities have said the procedures are voluntary, interviews with more than a dozen Uyghurs, Kazakhs and other Muslim women and men from Xinjiang, as well as a review of official statistics, government notices and reports in the state-run media, depict a coercive effort by the Chinese Communist Party to control the communitys reproductive rights. Authorities pressured women to use IUDs or get sterilized. As they recuperated at home, government officials were sent to live with them to watch for signs of discontent. One woman described having to endure her minders groping. If they had too many children or refused contraceptive procedures, they faced steep fines or, worse, detention in an internment camp. In the camps, the women were at risk of even more abuse. Some former detainees say they were made to take drugs that stopped their menstrual cycles. One woman said she had been raped in a camp. To rights advocates and Western officials, the governments repression in Xinjiang is tantamount to crimes against humanity and genocide, in large part because of the efforts to stem the population growth of Muslim minorities. The Trump administration in January was the first government to declare the crackdown a genocide, with reproductive oppression as a leading reason. The Biden administration affirmed the label in March. Sediks experience, reported in The Guardian and elsewhere, helped form the basis for the decision by the U.S. government. It was one of the most detailed and compelling first-person accounts we had, said Kelley E. Currie, a former U.S. ambassador who was involved in the governments discussions. It helped to put a face on the horrifying statistics we were seeing. Beijing has accused its critics of pushing an anti-China agenda. The recent declines in the regions birthrates, the government has said, were the result of authorities fully enforcing long-standing birth restrictions. The sterilizations and contraceptive procedures, it said, freed women from backward attitudes about procreation and religion. Whether to have birth control or what contraceptive method they choose are completely their own wishes, Xu Guixiang, a Xinjiang government spokesman, said at a news conference in March. No one nor any agency shall interfere. To women in Xinjiang, the orders from the government were clear: They did not have a choice. Last year, a community worker in Urumqi, the regional capital, where Sedik had lived, sent messages saying women between 18 and 59 had to submit to pregnancy and birth control inspections. If you fight with us at the door and if you refuse to cooperate with us, you will be taken to the police station, the worker wrote, according to screenshots of the WeChat messages that Sedik shared with The New York Times. Do not gamble with your life, one message read, dont even try. I Lost All Hope in Myself All her life, Sedik, an ethnic Uzbek, had thought of herself as a model citizen. After she graduated from college, she married and threw herself into her work, teaching Chinese to Uyghur elementary school students. Mindful of the rules, Sedik did not get pregnant until she had gotten approval from her employer. She had only one child, a daughter, in 1993. Sedik could have had two children. The rules at the time allowed ethnic minorities to have slightly bigger families than those of the majority Han Chinese ethnic group, particularly in the countryside. The government even awarded Sedik a certificate of honor for staying within the limits. Then, in 2017, everything changed. As the government corralled Uyghurs and Kazakhs into mass internment camps, it moved in tandem to ramp up enforcement of birth controls. Sterilization rates in Xinjiang surged by almost sixfold from 2015 to 2018, to just over 60,000 procedures, even as they plummeted around the country, according to calculations by Zenz. The campaign in Xinjiang is at odds with a broader push by the government since 2015 to encourage births, including by providing tax subsidies and free IUD removals. But from 2015 to 2018, Xinjiangs share of the countrys total new IUD insertions increased, even as use of the devices fell nationwide. The contraception campaign appeared to work. Birthrates in minority-dominated counties in the region plummeted from 2015 to 2018, based on Zenzs calculations. Several of these counties have stopped publishing population data, but Zenz calculated that the birthrates in minority areas probably continued to fall in 2019 by just over 50% from 2018, based on figures from other counties. The sharp drop in birthrates in the region was shocking and clearly in part a result of the campaign to tighten enforcement of birth control policies, said Wang Feng, a professor of sociology and an expert in Chinese population policies at the University of California, Irvine. But other factors could include a fall in the number of women of childbearing age, later marriages and postponed births, he said. As the government pushes back against growing criticism, it has withheld some key statistics, including annually published county-level data on birthrates and birth control use for 2019. Other official data for the region as a whole showed a steep drop in IUD insertions and sterilizations that year, though the number of sterilizations was still mostly higher than before the campaign began. In Beijings depiction, the campaign is a victory for the region's Muslim women. In the process of deradicalization, some womens minds have also been liberated, a January report by a Xinjiang government research center read. They have avoided the pain of being trapped by extremism and being turned into reproductive tools. Women like Sedik, who had obeyed the rules, were not spared. After the IUD procedure, Sedik suffered from heavy bleeding and headaches. She later had the device secretly removed, then reinserted. In 2019, she decided to be sterilized. The government had become so strict, and I could no longer take the IUD, said Sedik, who now lives in the Netherlands after fleeing China in 2019. I lost all hope in myself. The Women of Xinjiang Are in Danger The penalties for not obeying the government were steep. A Han Chinese woman who violated the birth regulations would face a fine, while a Uyghur or Kazakh woman would face possible detention. When Gulnar Omirzakh had her third child in 2015, officials in her northern village registered the birth. But three years later, they said she had violated birth limits and owed $2,700 in fines. Officials said they would detain Omirzakh and her two daughters if she did not pay. She borrowed money from her relatives. Later, she fled to Kazakhstan. The women of Xinjiang are in danger, Omirzakh said in a telephone interview. The government wants to replace our people. The threat of detention was real. Three women told The Times they had met other detainees in internment camps who had been locked up for violating birth restrictions. Dina Nurdybay, a Kazakh woman, said she helped one woman write a letter to the authorities in which she blamed herself for being ignorant and having too many children. Such accounts are corroborated by a 137-page government document leaked last year from Karakax County, in southwestern Xinjiang, which revealed that one of the most common reasons cited for detention was violating birth planning policies. Those who refused to terminate illegal pregnancies or pay fines would be referred to the internment camps, according to one government notice from a county in Ili, unearthed by Zenz, the researcher. Once women disappeared into the regions internment camps facilities operated under secrecy many were subjected to interrogations. For some, the ordeal was worse. Tursunay Ziyawudun was detained in a camp in Ili prefecture for 10 months for traveling to Kazakhstan. She said that on three occasions, she was taken to a dark cell where two to three masked men raped her and used electric batons to forcibly penetrate her. You become their toy, Ziyawudun said in a telephone interview from the United States, where she now lives, as she broke down sobbing. You just want to die at the time, but unfortunately you dont. Gulbahar Jalilova, the third former detainee, said in an interview that she had been beaten in a camp and that a guard exposed himself during an interrogation and wanted her to perform oral sex. The three former detainees, along with two others who spoke to The Times, also described being regularly forced to take unidentified pills or receive injections of medication that caused nausea and fatigue. Eventually, a few of them said, they stopped menstruating. The former detainees accounts could not be independently verified because tight restrictions in Xinjiang make unfettered access to the camps impossible. The Chinese government has forcefully denied all allegations of abuse in the facilities. The sexual assault and torture cannot exist, said Xu, the regional spokesman, at a news briefing in February. Beijing has sought to undermine the credibility of the women who have spoken out, accusing them of lying and of poor morals, all while claiming to be a champion of womens rights. We Are All Chinese Even in their homes, the women did not feel safe. Uninvited Chinese Communist Party cadres would show up and had to be let in. The party sends out more than a million workers to regularly visit, and sometimes stay in, the homes of Muslims, as part of a campaign called Pair Up and Become Family. To many Uyghurs, the cadres were little different from spies. The cadres were tasked with reporting on whether the families they visited showed signs of extremist behavior. For women, this included any resentment they might have felt about state-mandated contraceptive procedures. When the party cadres came to stay in 2018, Zumret Dawut had just been forcibly sterilized. Four Han cadres visited her in Urumqi, bringing yogurt and eggs to help with the recovery, she recalled. They were also armed with questions: Did she have any issues with the sterilization operation? Was she dissatisfied with the governments policy? I was so scared that if I said the wrong thing they would send me back to the camps, said Dawut, a mother of three. So I just told them, We are all Chinese people and we have to do what the Chinese law says. But the officials unwelcome gaze settled also on Dawuts 11-year-old daughter, she said. One cadre, a 19-year-old man who was assigned to watch the child, would sometimes call Dawut and suggest taking her daughter to his home. She was able to rebuff him with excuses that the child was sick, she said. Other women reported having to fend off advances even in the company of their husbands. Sedik, the Uzbek teacher, was still recovering from a sterilization procedure when her relative her husbands boss showed up. She was expected to cook, clean and entertain him even though she was in pain from the operation. Worse, he would ask to hold her hand or to kiss and hug her, she said. Mostly, Sedik agreed to his requests, terrified that if she refused, he would tell the government that she was an extremist. She rejected him only once: when he asked to sleep with her. It went on like this every month or so for two years until she left the country. He would say, Dont you like me? Dont you love me? she recalled. If you refuse me, you are refusing the government. I felt so humiliated, oppressed and angry, she said. But there was nothing I could do. This article originally appeared in The New York Times. 2021 The New York Times Company

See more here:

Fewer hurricanes expected in Pacific ocean this year - Yahoo News

Storm the NIH ACT UP Action, May 1990 / Image: NIH History Office

Sarah Schulmans new history of AIDS activism group ACT UP NY is a definitive and instructive history of how outsiders forced the government to accept that they mattered.

Let the Record Show: A Political History of ACT UP New York, 19871993

Sarah Schulman

Let the Record Show, Sarah Schulmans monumental new history of ACT UP New York, is a war chronicle in which the teller is both scribe and veteran. Schulman joined the AIDS Coalition To Unleash Power (ACT UP) a few months after it was founded in 1987. At that point, six years into the crisis, there were an estimated 500,000 people living with HIV in the United States alone, there were still no effective medical treatments, and the U.S. governments anemic response to the pandemic was a toxic cocktail of homophobia and hysteria.

ACT UP was most effective when it had the broadest coalition of members. As such, its story cannot be accurately told in a traditional narrative format that focused on a few heroes and their journey.

ACT UP burst onto this scene determined to confront apathy and create change on every level, from getting new drugs approved to creating alternative media through which to disseminate accurate information about the crisis. As the founding chapter, ACT UP New York was the mother ship, but 148 other chapters, all acting autonomously, have since sprung up around the globe. Unquestionably, they have been one of the most effective activist movements in modern U.S. historythough as Schulman chronicles, their successes did not come without great costs. In fact, Let the Record Show is in part a grand accounting, tallying up what was won, what was lost, and the process through which those battles were fought. Only by this kind of rigorous analysis can the lessons of ACT UP be passed on to current and future activists.

By the time she joined ACT UP, Schulman had already been writing about AIDS for four years, and it has remained a focus of her work ever since. Prior to Let the Record Show, she published several other nonfiction books that significantly dealt with AIDS, and four novels as well. In 2001, with fellow ACT UP member Jim Hubbard, she created the ACT UP Oral History Project, through which they conducted long-form video interviews with 188 members of ACT UP NY over the course of seventeen years.

Let the Record Show is a work of considerable formal daring composed almost entirely of quotes taken from those oral histories, woven together with summaries and interstitials that cohere those voices into a narrative. As Schulman writes in her preface, this is a book in which all people with AIDS are equally important. This isnt hollow rhetoric: one of Schulmans overarching themes is that ACT UP was most effective when it had the broadest coalition of members, and that even its narrowest successesthe ones that seemed to stem from or give benefit to just a small section of the groupwere only possible because of the power of the broader collective. As such, the story of ACT UP could not be accurately told in a traditional narrative format that focused on a few heroes and their journey. Unfortunately, as Schulman points out, this is all too often how ACT UP has been historicized, particularly in films like How to Survive a Plague (2012), which focused on a small group of white cisgender gay men who worked with the government to develop new drug treatments.

Let the Record Show resists this narrow framing, and instead uses a choral structure, weaving together many voices and letting none dominate. Schulman doesnt replace one set of heroes with another; rather, she destroys the idea of singular heroes at all. This is a political choice that creates a more honest representation of ACT UP, and it is a strength of the bookbut like all strengths, it contains its own weakness. To make room for these voices, Let the Record Show weighs in at over 700 pages. It at times can get repetitive, and the equal weighting of every voice can flatten their particulars, making it easy to lose the thread of who is speaking at any given moment. Let the Record Show is a powerful resource: no one will henceforth write about ACT UP without referencing it, but it is a book few are likely to read straight through. For this reason, Schulman has divided the text into four major thematic sections, and includes an introductory note on how to read it.

However, despite its many voices, Let the Record Show is unquestionably the product of Schulmans unique vision. Readers familiar with her work will see her fingerprints everywhere: in the analysis of the ways in which disagreements among allies can morph into projections of enemies (Conflict Is Not Abuse, 2016); in the examination of the psychic toll of homophobia, marginalization, and family rejection (Ties that Bind, 2009); and in her nuanced understanding of political tactics (Israel/Palestine and the Queer International, 2012), to name just a few.

But this is no retreading of familiar ground. Instead, it feels like the capstone of a career. Fighting AIDS helped Schulman to understand everything: politics, family, poverty, power, gender, race, sexuality, theater, narrative structure, and the world. Now she is bringing the resulting revelations back to bear on the fight against AIDS itself, and we are all the richer for it.

Schulman imparts many lessons in Let the Record Show, but reading it as the world was engulfed in another global pandemic, one rose to the top: activist movements must set their priorities from the bottomfrom those who have the least; those who need the mostor their success will always be partial. The most salient thread we can draw from Let the Record Show is an understanding of how mass movements can succeed and fail, all at the same time, depending on which part of the mass youre in.

Let the Record Show is a political history, and todays activists will find it instructive. It examines concrete strategies, why they appealed to (or were only possible for) certain groups, and how those strategies changed both their targets and the activists who undertook them.

Schulman describes Let the Record Show as a political history, and the books opening section, Political Foundations, analyzes the strategies through which, as she succinctly puts it, change is made. This section is deeply practical, and todays activistswhether in the Movement for Black Lives or the fight for trans rightswill find it instructive. Schulman examines concrete strategies, why they appealed to (or were only possible for) certain groups, and how those strategies changed both their targets and the activists who undertook them.

The only requirement for an ACT UP action, Schulman writes, was that it was direct action, with a goal related to ending the AIDS crisis. She makes clear that symbolic actions, or protesting for protestings sake, is only an option for those who have time to waste. ACT UP actions always had specific, tangible results in mind, and their targets were chosen because they had real power. Because they and their friends were dying terrible imminent deaths, ACT UP embraced simultaneity, freeing each member to work on actions that mattered to them, in the way that made most sense given the material reality of their lives. There was no formal approval process for actions. People proposed ideas at ACT UPs Monday night meeting, and others joined if they wanted.

For instance, when they wanted to draw attention to the pathetic speed of approvals for new medications, ACT UP went en masse to the headquarters of the Food and Drug Administration, which oversaw the approval process. Within this larger protest, small clusters of friendscalled affinity groupsplanned their own actions, from storming the building to connecting media outlets with AIDS activists in their home regions.

This multipronged approach enabled ACT UP to quickly wrack up wins on many different issues, including design[ing] a fast-track system in which sick people could access unapproved experimental drugs and making needle exchange programs legal in New York.

Using diverse tactics to achieve diverse goals was a strategy that drew on the unique strength that came with being an organization rooted in queer life, as Schulman elucidates in the third section of Let the Record Show, Creating the World You Need to Survive.

Queerness is not a vertical identity. It hopscotches across communities, blessing only some of us. Thus, the membership of ACT UP was incredibly diverse, yet still united by the extreme marginalization of being queer people and people with AIDS. Shared oppression doesnt automatically create solidarity among people from different backgrounds, but it does create moments of overlap, echoes of experience that provide potential foundations from which to build. This was key to the success of ACT UPthe ability to imagine a shared, better worldand it is a reminder for activists today that to create change, a building up must always accompany a tearing down. As Schulman writes:

Having been excluded and ignored by straight power for generations, deep undergrounds of queer opposition were built in which our needs and realities could be reflected and expressed and in which our authentic concerns could be engaged.

These deep undergrounds facilitated the creation of alternative health collectives, alternative research practices, and alternative mediaa whole parallel society, really. Underpinning all of it was a set of alternative valuesradical solidarity, empathy, honesty, celebration of difference, and a refusal to be passive in the face of injusticewhich were developed from (and necessary for) the experience of being connected to a diverse yet marginalized community.

What gave this subculture its manic energy and urgency was, of course, the ticking clock of AIDS:

The emergency forced those who took responsibility to try to create solutions, at great levels of commitment and effort. Because we wanted to win, which meant to live, ACT UP had to rise to reality and create solutions to problems created by government indifference and incompetence, while continuing to insist that this work was the responsibility of the government and private industry. It was a simultaneous approach of literally designing change while escalating pressure on the society at large to step up and be accountable.

Here again, however, is the double-sided coin of strength and weakness: urgency fueled ACT UPs embrace of simultaneity, which empowered them to make change. But at the same time, simultaneity allowed some factions to race off in their own direction, inadvertently hobbling the organization as a whole, even as they achieved laudable goals.

In particular, the Treatment and Data (T&D) committee of ACT UP NY (which was mostly, but not entirely, cis white gay men with class privilegethe people often treated as the heroes of ACT UP) cohered around a highly effective strategy of working with the government to get more drugs approved. Since these men had health insurance and financial security, a lack of approved drugs was the critical limitation that condemned them to die agonizing early deaths. And because they resembled the people in power in critical ways, negotiating with them was a viable strategy. Government authorities would take their meetings, and these mens immediate needs could be met without overturning capitalism, tearing down our system of mass incarceration, or rejecting the United States corporate approach to health insurance. In other words: their preexisting proximity to power meant powerful people would listen to them, and that their issues could be addressed without fundamentally altering the powers that be.

Schulman makes clear the long-term limitations of the strategy pursued by the men who planned Storm the NIH: as their demands were accepted by those in power, these men removed themselves from the diverse community that made that change possible.

During the six years that Schulman was a member of ACT UP NY, the gap between what levels of access different activist constituencies had was growing, and in many ways, determining group consciousness. This deepening division eventually led to the groups fracturing in 1992. Schulman outlines this traumatic break in the final section of her book, Desperation, tracing it to the famous May 21, 1990,action called Storm the NIH.

The National Institute of Health (NIH) was located in Bethesda, Maryland, and getting ACT UP NY down there required a massive mobilization, with months of planning and over $60,000 in expenses. The official demands for the action included testing all potential treatments immediately and devoting more research to opportunistic infections. In reality, however, the men of T&D had a narrower goal: to get their members placed on government committees, where they would have more direct power to affect long-term change. But, as Schulman notes, this was not made explicit to the group as a whole, and as she interviewed ACT UP members for the Oral History Project, almost no one could tell me . . . what the demands were for this action.

Afterward, because most participants had no clear understanding of, or agreement with, the goals, there was little feeling of shared success. As Schulman explains:

The manipulating, the false fronts and puppet mastering, even just the difficulties with emotional communication, i.e., the method used by some of these men, represented values and created a feeling of unease among some of the membership. It telegraphed a feeling of superiority and disrespect. . . . Perhaps the membership of ACT UP, those who normally occupied the Outside role, would have supported the same goals, had the goals for the NIH action been honestly stated, but they certainly would have demanded a more varied group of individuals represented at the table.

Even if that had been the outcome, however, Schulman astutely notes that those government committees might well have just ignored the dykes, street queens, and women of color that joined, as none of the above were represented in government, media, or pharma already.

It is in this complicated space, where success and failure comingle, that Schulmans complex understanding of activism shines. She never shames the men of T&D for embracing their power, nor does she minimize their incredible achievements in overhauling the governments approach to HIV medications. Perhaps what they gained through the Storm the NIH action could not have been gained in any other way; that is unknowable. Schulman is not interested in condemning the choices ACT UP members made, but in analyzing them honestly, in order to gain understanding that can be used by future movements. This spirit of open reflection is also part of the legacy of ACT UP, and helped make the ACT UP Oral History Project so powerful: in the course of conducting 188 interviews, no one, in seventeen years, refused to answer a question.

But Schulman also makes clear the long-term limitations of this insider strategy: as they effectuated change, these men removed themselves from the diverse community that made that change possible (literally: T&D formed a new organization, the Treatment Action Group, in 1992). These insiders could not have achieved the results they did without the outsider activists who worked against, not with, the government. But as their need for treatments got met, these relatively prosperous white gay men were no longer in the same place as other activists who did not have health care, or were imprisoned, or suffered the systemic devaluation of racism, or were women whose illnesses did not even qualify as AIDS in the eyes of the medical establishment. Although many of the men in T&D continued to be activists long after their own disease was considered a chronic manageable condition, AIDS activisms most radical and socially revolutionary vision evolved when those white men were in the same boat as everybody else who had AIDS: desperate. This wasnt because these white men were somehow more critical to making change; rather, everyone was critical, and the narrower the coalition of the desperate, the less they could achieve.

A few hundred dying people battled the United States, and often they won.

The men who successfully led the Storm the NIH action were indeed appointed to government committees, where they created new practices that are still the gold standard in AIDS research today. However, in these new roles, they also held cordial meetings with the same officials that the women of ACT UP were protesting for refusing to acknowledge that women had AIDSa refusal that blocked them from treatment and was often a death sentence. Sometimes these meetings and protests were literally on the same day, undercutting the strength of the outsiders for the benefit of those now on the inside.

The men of T&D were people with AIDS, desperate for new treatments, Schulman writes empathetically, and yet so were other people.

Strategies and what-ifs can be debated endlessly, but results are results. Perhaps the most damning assessment of the cost of this fissure is a simple fact that Schulman notes in her preface: By 2001 almost every HIV-positive woman in ACT UP New York, except for one confirmed survivor, had died.

ACT UPs members achieved incredible wins, against impossible odds, while watching their world crumble around them. They made mistakes and kept going, literally carrying each other when necessary. A few hundred dying people battled the United States, and often they won. Reading Let the Record Show made me wonder what they could have done with more bodies on the line; more help; more hands; more heart; more anger. Unfortunately, most people do not participate in making change, Schulman notes. Only tiny vanguards actually take the actions necessary, and even fewer do this with a commitment to being effective.

Many of ACT UPs womenand men, and nonbinary peoplefought effectively to their dying breath. Others survived and are still fighting. They succeeded in changing the definition of AIDS to include women. They brought HIV services into detention centers. They made films about the crisis. They are still making films about the crisis. They are writing histories that tell their successes and failures with clear eyes, to enable us to make better choices in the future.

But this story is inherently unfinished; AIDS is still a crisis; activists are still fighting today. ACT UP New York meets every Monday at 7:00 p.m. at the LGBT Community Center in Manhattan.

Everyone is invited.

See original here:

When Queers Fought the State and Won - Boston Review

SAN FRANCISCO, CA Sometimes referred to as the underdog and unlikely candidate, Eric Curry, a 27-year-old San Franciscan is running for San Franciscos 12th Congressional District seat. He officially launched his campaign to win the congressional seat once held by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D- San Francisco) in the Bay Area on Monday April 19, 2021.

According to the Bay Area Reporter, Curry, who would be the first gay Latino candidate to represent the district, is a democrat deeply invested in the rights of the working class, LGBTQ+ community and eco-friendly sustainability. He announced his candidacy after Pelosi hinted at the possibility that 2022 may mark the end of her time serving as House speaker. Pelosis suggestion of stepping down created debate as to whether she should also retire from Congress altogether the following year and opened the door for Curry to run for Congress. Curry told the Bay Area Reporter that he is focused on raising his name recognition with voters and seeking donations in order to have a fighting chance at surviving the primaries on June 7, 2022.

Curry states that hes running for Congress in his hometown of San Francisco because we simply cannot wait any longer for Medicare For All, housing reform, a Green New Deal and student loan forgiveness. He feels that the decisions are being made by politicians who wont be around in 20 years to deal with the consequences of their decisions.

It will be my generation, our kids and our grandchildren who will bear the brunt of the climate crisis, the healthcare crisis, the looming economic crisis and thus, we deserve a seat at the table, he says.

Curry pledges that on day one in office, he will cosponsor H.R. 794 The Climate Emergency Act.

Im quite baffled that our current representative, whom I deeply respect, doesnt seem to understand the urgency of the climate crisis, he explains. Once Congress acts on climate change, we can address the student loan crisis, Medicare For All and raising the minimum wage. But my priority is making sure we still have a planet to live on in 20 years.

According to Mercy Corps, the impacts of climate change do affect every continent and country, but it doesnt affect every demographic equally. The impoverished populations throughout the globe face the heavy social burdens of poverty and oppression while being forced to deal with the harshest consequences of environmental changes. Those who live in poverty have the least resources to cope with the struggle to earn a living, care for their families and live in a stable environment that has not been impacted by the climate.

The Climate Emergency Act would allow the president to declare a national emergency as result of climate change under section 201 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1621), making it possible for the president to:

(A) Upgrade public infrastructure, create nationwide access to clean energy and water, access to public transportation and high-speed broadband internet;

(B) Retrofit millions of homes, schools, business offices and industrial buildings to reduce the daily carbon footprint;

(C) Increase investments into public health response in preparation for extreme climatic events;

(D) Protect the vast wetlands, forests and public lands that may be in danger due to extreme weather;

(E) Create economical empowerment opportunities for farmers and rural communities by supporting regenerative agriculture and investing in American based food systems that support farmers, agricultural workers, healthy soil and climate resilience;

(F) Encourage transformative development of the American industrial base, creating high wage paying manufacturing jobs, including expanding the manufacturing of clean technologies that reduce industrial pollutions; and

(G) Establish new employment programs as needed.

Curry has put his activist background to work in organizing with grassroots progressive organizations across the country during the 2020 elections. He was a volunteer on Kamala Harris Presidential Campaign, participating in her organizing academy and later organizing for the Biden/Harris ticket. As a native Spanish speaker, Currys skills were useful for native Texans and Georgians as he was also a volunteer for the Warnock and Ossoff Senate campaigns. Due to his experience, he understands firsthand how money can influence elections.

There is no place for corporate money in politics. None. Corporations dont vote; people do. How on earth can I make the best decisions for the American people if my judgment is clouded by corporate interests? Curry asked Mills students in a campaign email.

Curry wants people to know that he is committed to running a campaign of, by, and for the people. If elected, the welfare of his constituents, not the corporations, will guide all of his actions in Congress.

According to Caltech Science Exchange, political action committees (PACs)is formed to represent business, labor or ideological interests by individuals privately raising money that will be donated to a political campaign. Those funds are then used for campaigns that sway an election either for or against targeted candidates, ballot initiatives or legislation that affect public policies by either altering legislators roll call voting or influencing election outcomes. Political candidates will often raise money to fund their campaigns and to demonstrate the breadth of their support through the aid of PACs. Campaign finance laws dictate who can contribute to a campaign, how much money they can contribute and how the funding may be used at the local, state and federal levels. Campaign funding can come from individual donors, political party committees and PACs.

When PACs alter legislators rollcall voting behavior, often called roll-call buying, a lawmaker will choose to simply vote present when being persuaded by PACs funding. Rollcall vote-buying often operates in a quidproquo fashion, which can limit the PACs influence on public policy.

When PACs influence election outcomes, a particular candidate will author a vote in favor of legislation that favors the PACs interest, providing specific benefits to the donating PACs as that candidate serves in office.

One social issue that PACs tend to influence is immigration policies. Currys stances on the detention centers at the Southwestern American borders and how the issue made him feel as the child of immigrants were made clear.

My mother came to the United States in the midst of a horrific civil war in El Salvador. My Abuelito [grandfather] and Abuelita [grandmother] came from nothing, but worked hard to provide the resources for my mother and her sisters to have the privilege of being able to immigrate to the United States legally, Curry says.

Curry reflects upon how many immigrants are not afforded the same opportunities as his mother and her family were and that it doesnt make them any less deserving of the American Dream.

I strongly oppose the detention centers at the border. The migrants at the border are not criminals; they are people just like you and me who are fleeing oppression, natural disasters, and corruption and are ready to work hard and contribute to our economy, Curry says.

The El Salvadorian Civil War ravaged the Central American state country of El Salvador, where approximately 75,000 Salvadorans died between 1980 to 1992. The two primary actors were a Marxist-Leninist guerrilla group called the Farabundo Mart National Liberation Front (FMLN) and the government of El Salvador. According to Aljazeera, FMLN guerrillas used kidnappings, bombings and terrorist tactics that involved killing mayors and informants. The civil war between the FMLN and the government of Salvador caused the civilians caught in the crossfire to become alienated and seek refuge abroad to avoid execution by the governments death squads. Currys family came to the U.S. seeking asylum and escaping the violence.

As a third-generation immigrant whose family came to this country fleeing civil unrest and oppressive governments, Curry has been working hard to become a trailblazer for future generations of Americans. This is the story of many South and Central American and Caribbean immigrants seeking asylum at our nations borders. Especially Salvadorian asylum seekers, who face execution upon their return to their native home. Salvadoran gangs prey on deportees who have very little to no protection by authorities upon return.

While talking about military actions being carried out against civilians, Curry opened up about police reform and the militarization of law enforcement in America and expressed his support of potentially abolishing the 1033 program that gives local law enforcement military-grade weapons and gear.

I absolutely support police reform and if elected, will fight from day one to support policies ending qualified immunity and increasing implicit bias training for law enforcement, said Curry. I also fully support the abolishment of the military surplus equipment transfer program [1033].

When dealing with the issue of military surplus and what many considered the worsening drug crisis, the 101st Congress enacted theNational Defense Authorization Act in 1990. Section 1208 of the NDAA made it possible for the Secretary of Defense to transfer to Federal and State agencies personal property of the Department of Defense, including small arms and ammunition, that the Secretary determines is suitable for use by such agencies in counter-drug activities; and excess to the needs of the Department of Defense. It was originally labeled the 1208 Program, until 1996 when Congress replaced Section 1208 of the act with Section 1033, according to News Week.

Curry is jumping headfirst into humanitarianism in politics. In refusing PACs money, standing in support of abolishing the 1033 program, fighting to release asylum seekers at the border, agreeing with the HR 794 Climate Emergency Act, advocating for a minimum wage increase, championing health care for all and eliminating student loan debt, Curry is keeping in tradition with the liberalism of current House Speaker Pelosi.

See more here:

The unlikely underdog in the fight: Following Eric Curry's journey to the 12th Congressional District seat The Campanil - Mills Campanil

In the keenly watched assembly election of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee brought the Modi-Shah politicking to a grinding halt. Banerjee secured a landslide victory for Trinamool Congress (TMC) as it swept the state by winning 213 of the 292 seats in the state. But keeping aside all the politics and statistics, there are voices of many Bengalis, some extremely popular, some completely unknown, who raised to the occasion and took a stand against voting for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ahead of the polls.

In November 2020, a group of people connected to various social and mass movements came together to create a forum called Bengal against Fascist RSS-BJP. The forum started a peoples campaign No Vote To BJP, which went to the farthest corners of the state. Students, youngsters, teachers, doctors and social activists joined the forum voluntarily and campaigned for the cause.

Kushal Debnath, one of the convenors of the forum, had then told The Wirethat through this campaign, they are not asking people to vote for TMC or any other political party, but requesting people to not vote for the BJP. Stopping the BJP from coming to power in Bengal is extremely crucial today, otherwise their fascist aggression will gain steam across India, Debnath said.

Dwaipayan Banerjee, a member associated with the forum, said, We got support from people cutting across various socio-economic strata. People associated with cinema, music, theatre, academia, all joined the movement as they believed this was essential. People joined from different political backgrounds, but they did not represent their party ideology. They joined as individuals who genuinely believe that BJP must not come to power inBengal,

Another convenor of the forum, who played an active role throughout the campaign, Kasturi Basu said, Our campaign minced no words in its attack on the BJP-RSS, exposing their every move as inimical to the interests of our people. It made no irresponsible comparisons of the fascist party BJP with other parties in the fray. It aimed to convince people, particularly those who have swung towards the BJP in the recent past, that this time they should not make a mistake again. It was imperative to stop the BJP from coming to power in Bengal to avoid centralised authoritarianism, to establish a firm mandate against NRC-CAA-NPR (National Register of Citizens-Citizenship Amendment Act-National Population Register), to uphold the sanctity of federalism, to say no more riots and religious majoritarian bigotry.

The members organised street corner meetings, street plays, put up posters and distributed pamphlets in various towns and villages. They also set up a social media team which ran an intense online campaign parallel to the street campaign. The No Vote To BJP campaign released a series of videos, each addressing various issues related to Bengal. The video series went viral and garnered millions of views.

The Joint Forum against NRC, a non-political civil society group, ran a campaign in various districts of West Bengal to educate people on CAA and NRC.The forum attacked the BJP and their leadership, alleging that the Union home minister Amit Shah was bluffing and misleading the Matua community on citizenship issues.

Also read: What Will the West Bengal Election Result Mean for Bihars Political Parties?

The Modi government at the Centre is deliberately issuing these rules now so that they can garner the support of Dalit refugees like Matua, Namasudras, Rajbangshis by hanging on to the roots of unconditional citizenship before the assembly elections, the forum had said on February.

The forum had also organised a Citizenship Protection Yatra, which started on February 26 from the border village of Betai and ran for a week in the refugee-concentrated areas of Nadia and North 24 Parganas, and ended on March 5. The main aim of the yatra was to raise awareness against the false promise of giving citizenship to the refugees and to demand repeal of the two laws, CAA 2003 and CAA 2019.

On asking what compelled the forum to organise this campaign amid a pandemic, Prasenjit Bose, a convenor of the forum, said, First, we were fighting against the NRC-NPR-CAA 2003 and 2019, and the BJP, in its Bengal manifesto, mentioned that they will implement CAA after coming to power in Bengal. So, we were duty bound to fight this and make the Bengal electorate aware of the possible danger. Second, the Bengal election this time was not just another state election, it had national context. This election was fought against the backdrop of the pandemic, catastrophic farm laws, NRC, CAA and a whole lot of wrong policies. BJPs win in Bengal would have bolstered their agenda of opposition-less India and weakened our democracy. So, with all means we had to fight to stop them.

No Vote to BJP campaigners. Photo: Himadri Ghosh

Taking a stand

Theatre group Jana Gana Mana performed a play called Indurer Kol(Mouse Trap) in various rural villages in Bengal. The play fundamentally premised against the fascist forces dealing with issues like NRC, CAA, inflation, LPG price hike with a pinch of sarcasm. While performing at the Mangrove Theatre Centre in the Sundarbans region on the occasion of World Theatre Day, the cast and crew were attacked by the local BJP leaders.

Playwright Shubhankar Das Sharma had told The Wire, We have seen in BJP-ruled states that freedom of speech and expression was suppressed. Here also, they are trying to silence peoplesvoices. They can try as much as they want to scare us, but we are not going anywhere, we are not scared. We will continue to enact the play at various places.

The group enacted the play in more than 84 locations starting from August 2020.

Just three days ahead of the first phase of the assembly election, a galaxy of artists from cinema, theatre and music fields came together in a music video, highlighting the need to stamp out fascist forces. In a song titled Nijeder Mote, Nieder Gaan (Our song about our views), without explicitly naming the BJP, the artists had taken a stand against its ideology of hatred. The music video features artists such as Parambrata Chatterjee, Anirban Bhattacharya, Sabyasachi Chakraborty, Rudraprasad Sengupta, Anupam Roy, Rupankar Bagchi, Riddhi Sen and Suman Mukhopadhyay.

The song, penned by one of the top film and theatre actors from West Bengal, Anirban Bhattacharya, touches upon issues like communal violence, love-jihad and forced nationalism, while promoting pluralism, fake news and propaganda. The video is directed by actors Riddhi Sen and Rwitobroto Mukherjee.

Poster of the music video. Photo: Special arrangement

The Wire asked Parambrata Chatterjee if he ever feared backlash for taking a stand against the central government, to which he said, Definitely. We have been seeing the BJP in power since 2014. We witnessed many wrongs by this dispensation. But [we] havent spoken enough about it because of some kind of fear. Now that it came to us, to capture our state, steamroll politics of hate and divide, which defies all democratic norms, we cant stay quiet. We have to speak against a fascist, autocratic dispensation.

Chatterjee opined that civil society has an important role to play in society and therefore, it should speak about the pressing issues. History shows how artists in India and across the globe played a crucial role in various socio-economic and socio-cultural issues. Indias foundation is unity in diversity. Now if some party or government tries to appropriate culture with an aim to create a homogenised society, it goes against the very idea of India. That must be resisted. People must speak up, he further said.

Also read: How West Bengal Halted the BJPs Chariot

The video not only received appreciation from people across the country, but also created a controversy as the makers were verbally attacked by several BJP leaders. BJP state president Dilip Ghosheven issued a warning and said, Artists should restrict themselves to singing and dancing. Dont try to do politics. Leave that to us. Or else we will take care of them.

Speaking toThe Wire, sociologist Piya Chakraborty, who was also part of the video, said, Since January, with the increasing polarisation regarding Bengal elections and the overall religious fascism, crushing of dissent and economic decline in the entire country.. We felt like we had to express our thoughts. Art was the best way to resist.

When asked about why she felt resisting the BJP was so central to this election and the political future of Bengal, Chakraborty said, The politics of the BJP centres around religious polarisation and Hindu majoritarianism. Not only does that go against the secular ethos of Bengal but also dangerous for its minority population and overall maintenance of peace and coexistence.

During the election, a band from Kolkata, Fiddlers Green, released a song urging voters of Bengal to be hushiyar'(beware). The song is a part of the video series produced and directed by senior journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta. The basic theme of the song was to urge people to be aware of the seeds of hatred that are being sown and how it could have serious consequences in the future.

Screengrab from Fiddlers Green music video Dike Dike Hao Hushiar.

Songwriter Swadesh Misra said that since the BJP came to power at the Centre, he was closely following deep distress in the society, from demonetisation to farm laws to divisive policies like CAA, NRC, attacks on dissenters, oppression of communities, aggressive push of North India culture etc. I felt the urge to take a stand against the fascist regime which has captured all institutions and bulldozed Indias federal structure through its one language, one nation, one government policy. When I got the chance to be a part of this project, I jumped immediately.

Misra further said that the BJPs win in Bengal would have helped the saffron party in taking forward their agenda of establishing a Hindu Rashtra. They [BJP] are doing social engineering to change this country, destroy Indias secular values and end the idea of co-existence. BJPs Bengal win would have boosted their agenda.

Last but not the least, the visit of farm leaders from Delhi border toBengal. Although it can be debated if it had any electoralimpact, but, their visit and doing mahapanchayat in places like Nandigram, Singur and Asansol created a talking point both in rural and urban Bengal.

Leader of the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU) Rakesh Tikait got a huge response when he reached Nandigram for the mahapanchayat. In a scathing attack on the BJP, Tikait said in Nandigram, BJP is planning to ruin the lives of farmers by supporting big corporations. They dont care about you and me. They are here to sell this countrys asset and hand it over to companies. This government is not run by a party, it is run by companies. So, to teach a lesson, BJP must be defeated. You will have to defeat them in Bengal.

Here is the original post:

How Bengali Civil Society Stood up Against the BJP - The Wire

Pop star-turned-politician, Wine, termed the Governments action as cowardly. [Courtesy]

The homes of opposition politicians Bobi Wine and Kizza Besigye have been surrounded by police as Uganda prepares for Yoweri Musevenis swearing-in on Wednesday, May 12.

The two took to Twitter on Monday night, May 10, to express concern over heavy police presence around their places of residence.

Both Wine and Besigye allege harassment of their supporters by law enforcement officers.

Pop star-turned-politician, Wine, termed the Governments action as cowardly.

The former presidential aspirant maintains Musevenis swearing-in for the sixth time as President is illegal.

The coward is aware that he is [an] illegitimate [president], and that is why he is very scared of the people, Bobi Wine said on the micro-blogging site.

Besigye wondered why the Government would deploy police to his house, yet he was out of the country.

Ugandas National Army Deputy Spokesperson, Deo Akiiki, defended the police deployment, saying the move was meant to avert possible chaos.

Take a quick survey and help us improve our website!

With credible evidence from intelligence, we shall not hesitate to arrest more of these schemers as and when we detect, said Akiiki in a televised address.

NTV Uganda reports that at least 4,000 people, including 11 Heads of State, have been invited to Musevenis swearing-in, which will be held at the Kololo Grounds in the capital Kampala.

According to reports by Ntv Uganda, Mr Musevenis inauguration has been marred by an increased security presence especially in urban areas and their environs.

Museveni got 5.85 million votes (58.64 per cent) of the total votes cast in the January 14, 2021 presidential election, while his closest challenger, Bobi Wine, amassed 3.48 million votes (34.83 per cent).

Wine claimed the results were doctored to place Museveni as the winner.

Museveni came into power in 1986 after overthrowing General Tito Okello, whose regime lasted for only 181 days.

Since then, he has won all presidential elections in Uganda.

Read this article:

Wine, Besigye claim oppression ahead of Museveni swearing-in - The Standard

The Kindred Spirits sculpture in Midleton, County Cork, Ireland, pays tribute to a gift from the Choctaw nation to help during the 19th century potato famine. Ireland paid it back with donations to the Navajo and Hopi nations to help them during the pandemic. Gavin Sheridan hide caption

The Kindred Spirits sculpture in Midleton, County Cork, Ireland, pays tribute to a gift from the Choctaw nation to help during the 19th century potato famine. Ireland paid it back with donations to the Navajo and Hopi nations to help them during the pandemic.

Last year, the Irish people raised nearly $2 million dollars for the Navajo and Hopi Nations so they could protect themselves from the pandemic. At the time, the infection rate in the Navajo community 2,304 cases per 100,000 was the highest in the country and nearly 40% higher than even the epicenter of New York City.

It was a show of thanks to Native Americans for a $170 gift sent by the Choctaw to the Irish people at the height of the potato famine in 1847.

When vaccines became available, Navajo Nation leaders made a concerted effort to obtain vaccines from the U.S. government and get shots in arms quickly to ensure that their residents were protected from the virus. The results have been tremendous, with nearly 90% of the eligible population receiving at least a first dose.

These last few weeks, as COVID set India aflame in a profound surge, Navajo Nation continued the cycle of generosity forward by gathering PPE to send to India via the Indian embassy in Washington, D.C.

This may seem like a feel-good story about pandemic generosity. And it is.

But there is another perspective. This chain of donations is akin to a crowdfunding campaign for a medical bill that should be covered through a strong social safety net, not by asking those with the least to scrounge together what little they have.

The burden of helping marginalized people in need in our global community belongs to those with wealth and power in this case, wealthy nations like the United States and not to those who have borne the brunt of systemic oppression and economic disenfranchisement.

But up to now in this pandemic, well-off nations have chosen a state of vaccine apartheid. Rich countries as a rule have enough vaccines. Poorer countries do not.

The privileged countries of the world could take a lesson from the Navajo nation and Irish experience. And indeed, the U.S. took a huge step in that direction last week. U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai announced the Biden administration's support for a version of the World Trade Organization proposal to temporarily waive intellectual property protections for COVID-19 vaccines.

This signal from the administration could be a potentially transformative move in the global fight against COVID-19. If followed up by swift and transparent negotiations, a temporary waiver on intellectual property could mean that countries with a severe shortage of vaccines could deploy additional manufacturers to meet the needs of their citizens, without fear of either being sued or sanctioned.

To live up to its potential, this waiver must be accompanied by technology transfer and active support to manufacturers in other countries so supply can increase. While none of this will happen overnight, it's imperative that this process moves with the urgency dictated by people dying needlessly each moment we continue without a comprehensive strategy for global scale-up of vaccines.

As for the objections by the pharmaceutical industry that it will take too long for other countries to master the technology: They said the same thing about HIV drugs and hepatitis vaccines. This was proven wrong: Manufacturers in low- and middle-income countries entered the market, and millions of people have been treated or immunized as a result. In our opinion, the industry's arguments simply indicate a desire to control the market and maximize revenue, and do not reflect the reality that time and time again, manufacturers in other countries have demonstrated that they can not only master new technologies, they can achieve scale, bring down costs, and ultimately help save more lives.

The alternative is for companies like Pfizer and Moderna to make the vaccine and sell it to other countries or give it to COVAX a joint program run by the World Health Organization and two nonprofits which aims to supply a limited number of vaccines to less wealthy countries.

But COVAX is expected to reach just 3% of the populations of low-income countries by early July. So the outlook is not positive to reach its original modest target of up to 20% of these populations by the end of 2021.

And even if it reaches its most ambitious goals, COVAX would never solve our current crisis of a lack of vaccine production worldwide. It is not a production plan; it is merely a distribution scheme. What we need is the former equipping nations with the knowledge and infrastructure to produce their own vaccines.

That's why we support the Biden administration announcement. It embodies the spirit of the Navajo Nation and Irish solidarity.

When the U.S. took a stand this week to change course, it took a critical first step to bringing an urgency to our response that has been lacking to date. A first step to finding our way back from vaccine apartheid to vaccine equity.

Sriram Shamasunder (@srijeeva) is associate professor of medicine at UCSF. He has worked clinically in low- and middle-income countries over the last 15 years. He is the director of UCSF HEAL, a health training program in Navajo Nation and rural India since 2014.

Priti Krishtel (@pritikrishtel) is a founder and an executive director of the Initiative for Medicines, Access & Knowledge, and has spent nearly 20 years addressing structural inequities in how medicines are developed and distributed worldwide.

See the original post here:

What The Navajo Nation And Ireland Can Teach Rich Countries About Generosity : Goats and Soda - NPR

In what is believed to be the biggest protest in history, in late November 2020 farmers from across India drove 200,000 trolleys and tractors towards Delhis borders in a mass protest against agricultural reforms. This was followed a few days later by a general strike involving 250 million people in both urban and rural areas of India as workers joined together to support the farmers.

The strike continues, despite the global public health crisis, which is hitting India harder than any other country in the world. Fear of COVID-19 has not deterred farmers, who have emphatically stated that regardless of whether they contract the virus, the black laws will kill them anyway.

The movement first began in the state of Punjab in June 2020, as farmers blocked freight railway lines in protest against these black laws, which increase corporate control over all aspects of the food chain from seed to sale. Farmers unions argue that the laws undermine state-controlled prices of key crops, by allowing sales outside of state mandis (markets).

The laws also enable corporations to control what contract farmers grow and how, thus reducing the bargaining power of small farmers. Corporations will be allowed to stockpile key produce and hence speculate with food, which was previously illegal. Finally, the laws provide legal immunity to corporations operating in good faith, thereby voiding the ability of citizens to hold agribusiness to account.

Braving tear gas and water cannons, thousands of farmers and their families descended on Delhi and transformed its busy roads into bustling camp cities, with communal langhar kitchens.

Undeterred by police violence, farmers fed these aggressors who beat them by day with free food by night. This act of community service not only underscored the peaceful intentions of the protests but also encapsulated one of the key ideas of the movement: no farmers, no food.

In the same spirit of solidarity, farmers at Delhis borders are responding to the rapidly escalating spread of COVID-19 in the city. They are distributing food packages and essential goods to hospitals, as well as in bus and railway stations for those leaving the capital.

Farmers from numerous states, of all castes and religions, are coexisting and growing the protest movement from the soil upwards literally, turning trenches into vegetable gardens. Many farmers refer to this movement as andolan a revolution where alliances are being forged between landless farm labourers and smallholder farmers. In a country deeply divided by caste and increasingly religion, this coming together around land, soil and food has powerful potential.

Women have also taken leading roles, as they push for recognition as farmers in their own right. They are exploring the intersections of caste oppression, gendered labour and sexual violence in person and in publications such as Karti Dharti a women-led magazine sharing stories and voices from the movement.

Despite the largely peaceful protests, farmers have been met with state repression and violence. At various points water supplies have been cut to the protest sites and internet services blocked. Undeterred, farmers have prepared the camp sites for the scorching summer heat that now envelops them.

Amnesty international has called on the Indian government to stop escalating crackdown on protesters, farm leaders and journalists. Eight media workers have been charged with sedition, while 100 people protesters have disappeared. In response, parliaments around the world have issued statements and debates on the right to peaceful protest in India, as well as a free and open press.

The heavy-handed government response and intransigence to the key demands of the movement adds grave doubt for farmers who are now being asked to disband protest sites in the interest of public health. It highlights the hypocrisy of being told to go home, while the ruling BJP was holding mass rallies in West Bengal.

The fear is that COVID-19 could derail the momentum of this movement, as with the protests around the Citizen Amendment Act, which were cleared in March 2020 due to enforced lockdown to curb the spread of COVID-19. Farmers repeat that they will leave as soon as the government repeals the laws and protects the minimum support price of key crops.

There has been a groundswell of support from around the globe, from peasant movements, the Indian diaspora community and celebrities including Rihanna and climate activist Greta Thunberg. This movement is fighting for the principles of democracy on which the Indian state was founded and is part of a civil society movement filling in for the state, which has been found sorely wanting in its response to the calamitous consequences of COVID-19.

The black laws are but the latest in a long history of struggle faced by Indian farmers. Indias sprawling fields have been sites of green revolution experimentation since the 1960s. This has worsened water scarcity, reduced crop genetic diversity, damaged biodiversity, eroded and depleted soils, all of which has reduced soil fertility.

The financial burden of costly inputs and failing crops has fallen on farmers, leading to spiralling debts and farmer suicides. The impacts of climate change and ecologically destructive farming are primary reasons for this financial duress. However, the movement has yet to deeply address the challenges of transitioning towards socioeconomically just, climate-friendly agriculture.

Peasant movements around the world highlight the importance of collective spaces and knowledge-sharing between small farmers. The campsites in Delhi provide a unique opportunity to link socioeconomic farming struggles to their deep ecological roots. These are indeed difficult discussions, but the kisaan (farmer) movement has provided spaces to challenge caste, religious and gender-based oppression.

The movements strength is its broad alliances and solidarity, but it remains unclear whether it will link palpable socioeconomic injustices to environmental injustices and rights. The ecological origins of COVID-19 make these connections ever more pressing the world over.

View original post here:

Indian farmers' strike continues in the shadow of COVID-19 - The Conversation UK

Abu Ali al-Ansari, a political analyst and Islamic scholar based in London, tells the Tehran Times that the ArabIsraeli normalization is a betrayal by Arab monarchies and it will not lead to the disappearance of the Palestinian cause.

This normalization is one of the final nails in the occupation of Palestine, and it will be one of the reasons for the final destruction of both the Arab and European Zionist project in the region, notes Abu Ali al-Ansari.He believes that the Arab people are not in favour of the normalization, and he explains the reality is that the Arab monarchs have very little to do with the Arab people; they are closer to their Zionist masters and to the Empire be it the British or the U.S. Empires.

Following is the text of the interview:

Q: How do characterize the current situation in West Asia?

A: The situation in West Asia is at a pivotal stage in history at this time. Most of the so-called Arab monarchies, including those who consider themselves to be the custodians of the two holy places, are firmly in the pocket of the Empire and the forces of the real Axis of Evil.

However, with His grace, there is also a massive resurgence within the populations of the Arab and Muslim countries, and the Axis of Resistance, the forces who have fought against various Western and Zionist projects like DAESH and so-called Israel are stronger than ever.

I believe that we are living in a historic time when soon we will see the demise of the Empire, and along with it its Axis of Evil, and the dawn of a new age in the regionWhile the propaganda mechanism against the Resistance Axis is in full swing, and working tirelessly, every move that the enemies make thinking they can harm the Axis of Resistance fails. It appears as if the Empire and its allies are stuck in quagmire after quagmire in the West Asia region (and elsewhere), and with the advent of the Coronavirus, their predicament becomes far worse.

I believe that we are living in a historic time when soon we will see the demise of the Empire, and along with it its Axis of Evil, and the dawn of a new age in the region, with His grace.

Q: What is your thought on the ArabIsraeli normalization?

A: This normalization is an academic exercise. It is nothing new. These Arab sheikhdoms, these oilfields and shopping malls with flags, run by the most corrupt of the corrupt people, have always been partners with the Zionist entity. Some even reference entities such as so-called Saudi Arabia and the so-called UAE as the Arab Zionists.

They have only ever given lip service to the plight of the people of Palestine. Providing charity, but never actually providing any useful support be it diplomatic or military to the Palestinians in their resistance to Zionist occupation.

The reality is that the U.S. has finally managed to get these Arab leaders to be honest, to express publicly that they are with the Zionists; and indeed, that the Palestinians need to give up the struggle for their rights and freedom from occupation.

This is a fatal mistake for these Arab rulers and given the way they have abused their own populations, it is but a matter of time till they are dealt the final and fatal blow.

These Arab sheikhs who in reality are just DAESH but with formal attire failed in Syria and Iraq, they are failing catastrophically in Yemen, and they should understand that the fire they have ignited in Yemen will burn them, and will be a means to the ultimate liberation of Palestine.

Q: Do you think the normalization can lead to forgetfulness of the resistance and the Palestinian cause?

A: I believe this is the intention of the Empire, this is exactly what they want. They want the Arabs to forget Palestine, to become taken in with the material benefits that they will allegedly obtain as a reward for the so-called normalization. However, I have no doubt that this is a mistake.

This normalization is an academic exercise. It is nothing new. These Arab sheikhdoms, these oilfields and shopping malls with flags, run by the most corrupt of the corrupt people, have always been partners with the Zionist entity.Even if sadly the majority of the people of these Arab oil fields and shopping malls with flags support this normalization; this normalization will not make the Palestinian cause disappear.

It will in fact polarise and make clear those who are with the oppressed and those who are with the oppressors.

This normalization is one of the final nails in the occupation of Palestine, and it will be one of the reasons for the final destruction of both the Arab and European Zionist projects in the region.

Q: Basically, can the normalization be generalized to Arab nations or it is considered a betrayal by Arab monarchies? In your view, will Arab nations come along with this betrayal?

A: I believe that the normalization is something for the Arab monarchs (who in and of themselves lack any real legitimacy, but thats another discussion for another time), I do not believe the Arab people are in favour of this.

After all, if your brothers home were stolen, his family killed, his daughters raped and his sons massacred, and then your brother is told he cannot fight back, would you expect your brother to accept this? Would you accept this? No person with any honor or dignity will ever accept this regardless of which faith they follow.

The reality is that the Arab monarchs have very little to do with the Arab people; they are closer to their Zionist masters and to the Empire be it the British or the U.S. Empires. They are servants of the Empire and only seek to occupy the Arab countries and peoples.As Ive said, this normalization is one of the final nails in their coffins.

Q: As you know, the Israeli regime has been violating human rights in the case of Palestinians, including the recent Israel blockage of covid vaccines from entering Gaza. How do you assess this brutal decision? Why have international organizations, especially the UN, been playing a passive role there?

A: Honestly speaking, this is not unexpected. There is little humanity when it comes to the Zionists, they are a fascist supremacist entity, who care little for anyone else.

For them to block the COVID vaccination from the people of Palestine is completely expected; as far as the Zionists are concerned the sooner all the Palestinians are removed from existence the better for the Zionists.

Arab leaders including organizations like the so-called Arab League have done nothing to help the people of PalestineThe real tragedy is that the Arab leaders including organizations like the so-called Arab League have done nothing to help the people of Palestine (aside from the customary lip service).

As for the so-called United Nations. The United Nations cannot be expected to do anything as long as it is owned and controlled by the masters and supporters of the Zionists, this is a reality. The UN is the one that is responsible for the occupation of Palestine, by doing nothing, doing less than nothing to help the Palestinians, even after UNSC resolution after resolution condemning the Zionists and declaring their behaviour in cases as war crimes.

The UN is impotent and will remain impotent as long as the veto remains (especially while it remains with the U.S., UK, France who are known and strong allies and partners of the Zionist entity).Sadly, to expect these intentional organizations to do anything that would counter U.S. foreign policy is wishful thinking.

Q: The Western media is trying to introduce the Axis of Resistance as a kind of expansion of the Shiite influence over the region. What do you think?

A: This is nothing new. The Western media is not really a news forum that provides real analysis; rather it is a mouthpiece for the foreign policy Zionist-inspired and controlled of the Empire. This needs to be understood.The Western media is more interested in keeping the people comatose and in their happy little delusions, worrying about non-issues than to educate the people on the reality that their so-called elected officials are committing, the crimes being committed in their names, and so on.

The current line taken by the Western media is nothing new at all. It must be understood that the Islamic Republic of Iran, more so the Islamic Revolution Guard Corp, and more so its Quds Force, that was led by the great martyr of Islam, Hajj Qassem Soleimani, may God rest his pure soul, and that now continues its march led by Sardar Ismail Qaani, may God protect him; and led by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Imam Khamenei, may God protect him, have taken the most important steps in ensuring that the West Asia region is kept free and to minimize the influence of the Zionist Axis.

Yes, Islamic Iran has supported unwaveringly the Palestinian Resistance, the Lebanese Resistance, the Yemeni Resistance, and more besides, because they are humane causes, they are causes where a people are standing up to oppression, occupation, and to tyranny.The Empire and its mouthpieces the Western Media have a problem with this, because this is a war on the information arena as well as the physical arena.

For every victory that the Resistance Axis has on physical arena, the enemies have to reduce the pain of that victory by creating an operation on the information arena (the soft war arena). This is why, the Islamic Resistance, the people standing against the forces of the Empire, must become stronger on the Soft War arena; that way, for every victory on the physical arena, there is also a monumental victory on the information arena; which ultimately will further break the back of the Empire.

Q: What will be Biden's foreign policy toward this dispute? Do you think the normalization continues in Biden's presidency?

A: As far as the U.S. is concerned, especially in matters of foreign policy; and more so than the foreign policy that is related to the Zionist entity, absolutely nothing will change (except to give more support to the Zionist entity). The U.S. is a firm ally to the Zionists, be it with a Democratic or Republican or any other party government. The same is the case with other Western countries, including the UK, France, and such.

While the formalization of normalization was started during the Trump regime, it will continue, and mark my words, become more expansive during Biden.

Link:

The normalization will not make the Palestinian cause disappear: Political analyst - Tehran Times

May 11, 2021, 3:55 PM

For more than 800 years, English naval ships have been launching from Portsmouth, bound for the worlds oceans.Last week, the Royal Navy opened a new era with the departure of a new aircraft carrier, HMSQueen Elizabeth, for the beginning of an seven-monthdeploymentthat will bring it to the Indo-Pacific, along with a strike group. There, the Royal Navy task force will participate in operations designed to ensure freedom of navigation and open seas. The reason? We see China as being a challenge and a competitor, said Britains first sea lord, Adm. Tony Radakin, during a visit with his U.S. counterpart, Adm. Mike Gilday, the chief of naval operations.

Some might wonder why the British are sticking their toes into the turbulent waters of far-away Asiawhy London is suddenly so committed to upholding a free and open Indo-Pacific, adopting the slogan used by the Trump and Biden administrations alike. Or, even more tellingly, why so many nations even beyond the United Kingdom are increasingly vocal in their criticisms of Beijing.

The looming Chinese-U.S. confrontationand especially the United States supposedly more aggressive stanceis often cited as the main threat to global peace. The danger is argued to be the result of former U.S. President Donald Trumps attempts to overturn four decades of more cooperative U.S. policy toward China. Trumps moves, including imposing tariffs, banning tech companies, challenging Beijings influence campaigns, increasing naval operations in the South China Sea, and deepening ties with Taiwan, led to warnings that Washington was turning China into anenemyand pushing the two nations closer to conflict.For example, an open letter to then-President Trump signed by more than 100 American academics and former diplomats and military officers expressed the belief that many U.S. actions are contributing directly to the downward spiral in relations.

The fact that the Biden administration has not only continued but in some ways intensified Trumps policies has added to concern that the U.S. foreign-policy elite is now irrevocably committed to a confrontational approach to China. Thus, the Nations Michael Klare criticized Secretary of State Antony Blinken for lambasting the Chinese at his Anchorage meeting with his Chinese counterparts and stated that the U.S. Navys freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea were provocative maneuvers, despite The Hagues 2016 rejection of Beijings claims in those waters.

Were it really the case that America alone was to blame for U.S.-Chinese tensions, then one might expect to see other countries dissociate themselves from Washingtons apparently rash actions, either sitting on the sidelines or actively opposing U.S. policies. Instead, Beijing not only finds itself the target of a widening range of critics but in active disputes with a host of liberal nations.

From influence campaigns to hacking, from economic threats or coercion to the militarization of international waters, Beijing is increasingly exercising a might-makes-right foreign and security policy that is setting it against large parts of the world, independent of whatever is happening in U.S.-Chinese relations.

Perhaps the sharpest tensions are currently between Australia and China. Australia has been facing economic warfare from its biggest trading partner since it passed strict legislation starting in 2018 to block Chinese money from its domestic political system, ban Huawei from its 5G networks, and call for an international investigation into the origins of the coronavirus. Beijing hassince endedeconomic dialogue with Canberra and either banned or put damaging tariffs on billions of dollars of Australian products, including beef, wine, wood, and lobster. In response, Australian Foreign Minister Marise Paynecanceledtwo Belt and Road projects, and an Australian general warned of the high likelihood of armed conflict between the two countries.

Meanwhile, in the South China Sea, Philippine Foreign Secretary Teodoro Locsin Jr.toldBeijing to get the fuck out of the waters of what Manila calls the West Philippine Sea. The highly undiplomatic chastisement came after months of Chinese pressure at Whitsun Reef, with China at one point lashing hundreds of fishing vessels together in an attempt to intimidate Manila into surrendering the reef, la the successful 2012 takeover of Scarborough Shoal. Beijing has largely ignored the 2016 Hague Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling against Chinas claims in the South China Sea, continuing to send its fishing fleets and maritime forces into contested waters.

India remains on combat footing in the Himalayas, where Chinese forces regularlycrossthe so-called Line of Actual Control in strategic passes between Aksai Chin and Ladakh. Clashes there between forces of the two nuclear nations in the summer of 2020 led to the deaths of at least 20 Indian soldiers and an unknown number of Chinese. Indian commanders have stated that Chinese actions are the most aggressive since the 1962 border war between the two.

As for Japan, its air forcescrambledalmost 1,000 times in 2019 to counter Chinese incursions into airspace over the Senkaku Islands (known in China as the Diaoyu), while in 2020 Chinese vesselsenteredthe contested waters 333 times, forcing the Japanese coast guard and navy to respond. This continues a pattern of intimidation stretching back over a decade.

Even New Zealand, criticized by some in the West for being too hesitant to call out Chinese policies like the oppression of the Uyghurs or the crushing of Hong Kongs democracy, has started to change its tune. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern recently stated that it is becoming moredifficultto reconcile differences with China, its largest trading partner.

One can agree or disagree with Joe Bidens or Trumps China policy. Whats evident, though, is that other leading nations around the world are just as worried about Beijings threats to regional stability, freedom of navigation, domestic economic and political systems, democracy movements, and intellectual property. In short, whatever one thinks about U.S. policy, the problem does not lie simply with a Washington looking for a new enemy to fight. Rather, countries that share broadly liberal values believe based on their own assessments that Beijing is a threat in some degree to their way of life, too.

Given this environment, the new British desire to get more engaged in the Indo-Pacific is understandable, despite British Prime Minister Boris Johnsons statement that he is fervently Sinophile. His government, like others, now recognizes that it must deal with the China it has, not the China it wants.

In light of this reality, the more assertive policies of the Trump and Biden administrations make sense. In particular, the Quad alignment of the United States, Japan, India, and Australia has a particular utility in helping to forge a common security consensus among the leading liberal nations in the region. The Quad wont replace Americas defense alliances, but it can play a different type of role in promoting shared norms and cooperation.

The heads of state meeting of the Quadleaders this spring was an important milestone, but the participants need to begin discussing broader goals and the sensitive question of what kinds of joint actions they are willing to carry out that focus on security and stability. Given the tensions each of these countries has with China, the grouping likely will not be seen as anything other than anti-China. That, however, should not be an excuse to derail the coalition. The new commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, Adm. John Aquilino, will have an opportunity to help shape the next phase of the Quad initiative, working with the White Houses coordinator for Indo-Pacific affairs, Kurt Campbell.

Further, Washington and its Asian partners should consider how other, non-Asian nations concerned with regional stability may play a common role. Here, the French and British are the likeliest candidates. In addition to their dependence on open trade routes, the countries together have nearly millions of expatriate citizens or overseas dependents in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as territory stretching from the southern Indian Ocean to Oceania in the Pacific. Both have identified the Indo-Pacific as a key strategic concern; the French have released severalAsiastrategies, while the Britishemphasizedthe region in its recently concludedIntegrated Review.

No one will pretend that either Paris or London can play a role comparable to Washington, but neither should their interests be dismissed. With the British sending HMSQueen Elizabethto the region, and the French havingjoinedthe Quad nations in maritime exercises in April, these two nations have the potential to help buttress regular Quad activities and complement the more limited capabilities of the Japanese, Indians, and Australians.

In a number of important capitals in Asia and beyond, it appears that patience has run out with Beijing. No state is unaware of its economic ties with China nor the fact that the worlds second-most powerful nation will undoubtedly play a major global role. However, it is Beijings policies, not American nefariousness, that is causing an international reaction.

In response, a united front of both numbers and common interests is not an artificial creation but a natural evolution in response to Beijings actions. The world no longer needs to profess its goodwill in having tried for a half-century to integrate China into the global economic and political systems. The record of such efforts is clear, including repeatedly shying away from imposing any costs on Beijing for either predatory behavior or breaking agreements. Now, leading states are realizing that it is time to figure out how to defend both their interests and the broader community that has helped keep peace among the great powers since 1945.

Read the original:

US Allies Are Finally Rallying Around Washington's Assertive Stance on China - Foreign Policy