Category Archives: War On Drugs

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis and more, subscribe to Mother Jones' newsletters.

In mid-March, police officers barged into Breonna Taylors home in Louisville, Kentucky, in the middle of the night and discharged a spray of bullets that struck and killed the 26-year-old EMT. More than two months later, leaders in her city are taking steps to make it harder for officers to enter homes without knocking.

On Monday, Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer announced that the police chief will now have to sign off on all no-knock warrants, the type of search warrant officers obtained to enter Taylors home as part of a drug investigation. But its unlikely Taylor will be the last Black woman to lose her life as a result of these warrants: Research shows that Black and Latino people have long been disproportionately affected by these kinds of raids, and tens of thousands more will likely be targeted within the year.

They dont do this in other neighborhoods, Benjamin Crump, a civil rights attorney representing Taylors family, said in a press call last week. Crump has also represented the families of other Black shooting victims around the country, including Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, and Ahmaud Arbery. If this was another household in a more affluent community, lightning would strike and thunder would groan if such a warrant were issued, Crump said.

Taylor, 26, and her boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, were in bed when they heard the officers enter at around 12:40 a.m. on March 13. According to the search warrant, police believed a suspected drug dealer named Jamarcus Gloverwho did not live with Taylor and had already been arrested elsewherewas keeping drugs or money at her house.

Walker, thinking the plain-clothes officers were intruders, called 911. He then pulled out his gun and fired a shot at one officers leg. The officers responded with more than 20 rounds of bullets that sailed through the kitchen and living room, fatally striking Taylor eight times. Bullets also flew into an adjacent home, where a pregnant woman and a five-year-old child slept. The officers found no drugs on the premises. They promptly charged Walker with attempted murder.

Walker was a legally registered gun owner, and Kentuckys Stand Your Ground law allows people to use deadly force against an intruder at home. But the law doesnt apply when the intruder is a police officer who identifies himself as such. The Louisville officers claim that even with their no-knock warrant, they knocked and announced themselves before forcibly entering Taylors home. According to lawyers for her family, neighbors say they heard no knock.

Neither Taylor nor her boyfriend had a criminal record for drugs or violence, the lawyers say. In a lawsuit filed in late April, they accuse the police of negligence, excessive force, and wrongful death. Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear last week described reports of the killing as troubling and called for an investigation. Responding to Taylors death, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul told the Courier-Journal he thought no-knock warrants should be forbidden.

Historically, police officers executing a warrant were supposed to knock, announce themselves, and wait before entering a persons home. But in the 1970s and 80s, as the war on drugs ramped up, many officers argued that drug dealers would take advantage of the warning to destroy evidence or arm themselves. Judges began approving more no-knock warrants, along with quick-knock warrants, another type that requires officers to knock but allows them to barge inside seconds later. Around the country, no-knock and quick-knock drug searches surgedfrom around 3,000 in 1981 to at least 60,000 annually in recent years, according to Peter Kraska, a professor at Eastern Kentucky University who studies these raids. In many cities, its rare for a judge to deny an officers request for a no-knock warrant, partly because its easy to argue a suspect will be dangerous when you consider that 4 in 10 American adults live in a home with a gun.

As the number of raids increased, so did the toll on Black families. The war on drugs has always been predominantly prosecuted against minority communities, so the bulk of no-knock raids are executed against those same people, says Kraska.

The officers who killed Taylor wore plain clothes. Usually, no-knock raids are carried out by trained SWAT or drug tactical teams with military-grade gear. In 2014, researchers at the ACLUstudied more than 800 SWAT raids by law enforcement around the country. In total,they found that 42 percent of people affected by search-warrant raids were Black, and 12 percent were Latino.Nearly two-thirds of the raids were drug searches.Taken together, Black people and Latinos accounted for 61 percent of the people targeted by SWAT drug raids.And SWAT teams found contraband in only about a third of these cases, meaning that many innocent people were raided unnecessarily.

Others were killed or injured. In 2008,SWAT officers opened fire into the home of Tarika Wilson in Lima, Ohio. They were hunting for Wilsons boyfriend, a suspected drug dealer, but instead they fatally shot Wilson, who was cradling her 14-month-old son. (Bullets hit the baby in the left shoulder and hand, but he survived.) In 2014, Georgia police threw a grenade into the crib of a 19-month-old toddler during a SWAT raid, burning the boy so badly he was placed into a medically induced coma; the officers, who said they hadnt realized there were children in the home, were not charged.

In 2010, as portrayed in this Mother Jones investigation, Detroit police who entered the wrong apartment during a no-knock raid and killed 7-year-old Aiyana Stanley-Jones as she slept on the couch. Between 2010 and 2016, at least 81 civilians and 13 officers died in forcible-entry SWAT raids around the country, according to a New York Times report. And Kraska, the professor, has documented about 330 no-knock or quick-knock raids in the past two decades that led to a killing or serious injury. This is such an extreme, inherently risky, and violent approach, he says. It doesnt make any sense to use this highly militarized approach for potential low-level drug possession or low-level dealing.

While the Louisville police department will now require the police chiefs sign-off on no-knock raids, Kraska worries its a pretty meaningless attempt at reform because its contingent on the chiefs sensibilities. If you have a progressive police chief who is concerned about citizens wellbeing, thats a good idea, he says, but if you have a chief who thinks [raids] are the best way to fight the drug war, you could have a complete mess.

Mayor Fischer acknowledged that the policy change was just a first step. We know there needs to be more conversation on the use of these warrants, he said Monday. (Quick-knock warrants will still be allowed without the police chiefs approval.) He added that the police department would expand its use of body cameras, which had not been worn by the officers who killed Taylor.

It may not have been the kind of justice Taylors mom, Tamika Palmer, imagined for her daughter. I want them to say her name, Palmer said in a recent interview with the Washington Post. Palmer says Taylor was scheduled to work a hospital shift the morning after she was shot. Theres no reason Breonna should be dead at all.

Read more from the original source:

Breonna Taylor Is One of a Shocking Number of Black People to See Armed Police Barge Into Their Homes - Mother Jones

DONALD TRUMP launched a new vaccine war this week, but not against the virus. It was against the world. The US and Britain were the only two hold-outs in the World Health Assembly on the declaration that vaccines and medicines for Covid-19 should be available as public good, and not under exclusive patent rights.

Having badly botched his Covid-19 response, he is trying to redeem his electoral fortunes in the November elections this year by promising an early vaccine. Trumps Make America Great Again is vaccines for us, but the rest will have to queue up and pay what big pharma asks, as they will hold the patents.

In contrast, all other countries agreed with the Costa Rican proposal in the World Health Assembly that there should be a patent pool for all Covid-19 vaccines and medicines.

President Xi Jinping said that Chinese vaccines would be available as a public good, a view also shared by European Union leaders. Among the eight vaccines in phase 1 and 2 of clinical trials, the Chinese have four, the US two, Britain and Germany one each.

Trump has a given an ultimatum to the WHO of a permanent withdrawal of funds if it does not mend its ways in 30 days. In sharp contrast, almost all countries including close allies of the US rallied behind the WHO. The failure of the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) against Covid-19 with four times the annual budget of the WHO is visible to the world.

The CDC failed to provide a successful test for the SARS-CoV-2 even after two months of the WHO distributing successful test kits to a large number of countries. Trump has yet to hold his administration and the CDC responsible for this criminal bungling.

This, more than any other failure, is the reason that the US numbers for Covid-19 are now more than 1.5 million and about one-third of all global infections. Contrast this with China, the first to face an unknown epidemic, stopping it at 82,000 and what countries such as Vietnam and South Korea have done.

If we do not address the intellectual property rights issue in this pandemic, we are likely to see a repeat of the Aids tragedy. People died for 10 years as patented Aids medicine was priced at $10-15,000for a years supply, far beyond their reach.

Finally, it was Indian patent laws that till 2004 did not allow for such patents that helped people to get Aids medicine at less than a dollar a day, or $350 for a years supply. Today, 80 per cent of the Aids medicines in the world comefrom India. For big pharma, profits trumped lives, and they will continue to do so unless we change the world.

Most countries have compulsory licensing provisions that will allow them to break patents in case of epidemics or health emergencies. Even the WTO, after a bitter fight, accepted in its Doha Declaration (2001) that countries, in a health emergency, have the right to allow any company to manufacture a patented drug, and even import it from other countries.

Why is it then, that countries are unable to break patents, even if there are provisions in their laws and in the WTOs Trade Related Intellectual Property agreements (TRIPS)? It isUS bullying. Under US domestic trade actsit issues special reportsthreatening any country with trade sanctions that tries to compulsorily license any product.

India figures prominently each year, for daring to issue a compulsory license in 2012 to Natco for nexavar, a cancer drug which Bayer was selling for $65,000 a year.

Bayer CEO Marijn Dekkers was quoted widely saying that this was theft, and We did not develop this medicine for IndiansWe developed it for Western patients who can afford it.

This leaves unanswered how many people even in the West can afford a $65,000 bill for an illness. But there is no question that this would be a death sentence for anybody but the super rich in countries like India.

Though a number of other drugs were also under consideration for compulsory licensing at that time, India has not exercised this provision again after US threats.

It is the fear that countries can break patents using their compulsory licensing provisions that led to proposals for patent pooling.

The argument was that since many of these diseases do not affect rich countries, big pharma should either let go of their patents in such patent pools, or philanthropic capital should provide the additional funds for developing new drugs for this pool.

It is this idea of patent pooling that has been backed by all countries in WHA, barring the US and its loyal ally Britain.

While patent pooling is welcome if no other measure is available, it also makes it appear as if countries have no other recourse apart from the charity of big capital. What this hides, as charity always does, is that people and countries have legitimate rights even under TRIPS to break patents.

The US, which screams murder if a compulsory license is issued by any country, has no such compunction when its own interests are threatened. During the anthrax scare in 2001, the US secretary of health issued a threat to Bayer under eminent domain for patents, for licensing ciprofloxacin to other manufacturers.

Bayer folded, and agreed to supply the quantity and at a price that the US government was demanding without a whimper the same Bayer which considers India as a thief for issuing a compulsory licence.

The vaccines for Covid-19 might need to be repeated each year, as we still do not know the duration of its protection. It is unlikely that it will provide a lifetime immunity like the smallpox vaccine.

Unlike Aids, where the patient numbers were smaller and could be stigmatised in different ways, Covid-19 is a visible threat for everyone.

Any attempt to hold people and governments to ransom on Covid-19 vaccines or medicineswill see the collapse of the entire patent edifice of TRIPS that Big Pharma backed by the US and major EU countries have built. That is why the cleverer partsof the capitalist world moved towards a patent pool for Covid-19 medicines and vaccines.

Unlike clever capital, Trumps response on the Covid-19 vaccine is to simply bully his way through. He believes that with the unlimited money he is now willing to put into the vaccine efforts, the US would either beat everybody else to the winning postor buy the company that is successful.

If he succeeds, he can then use his Covid-19 vaccine as a new instrument of global power. It is the US that will then decide whether a country gets the vaccine.

Trump does not believe in a rule-based global order, even if the rules are in the favour of the rich. He is walking out of various arms control agreements and has crippled the WTO.

He believes that the US, as the biggest economy and the most powerful military power, should have the right to dictate to all countries. Threats of bombing and invasions can be combined with unilateral sanctions; and the latest in his imaginary arsenal, withholding vaccines.

His problem is the days of a sole global hegemon are long over. The US has shown itself as a crumbling giant and its epidemic response has been shambolic. It has been unable to provide virus tests to its people in time, and stop the epidemic, which a number of other countries have done.

China and the EU have already agreed that any vaccine developed by them will be regarded as public good. Even without that, once a medicine or a vaccine is known to be successful, any country with a reasonable scientific infrastructure can replicate the medicine or the vaccine, and manufacture it locally.

In India, as in many other countries, we have the scientific capability. We also have one of the largest generic drug and vaccine manufacturing capacities in the world.

What prevents us, or any country, from manufacturing vaccines or the drugs once they are developed? Only the empty threat of a failed hegemon on patents? Or the belief that in the US-China vaccine war, we need to be on the US side?

This article is adapted from Peoples Democracy http://www.peoplesdemocracy.in.

More:

The US has declared a vaccine war on the world - Morning Star Online

Published: 5/20/2020 6:20:10 AM

An estimated 1.7 million hospital patients acquire infections in the United States each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control, and 99,000 of them die.

That sobering data came to light before the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic, and it does not include lives lost to infections in doctors offices, nursing homes and assisted-living facilities. This year the number of deaths due to infections is expected to soar. Elderly people are particularly vulnerable, but there are reasons for hope.

To me one of the most compelling images of hope in America is something you see everywhere copper piping. There is a wealth of evidence about the attributes of copper, an antimicrobial metal, that could be used on hard surfaces in hospitals and other facilities to reduce the spread of infections.

Copper is a pretty miraculous material. Used on doorknobs and bed and IV frames and other hard surfaces, copper kills viruses, influenzas and bacteria like E.coli. When the coronavirus lands on most hard surfaces, it can live up to four or five days. But when it lands on copper or a copper alloy like brass, it begins to die within minutes, and is undetectable within hours. Copper disables viruses and bacteria, and it can drastically decrease the spread of infections.

The evidence of coppers value to public health is striking. A 2015 study compared infection rates at three hospitals and found that when copper alloys were used on fixtures, infection rates fell by 58%. Another study conducted the following year inside a pediatric intensive care unit showed a similar result.

Why do some health care facilities want to deny the advantages of copper and copper alloys? The cost of switching to copper fixtures would be negligible in comparison to the cost of lives lost.

Coppers antimicrobial properties were recognized long ago. Thats why copper is used for pipes that carry water into homes, because it kills viruses and bacteria that are resistant to drugs. The use of copper boomed during the 1920s when it became popular for fixtures in bathrooms and kitchens. But it was subsequently pushed out of many building applications by a wave of new (and cheaper) materials that were favored by architects and designers stainless steel, aluminum, tempered glass and plastics.

Now is the time to bring copper back. Increasing the use of antimicrobial surfaces wont eliminate the need for hand-washing and sanitary cleaning. But if recent history is any guide, the adoption of antimicrobial surfaces in hospitals and nursing homes could go a long way toward reducing infections and the spread of deadly pathogens.

(Virendra Mathur is professor emeritus in the Department of Chemical Engineering at the University of New Hampshire.)

More here:

My turn: Three cheers for copper in war on pandemics - Concord Monitor

Joe Biden became the presumptive Democratic nominee in the 2020 election by running as a moderate unifier, hoping to win over voters with the promise of business-as-usual politics from the pre-Trump era.

Now the COVID-19 pandemic has led him to rethink his platform of a return to the days of bipartisan consensus, and his campaign is seizing the opportunity to offer what the Los Angeles Times described as "bold change" on such issues as climate change, health care, social welfare, and infrastructure.

But it's worth remembering that in his 44 years in the Senate and then as vice president, Biden repeatedly took advantage of moments of crisis to push through policies that have exacerbated some of the most critical problems afflicting American society.

Biden has been a prominent figure in the bipartisan War on Drugs for decades, he helped the Clinton administration pass disastrous crime and immigration bills, he laid the foundation for the PATRIOT Act, he assisted the George W. Bush administration in making the case for the war in Iraq, and then as vice president he oversaw the deportation of a record number of people.

Aside from his policy record, several women have accused Biden of inappropriately touching them in public, and now his campaign is in crisis because of a sexual assault allegation by a former staffer.

But the terrible choice put forth by the two major parties in 2020 isn't just about sexual misconduct or character. Joe Biden's greatest political liability is his legacy as a lawmaker and vice presidenta legacy that laid the groundwork for the Trump administration's most draconian policies.

On crime, drugs, civil liberties, surveillance, immigration, and foreign policy, Biden's record serves as a cautionary tale about bipartisanship and "bold" thinking in response to perceived crises going all the way back to the '70s.

Produced, written, and edited by Justin Monticello. Graphics by Lex Villena and Austin Bragg. Research by Regan Taylor. Audio production by Ian Keyser.

Music: Cooper Cannell, Futuremono, Lex Villena, and The Whole Other.

Photos: Andrea Renault/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; AR4/Chris Connor/WENN/Newscom; ARCHIE CARPENTER/UPI/Newscom; Arnie SachsCNP/Newscom; Arnie SachsCNP/Sipa USA/Newscom; Arthur Grace/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Bastiaan Slabbers/Sipa USA/Newscom; Bill Clark/Roll Call Photos/Newscom; CD1/Carrie Devorah/WENN/Newscom; Chris Corder UPI Photo Service/Newscom; Chris Kleponis/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Chris Maddaloni/Roll Call/Newscom; Christopher Morris BlackStar Photos/Newscom; Dennis Brack bs20/Newscom; Dennis Brack/Black Star/Newscom; Dennis Brack/Newscom; Dennis Brack / DanitaDelimont.com "Danita Delimont Photography"/Newscom; Dennis Van Tine/MCT/Newscom; Douliery Olivier/ZUMA Press/Newscom; EDUARDO JARAMILLO Notimex/Newscom; ERIN SCHAFF/UPI/Newscom; Everett Collection/Newscom; FILE PHOTO/Roll Call Photos/Newscom; GREG WHITESELL /UPI/Newscom; GREG WHITESELL /UPI/Newscom; Howard L. SachsCNP/Newscom; Jack Kurtz-POOL/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Jack Kurtz UPI Photo Service/Newscom; John J. Kim/TNS/Newscom; KEVIN DIETSCH/UPI/Newscom; Larry Downing/CNP/AdMedia/Newscom; Lora Olive/ZUMA Press/Newscom; MANNIE GARCIA/REUTERS/Newscom; Mark Reinstein/ZUMA Press/Newscom; MARTIN H. SIMON/UPI/Newscom; MATTHEW HEALEY/UPI/Newscom; Michael Brochstein/Sipa USA/Newscom; Michael Kleinfeld UPI Photo Service/Newscom; MIKE THEILER/REUTERS/Newscom; NATALIE KREBS/UPI/Newscom; PAT BENIC/UPI/Newscom; Pat Benic/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Pete Souza/UPI/Newscom; Ricardo Watson UPI Photo Service/Newscom; Riccardo Savi/Polaris/Newscom; Richard Ellis/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Rick D'Elia/ZUMA Press/Newscom; ROGER L. WOLLENBERG/UPI/Newscom; Roger L. Wollenberg UPI Photo Service/Newscom; Ron SachsCNP/Newscom; Ron Sachs/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Saul LoebPool via CNP/Newscom; Scott J. Ferrell/Congressional Quarterly/Newscom; Scranton Times-Tribune/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; SplashNews/Newscom; SMG/ZUMA Press/Newscom; ST / Splash News/Newscom; STEVE DESLICH/KRT/Newscom; Steve W Grayson. UPI Photo Service/Newscom; Steve Wursta UPI Photo Service/Newscom; TOM PENNINGTON/KRT/Newscom; Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom; Tom Williams/Roll Call Photos/Newscom; Tom Williams/Roll Call/Newscom; WASHINGTON POOL/SIPA/Newscom; White House/SIPA/Newscom; WILL POWERS/UPI/Newscom

Read the original:

Joe Biden's 'Bold' Thinking Shredded Civil Liberties and Destroyed Lives - Reason

US President Donald Trump launched a new vaccine war this week, but not against the virus. It was against the world. The US and UK were the only two hold-outs in the World Health Assembly on the declaration that vaccines and medicines for COVID-19 should be available as public good, and not under exclusive patent rights. The US explicitly disassociated from the patent pool call, talking instead of the critical role that intellectual property plays in other words, patents for vaccines and medicines. Having badly botched his COVID-19 response, Trump is trying to redeem his electoral fortunes in the November elections this year by promising an early vaccine. His Make America Great Again is vaccines for us, but the rest will have to queue up and pay what big pharma asks, as they will hold the patents.

In contrast, all other countries agreed that with the Costa Rican proposal in the World Health Assembly that there should be a patent pool for all COVID-19 vaccines and medicines. President Xi Jinping said that Chinese vaccines would be available as public good, a view also shared by leaders from the European Union. Among the eight vaccine candidates in Phase1 and 2 of clinical trials, the Chinese have four, the US two, and UK and Germany have one each.

Trump has a given an ultimatum to the World Health Organisation (WHO) regarding a permanent withdrawal of funds, if it does not mend its ways in 30 days. In sharp contrast, in the Assembly, almost all countries including close allies of the US, rallied behind the WHO. The failure of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) against COVID-19, with four times the annual budget of the WHO, is visible to the world. The CDC failed to provide a successful test for the SARS-CoV-2 even after two months of the WHO distributing successful test kits to more than 120 countries. Trump has yet to hold his administration and the CDC responsible for this criminal bungling. This, more than any other failure, is the reason that the US numbers for COVID-19 cases are now more than 1.5 million, and about a third of all global infections. Contrast this with China, the first to face an unknown epidemic which stopped it at 82,000 cases and what countries such as Vietnam and South Korea have done.

There is one issue looming large over the COVID-19 pandemic now. If we do not address the intellectual property rights issue in this pandemic, we are likely to see a repeat of the AIDS tragedy. People died for ten years as patented AIDS medicine was priced at between 10,000 to 15,000 dollars for a years supply, far beyond their reach. Finally, it was Indian patent laws that, till 2004, did not allow for such patents, helping people to get AIDS medicine at less than a dollar a day, or $350 for a years supply. Today, 80% of the AIDS medicines in the world comes from India. For big pharma, profits trumped lives, and they will continue to do so, Covid or no Covid, unless we change the world.

Most countries have compulsory licensing provisions that will allow them to break patents in case of epidemics or health emergencies. Even the World Trade Organisation (WTO), after a bitter fight, accepted in its Doha Declaration (2001), that countries in a health emergency have the right to allow any company to manufacture a patented drug, and even import it from other countries.

Why is it then, that countries are unable to break patents, even if there are provisions in their laws and in the TRIPS Agreement? It is US bullying and the fear of the country. Under US domestic Trade Act, it issues Special ReportsUSTR 301threatening any country with trade sanctions that tries to compulsorily license any product. India figures prominently each year, for daring to issue a compulsory license in 2012 to Natco Pharma for Nexavar, a cancer drug, which Bayer AG was selling for $65,000 a year. Marijn Dekkers, the CEO of Bayer, was widely quoted saying that this was theft, and We did not develop this medicine for IndiansWe developed it for western patients who can afford it.

This leaves unanswered how many people, even in the west, can afford a $65,000 bill for an illness. But there is no question that this would be a death sentence for anybody but the super rich in countries like India. Though a number of other drugs were under also consideration for compulsory licensing at the time, India has not exercised this provision again after US threats.

It is the fear that countries can break patents using their compulsory licensing provisions that led to proposals for patent pooling. The argument was that since many of these diseases do not affect rich countries, big pharma should either let go of their patents to such patent pools, or philanthropic capital should provide the additional funds for developing new drugs for adding to this pool. It is this idea of patent pooling that was backed by all countries in the recent World Health Assembly, WHA-73, barring the US and its loyal camp follower, the UK. The US also entered its disagreement with the final WHA resolution on this issue.

While patent pooling is welcome if no other measure is available, it also makes it appear as if countries have no other recourse aside from charity by big capital. What this hides, as charity always does, is that people and countries have legitimate rights, even under TRIPS, to break patents.

The US, which screams murder if compulsory license is issued by any country, has no such compunction when its own interests are threatened. During the anthrax scare in 2001, the US Secretary of Health issued a threat to Bayer under eminent domain for patents, for licensing ciprofloxacin to other manufacturers. Bayer folded, and agreed to supply the quantity and at a price that the US government demanded for. And, without a whimper. Yes, the same Bayer, which considers India a thief for issuing a compulsory license!

The vaccines for COVID-19 might need to be repeated each year, as we still do not know the duration of its protection. It is unlikely that it will provide lifetime immunity like the Smallpox vaccine. Unlike AIDS, where patient numbers were smaller, and could be stigmatised in different ways, COVID-19 is a visible threat for everyone. Any attempt to hold people and governments to ransom on COVID-19 vaccines or medicines, could see the collapse of the entire patent edifice of TRIPS that big pharma, backed by the US and major EU countries, have built. It is why the more clever of the capitalist world have moved towards a patent pool for COVID-19 medicines and vaccine.

Unlike clever capital, Trumps response to the COVID-19 vaccine is to simply bully his way through. He believes that with unlimited money that he is now willing to put into the vaccine efforts, the US would either beat everybody else to the winning post, or buy the company that is successful. If he succeeds, he can then use his COVID-19 vaccine as a new instrument of global power. It is the US that will then decide which countries get the vaccine, and which ones do not.

Trump does not believe in a rule-based global order, even if the rules are biased in the favour of the rich. He is walking out of various arms control agreements and has crippled the WTO. He believes that the US, as the biggest economy and the most powerful military power, should have the untrammelled right to dictate to all countries. Threats of bombing and invasions can be combined with unilateral sanctions; and the latest in his imaginary arsenal, is withholding vaccines.

His problem is that the days of a sole global hegemon are long over. The US has shown itself as a crumbling giant and its epidemic response has been shambolic. It has been unable to provide virus tests to its people in time, and failed to stop the epidemic through containment or mitigation measures, which a number of other countries have done.

China and the EU have already agreed that any vaccine developed by them will be regarded as public good. Even without that, once a medicine or a vaccine is known to be successful, any country with a reasonable scientific infrastructure can replicate the medicine or the vaccine, and manufacture it locally. India, as many other countries, has the scientific capability. We also have one the largest generic drug and vaccine manufacturing capacities in the world. What prevents us, or any country for that matters, from manufacturing vaccines or the drugs once they are developed? Only the empty threat of a failed hegemon on breaking patents? Or the belief that in the US-China vaccine war, they need to be on the US side?

Original post:

US Declares Vaccine War on the World - NewsClick

Now Playing100 Best Shows: The Best Streaming Shows

June is visible off in the distance, so it's time to start planning out your Netflix queue for the next month. You plan what you're going to watch a month in advance, right? It's not just us? Good. Save these titles for when they release, so you have something to look forward to. Highlights among Netflix's movie and series offerings this month include the return of The Silence of the Lambs to the streaming service, Spike Lee's Vietnam heist movie Da 5 Bloods, two movies starring Edgar Ramirez, and much more.

For a complete menu of options, check out the full list of of everything that's coming to Netflix in June 2020. You can also examinewhat's coming to Hulu in June. If you're looking for even more hand-picked recommendations, take a look at out Watch This Now! page, which has everything we're watching.

Premieres: June 1/June 5June is Hannibal Lector Month on Netflix! Thomas Harris' gentleman cannibal is at the center of these classics, which are among the best movies and shows of their respective decades. The Silence of The Lambs follows FBI agent Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster) as she tries to catch a serial killer known as Buffalo Bill (Ted Levine); while the series Hannibal is about a younger version the man-eating psychiatrist (Mads Mikkelsen) and his psychosexual relationship with FBI profiler Jack Graham (Hugh Dancy). You can't go wrong with either of them.

Premieres:June 5It's a tough call to say which movie has the cooler title, this orDa 5 Bloods, but I have to give the edge to The Last Days of American Crime. In this wild-ass graphic novel adaptation, career criminal Edgar Ramirez assembles a team to carry out one last heist before the government starts broadcasting a signal that makes it impossible for anyone to knowingly commit unlawful acts. It's a "one last job" action flick where the last job really is the last job. (Trailer)

Premieres: June 12The latestSpike Leejoint follows four black Vietnam vets Paul (Delroy Lindo), Otis (Clarke Peters), Eddie (Norm Lewis), and Melvin (Isiah Whitlock Jr.) who go back to the country in search of the remains of their squad leader (Chadwick Boseman)...and buried treasure. It's a Vietnam epic like only Spike Lee could do. (Trailer)

Premieres: June 12 Season 2 of this fly-on-the-wall dating show will make you nostalgic for when it was possible to go to restaurants, kiss, or imagine a future. Six new singles will go on dates in New Orleans, and we will watch them. Who will get a second date, and who will drunkenly yell at a woman about how she's a liar and walk out? (no trailer yet)

Premieres: June 12This Polish series is the latest Netflix adaptation of a book by Harlan Coben, following the popular mysteriesThe StrangerandSafe, and stays in those same murky waters of crime and secrets, oh so many secrets! InThe Woods, a man looks for answers about the disappearance of his sister 25 years earlier, when four teens went into the woods and never came out, hoping that she's alive even as bodies and new evidence are being pulled out. -Tim Surette (Trailer)

Premieres: June 19 Acclaimed director Olivier Assayas helms this espionage thriller that's based on a true story about Cuban spies infiltrating exile groups in the 1990s to stop terrorism against the island, at great personal cost to themselves and their families. The glamorous cast includes Penelope Cruz, Wagner Moura, Gael Garcia Bernal, Ana de Armas, and Edgar Ramirez again. (no trailer yet)

Premieres: June 23 Eric Andre, who your weird nephew would argue is the greatest comedian in the world, does his first Netflix special from New Orleans, Louisiana. He's against the War on Drugs, the War on Sex, and the War on Fart Jokes. And there definitely is a War on Fart Jokes. (no trailer yet)

Want to know what else is coming to Netflix? Here's everything that we know is coming to Netflix in 2020.

Read the rest here:

These Are the Best Movies and TV Shows Coming to Netflix in June - TV Guide

Ilana Tel-Oren May 21st, 2020 - 1:31 PM

Kurt Vile and Cate Le Bon originally planned on touring this spring, but their spring tour has been pushed into late summer due to Covid-19. The tour, initially set to begin on April 8 in Chicago, now kicks off on August 21 in Los Angeles at the stunning and historic Theatre at Ace Hotel in Downtown. The flyer boasts that Vile and Le Bon will perform both together and solo withWarpaint drummer Stella Mozgawa and Stephen Black, aka Sweet Baboo, who also performs in Cate Le Bons band.

Vile is known for his collaborative work with artists such as Courtney Barnett and Steve Gunn, his seven solo albums and for being the co-founder and former lead guitarist for the indie rock band The War on Drugs. Hes been known to blend genres like folk, country, psychedelia and indie rock, creating a retro feel to his sound. His latest album Bottle It Inwas released in 2018 and features contributions from Kim Gordon, Cass McCombs, Stella Mozgawa of Warpaint, and Mary Lattimore.

Welsh musician Cate Le Bon will join Vile on tour, coming off a stunning 2019 album release with Reward.Together, Vile and Le Bon should make for a performance and tour not to be missed!

Location: The Theatre at Ace Hotel

Address:929 S Broadway, Los Angeles, CA 90015

Tickets available starting at $25

Photo Credit: Stephen Hoffmeister

Continue reading here:

Kurt Vile and Cate Le Bon come together on 8/21 at the Theatre at Ace Hotel - mxdwn.com

TWO months of lockdown have put the Philippine justice system under more stress and farther away from the reach of ordinary citizens.

Lawyers from the multisectoral network Courts Appointments Watch PH pointed to illegal or warrantless arrests, maltreatment of quarantine violators, transgression of labor laws, and a crackdown on free expression during a webinar titled Access to Justice Under a Pandemic Crisis on Wednesday, May 19.

Lack of legal information and access to the complex and formalistic judicial system has long been a problem for the poor and those in far-flung areas, said lawyer Sheila Formento of Alternative Law Groups (ALG).

In 2017, the Philippines had 2,200 courts, equivalent to just one court for every 50,000 people, according to figures submitted to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

That same year, one prosecutor handled an average 166 cases and disposed of 145 cases, according to the National Prosecution Service. At the Public Attorneys Office, which serves indigent litigants, each lawyer handled 465 cases in 2018.Courts constrained

Posting bail for detainees became particularly difficult, even for those with money, because of limited court operations during the lockdown.

Even those who scraped up money for bail ay nahirapan pa rin makapagpiyansa dahil sa dami ng requirements at nahihirapan din magbayad, said lawyer Jose Manuel 'Chel'Diokno of the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG).

(Even those who scraped up money for bail had a hard time because of so many requirements. It was also difficult to make payments.)

In some areas, bail could only be paid through state-owned Land Bank of the Philippines. Some branches were open just three times a week and for only half a day. Interbranch payments, ATM, and online banking services were not accepted.

In just a month after the enhanced community quarantine (ECQ) was enforced, the Philippine National Police (PNP) arrested 31,363 individuals, 2,467 of which were still in detention. Police filed 24,248 cases of quarantine violations.

These cases were on top of the arrests and killings under the war on drugs, which continued despite the lockdown.

Dahil sa limitadong operasyon ng mga korte, 'yung mga pending na kaso ay lalong made-delay at dahil madadagdagan pa ng mgaviolation ng ECQ, mas lalo pa itong dadami, Formento said.

(Because of limited operations of the courts, pending cases will be further delayed, and the case loads will swell as violations of the ECQ pile up.)

Food or bail money?

Lawyers from the multisectoral network said unchecked abuses and human rights violations by law enforcers, as well as delays in the resolution of cases, have contributed to growing distrust in the judicial system among the poor and disadvantaged.

In many communities, the choice was either to post bail or go hungry, and the poor would rather spend their money on food and other necessities than file a case against abusers, ALG said.

Online initiatives to help to those in need, including remote legal advice and electronic filing of cases and bail petitions, were hampered by poor internet connection in far-flung communities and even in urban poor areas, it said.

The group has developed information materials on individual rights at checkpoints and during arrests, as well as on court procedures and other relevant issuances.

Isang malaking hamon ang ibinigay ng pandemic na ito sa ating justice system. Bagamat may kakulangan sa pasilidad at sa kahandaan ng organisasyon, dapat siguraduhing ang hustisya ay gumugulong para sa lahat. Kailangan ng pagmamatyag nating lahat na siguruhin ito, Formento said.

(The pandemic is a big challenge to our justice system. Even if theres a lack of facilities and organizational preparedness, the wheels of justice need to turn for everyone. We have to keep watch to make sure of that.)

Unwarranted arrests

Diokno said the pandemic further underscored lingering issues such as abuse of power, human rights violations, lack of access to the justice system, overcrowded jails and detention centers, lack of accountability, weaponization of the law, and impunity.

He cited instances when rules on warrantless arrests were not observed during the quarantine.

By law, warrantless arrests are allowed only in three situations: 1) when the crime is committed in the presence of police or in flagrante delicto, 2) when in hot pursuit based on personal knowledge of who committed the crime and 3) when arresting escaped prisoners.

Unfortunately, the power to arrest without warrant has been, in my opinion, misused, said Diokno.

Warrantless arrests have been used against people over jokes, memes, satires, and even legitimate opinions and speech on social media.

In Cebu, Bambi Beltran was arrested for posting a satirical Facebook status, and the Zambales teacher Ronnel Mas, who posted a reward to kill President Duterte on Twitter, was brought to Manila under questionable circumstances.

This pandemic has exposed the flaws in our justice system, said Diokno.

Diokno also said it was not unusual to hear of a poor person being arrested for a simple quarantine violation and then detained for more than 20 days.

FLAG also received reports that some detainees were beaten up in crowded jails, where social distancing was next to impossible, he said. (Seerelated story: Philippine Jails are a Covid-19 Time Bomb)

Labor rights take the backseat

Job security and labor rights have also suffered as workers bore the brunt of business losses due to the lockdown, said Marco Gojol of National Union of Workers in Hotel, Restaurant and Allied Industries-Sentro (Nuwhrain-Sentro).

Gojol said many companies were poised to let go of employees with losses mounting due to extended closures. Many companies were unable to get government subsidies, he said.

Ang isa sa pinakamalaking issues na kinakaharap ng workers ngayon ay income loss. Maraming kumpanya ang napilitang itigil ang operasyon at apektado ang maramingno-work, no-pay (na mga manggagawa), Gojol said.

(One of the big issues faced by workers is income loss. Many companies have been forced to stop operations and workers in no-work, no-pay arrangements have been affected.)

Many employers avoided stoppage by shifting to alternative modes of work, such as work-from-home and skeletal operations, but regular employees were prioritized over contractual employees, Gojol said.

In areas under the less restrictive general community quarantine, employees had a hard time going to work because of lack of public transportation. Safety remained a question mark in the absence of mass testing for the coronavirus disease, he said.

Moreover, union-busting did not stop during the pandemic, and some workers were dismissed for demanding safe workplaces and protocols, Gojol said.

Gojol said food and beverage workers from the Sentro labor centerfiled a notice of strike due to lack of safety protocols in their workplace on May 18. The notice was received but not docketed by the National Conciliation and Mediation Board, whose operations were put on standstill by the pandemic.

Gojol called on justice system stakeholders to help the labor sector find ways to protect the fundamental rights of workers amid the Covid-19 outbreak.

He cited the Department of Labor and Employments Advisory 17, which encouraged workers and employees to negotiate temporary adjustments to wages and other benefits.

Habang may pandemya, inevitable ang labor-management disputes. Paano ia-address ng mga parties ang issues ngayong new normal at paano magwo-work iyong mgadispute resolution mechanisms in this situation? Gojol said.

(Labor-management disputes are inevitable during the pandemic. How will the parties address these issues during the new normal and how will dispute resolution mechanisms work in this situation?)

Media, free expression under threat

Karol Ilagan of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism said truth-telling and holding government to account have become even more important during the pandemic.

The crisis is transforming the business of journalism from gathering information, reporting, research to production, publishing and broadcast. It comes at a time when our role in disseminating reliable and verifiable information and holding power to account has never been more critical, she said.

The governments pandemic response, however, has been accompanied by threats to press freedom, freedom of expression, and journalists safety. Some of these measures were meant, ostensibly, to stem the spread of disinformation, Ilagan said.

Ilagan cited the provision penalizing fake news in the Bayanihan to Heal as One Act, which has been weaponized to punish or stifle dissenting voices, especially those on social media.

According to a report published by the Freedom for Media, Freedom for All netowrk, at least 60 individuals have been charged by government officials on the basis of this provision of the pandemic response law. (See related story:Journalists Struggle to Cover the Pandemic as Space for Media Freedom Shrinks)

In a jab against press freedom, ABS-CBN, the countrys biggest media network, was shut down on May 5 as lawmakers allowed its broadcast license to expire under pressure from the Duterte government.

The shutdown has deprived Filipinos of access to information during the pandemic, and has jeopardized the livelihood of 11,000 network employees.

The Philippine Press Institute said over half of its members had ceased printing due to economic losses, and layoffs were expected in the next few months across media companies. ABS-CBN has said it would be forced to lay off workers by August without a new franchise.

Reporters and newsrooms are under intense pressure during this pandemic, which is arguably the most complex story that we can cover right now. At stake is the publics right to know at a time when the stakes are even higher, Ilagan said.

While information about the pandemic has been made available online by various government agencies, access to other information about the inner workings of government has generally been delayed, she said.

The Presidential Communications Operations Office for a time has ordered the suspension of responding to Freedom of Information (FOI) requests during the quarantine period. Not all agencies cater to FOI requests, resulting in longer waiting times and delays for journalists looking for stories during the pandemic.

Bright spots still in sight

Ilagan said collaboration was key to tackling the difficulties and challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic as media and other stakeholders seek transparency and accountability in the legal system and the government.

If we are to talk about solutions, there should be a concerted effort, particularly with the spread of disinformation. Alam nating aggressive ang nagpapakalat nito. We have to be more vigilant in providing verified and reliable info. And we have to work extra hard kasi nahihirapan tayo to do our job given the practical limitations, Ilagan said.

Ria Nadora of the Association of Law Students of the Philippines urged the public to join in the national discourse for improved access to the justice system by using online spaces and social media.

Not being silent about the matter helps in its own little way, Nadora said.

Lyceum of the Philippines law dean Ma. Soledad Deriquito-Mawis, past president and chairpersonof the Philippine Association of Law Schools, was optimistic of the solutions discussed during the webinar.

This pandemic was not able to put a curse on our spirit in defending our freedoms and fighting for our rights. This pandemic did not put to sleep the Filipino spirit, Mawis said.

Excerpt from:

Access to PH Justice System Suffers Amid the Lockdown - Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism

The Cambodian governments three-year long war on drugs campaign has fuelled a rising tide of human rights abuses, dangerously overfilled detention facilities and led to an alarming public health situation even more so as the COVID-19 pandemic unfolds while failing in its stated objective of curbing drug use, a new investigative report by Amnesty International published today reveals.The new 78-page report, Substance abuses: The human cost of Cambodias anti-drug campaign, documents how the authorities prey on poor and marginalized people, arbitrarily carry out arrests, routinely subject suspects to torture and other forms of ill-treatment, and dispatch those who cant buy their freedom to severely overcrowded prisons and pseudo rehabilitation centres in which detainees are denied healthcare and are subjected to severe abuse.

Cambodias war on drugs is an unmitigated disaster it rests upon systematic human rights abuses and has created a bounty of opportunities for corrupt and poorly-paid officials in the justice system.

Cambodias war on drugs is an unmitigated disaster it rests upon systematic human rights abuses and has created a bounty of opportunities for corrupt and poorly-paid officials in the justice system, while doing nothing for public health and safety, said Nicholas Bequelin, Regional Director at Amnesty International. Cambodias Prime Minister, Hun Sen, launched his anti-drugs campaign in January 2017, just weeks after a state visit by Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, during which the two leaders pledged to cooperate in combatting drugs. According to government officials, the campaign aims to reduce drug use and related harms in Cambodia, including by arresting people who use drugs en masse. As recently as March 2020, Interior Minister Sar Kheng called for legal action against all drug addicts and dealers in small-scale drug use and distribution cases.Yet, like the Philippines so-called war on drugs, this campaign is rife with egregious human rights violations that are disproportionately affecting poor and marginalized people irrespective of whether or not they use drugs.Using abusive approaches to punish people who use drugs is not only wrong, it is utterly ineffective. It is high time that Cambodian authorities heed the widely available scientific evidence showing that all-punitive law enforcement campaigns simply exacerbate social harms, said Nicholas Bequelin.

In the course of its investigation Amnesty International spoke to dozens of victims of Cambodias inhumane anti-drugs campaign. They described being subjected to two parallel systems of punishment: some were arbitrarily detained without charge in drug detention centres, while others were convicted through the criminal justice system and sent to prison.

Their testimonies reveal a remarkable consistency in violations of due process leading to peoples detention, and no coherent method in determining whether people are either criminally prosecuted or sent to drug detention centres. Individual police officers who are sometimes influenced by bribes have significant discretion to determine peoples fate.

They asked me how many times I sold drugs The police officer said if I didnt confess, he would use the taser on me again.

The case of 38-year-old Sopheap shows the arbitrary nature of the campaign. She started using methamphetamine occasionally in early 2017. Six months later, in October 2017, she was arrested in a drugs raid along with her two 16- and 17-year old neighbours.

There were no more drugs left when the police came, only a bottle, a lighter and other paraphernalia lying around, she explained. They said they would send us to a rehabilitation centre but they actually sent us to the court, and then to the prison.

Many people described how they were detained as a result of police raids on poor neighbourhoods or city beautification sweeps that leave people who are poor, homeless, and struggling with drug dependence especially at risk of arrest.

Sreyneang, a 30-year-old woman from Phnom Penh, told Amnesty International how she was tortured following her arbitrary arrest during a drugs raid in Phnom Penh: They asked me how many times I sold drugs The police officer said if I didnt confess, he would use the taser on me again.

Those subjected to criminal prosecution consistently described legal processes which made a mockery of fair trial rights, including convictions based on flimsy and inadequate evidence and summary trials conducted in the absence of defence lawyers. Many accused people had a very limited understanding of their rights, putting them at even greater risk of human rights violations.

One interviewee, Vuthy, was only 14 at the time of his arrest. After being arrested in a drugs raid, he was beaten by several police officers and charged with drug trafficking. He described his investigation and trial: I didnt understand the process and what the different court visits meant. The first time I understood what was happening was when they told me my prison sentence. Nobody ever asked me if I had a lawyer or gave me one.

The campaign, which continues to this day, was initially presented as a six-month operation starting in January 2017. It is the leading cause in Cambodias current crisis of severe overcrowding in prisons and other detention facilities.

This overcrowding crisis is causing serious violations of the right to health of people deprived of their liberty. It often amounts to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment under international human rights law.

By March 2020, the nationwide prison population had skyrocketed by 78% to over 38,990 people since the campaigns start. Cambodias largest prison facility, Phnom Penhs CC1, exceeded 9,500 prisoners nearly five times its estimated capacity of 2,050.

This situation should have led the authorities to urgently ease extreme overcrowding in the countrys detention centres amid the COVID-19 pandemic, including by releasing all those held without an adequate legal basis such as people held in drug detention centres and by pursuing parole, early or conditional release, and other alternative non-custodial measures for prisoners, especially those most at risk of COVID-19.

Maly described how she and her one-year-old daughter were held in Phnom Penhs CC2 prison: It was so hard to raise my daughter inside. She wanted to move around, she wanted more space, she wanted to see the outside. She wanted freedom She often got fever and flu. Because we had no space, my child normally slept on top of my body.

While the total population in Cambodias drug detention centres is not publicized, all testimonies obtained by Amnesty International suggest that overcrowding inside these centres is just as severe as inside prisons.

All detention facilities are at high risk of major outbreaks of COVID-19, and many detainees have pre-existing conditions such as HIV and tuberculosis that put them at increased risk. Long, a former CC1 inmate, told Amnesty International: If one person got a respiratory infection, within a few days everyone in the cell got it. It was a breeding ground for illness.

Exclusive video footage from inside a Cambodian prison, published by Amnesty International last month, showed extreme overcrowding and inhumane conditions of detention. In response, a spokesman for the prisons department conceded that every day is like a ticking time bomb for a COVID-19 outbreak in detention facilities.

Yet, to date, the Cambodian authorities have failed to take any action to reduce the prison population, even as regional neighbours including Thailand, Myanmar and Indonesia have released tens of thousands of people in detention who are at risk, including people held on drug-related charges.

Although drug detention centres claim to provide treatment for people with drug dependence, in practice they operate as sites of abuse. Every individual interviewed by Amnesty International provided detailed accounts of physical abuse amounting to torture or other ill-treatment committed by centre staff or so-called room leaders inmates entrusted by staff to enforce discipline.

As soon as the guard left, the room leader started to beat me. I was knocked unconscious so I cant remember what happened after that.

Thyda, who was held in the Orkas Khnom drug detention centre in Phnom Penh during 2019, told Amnesty International: This [violence] happened to everyone and it was normal. Violence like this was part of the daily routine; part of their programme.

Another, Sarath, described his first day in a drug detention centre, where he was sent at the age of 17: As soon as the guard left, the room leader started to beat me. I was knocked unconscious so I cant remember what happened after that.

Drug detention centres have also been dogged by reports of sexual violence and deaths in custody. Amnesty Internationals investigation uncovered multiple new allegations of such deaths. Phanith, a former room leader, told Amnesty International how he witnessed an inmate chained by the hands and the feet so that he could not move around. And the building leader beat him like that until he died.

Time to end punitive approaches to people who use drugs

The Cambodian authorities hard-line approach to people who use drugs has failed in its primary aim of reducing drug use and related harms, and instead created a catastrophic public health and human rights crisis for the countrys poorest and most at-risk populations.

Yet there are clear, evidence-based alternatives. International drug policy has shifted in recent years and led to sweeping reforms in favour of evidence-based alternatives that better protect public health and human rights, including the decriminalization of use and possession of drugs for personal use. The Cambodian Ministry of Health has recently taken some tentative steps in the right direction by increasing the availability of evidence-based treatment in community settings.

However, it is essential that all compulsory drug detention centres be shut down promptly and permanently. People detained there must be released immediately with sufficient provisions of health and social services made available to them.

In Cambodia, and across the world, the so-called war on drugs has failed. But there are clear alternatives based on scientific evidence that better protect human rights.

Moreover, the Cambodian authorities should move without delay towards implementing the measures they committed to at the UN Human Rights Council in 2019, in order to put in place a new drug policy that shifts away from prohibition and fully protects the rights of people who use drugs and other affected communities.

In Cambodia, and across the world, the so-called war on drugs has failed. But there are clear alternatives based on scientific evidence that better protect human rights. The Cambodian authorities must consign the abusive policies of arbitrary detention and criminalization to history and embrace a compassionate and effective new era of drug policy, said Nicholas Bequelin.

View original post here:

Rife with torture and corruption, Cambodia must overhaul its "war on drugs" - Amnesty International

We are at war. So declared Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organization, three months into the fight against the novel coronavirus. If nothing else, its a sentiment President Donald Trump and the head of the WHO wholeheartedly agree on. And so do many other world leaders.

Especially when it comes to the mobilization of resources, war may be an appropriate analogy for fighting a pandemic such as COVID-19. But its ultimate defeat will be nothing like a military victory and will require the kind of extensive global cooperation that is more associated with keeping peace than fighting wars.

From Lyndon Johnsons War on Poverty and Richard Nixons War on Cancer to Ronald Reagans War on Drugs and George W. Bushs War on Terror, theres a long history of American presidents resorting to the language of war to mobilize action against major challenges and threats.

Trump was late to use the language of war, but once the extent of COVID-19s destruction became too hard to ignore, he fully embraced it. The world is at war with a hidden enemy, Trump tweeted in mid-March. WE WILL WIN, he reassured Americans. He depicted the foreign virus as an Invisible Enemy, and saw America as being on a wartime footing and himself as the wartime president. He called Americans warriors and urged them to defend against an attack that was worse than Pearl Harbor worse than the World Trade Center attack on 9/11.

Among other world leaders whove cast the fight against the virus as a war, President Xi Jinping called on the Chinese people to mobilize for a peoples war. Beijings propaganda machine touted Xi as the Peoples Leader commanding the decisive battle. And those citizens who had fallen to the disease were described as the wars martyrs.

In Europe, too, leaders have resorted to martial language. President Emmanuel Macron declared France was at war against an enemy that is invisible, elusive. In Britain, Prime Minister Boris Johnson, himself temporarily felled by the disease, has invoked Winston Churchill and the spirit of the Blitz, urging Britons to directly enlist in the fight while reassuring them they would come through it stronger than ever.

The language of war can be used to bring a nation together in common cause, to mobilize resources for the fight, to underscore the need for sacrifice and to force early and effective action. When it comes to dealing with a pandemic, all these efforts are necessary.

But they are not enough. A virus, though deadly, is not like an enemy in war. While it attacks through physical interaction, the attacker is as likely to be a spouse, a child or a parent, as someone unknown to us. It can be countered through physical separation, but it will only be defeated through outside medical intervention.

Finding a treatment or vaccine is nothing like fighting a war. It requires widespread, global cooperation among scientists to research, discover and test possible drugs and then to manufacture, distribute and deliver them all across the globe. And victory comes not from a single battle or even from the viruss defeat in one nation or region. It only comes from its defeat everywhere. When it comes to a pandemic, no one is safe until everyone is safe.

Many understand this need for cooperation. Last week, leaders from around the world connected virtually to pledge their support and more than $8 billion to fund vaccine development and research on diagnosing and treating the disease. The United States was notably absent from the effort, while China, which was represented by its ambassador to the European Union, pledged no funding.

Asked why President Trump did not join his world colleagues and pledge U.S. support for this global effort, a senior State Department official said Washington was doing its part. The United States is riding to the sounds of the gun, boldly heading into the fight to stop this pandemic, Jim Richardson, director of foreign assistance, said in a news briefing. Retreat is simply not an option.

Here lies the deeper danger of seeing the fight against this pandemic as a war. Wars rarely end by vanquishing the enemy. Most often, they end in stalemate, because of exhaustion, or through negotiation. But viruses dont negotiate, and in this pandemic, a stalemate means thousands will continue to die, every single day.

We are in this together, former President George W. Bush said so eloquently a few days back. We are not partisan combatants. We are human beings, equally vulnerable and equally wonderful in the sight of God. We rise or fall together. And we are determined to rise.

Ivo Daalder is president of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and a former U.S. ambassador to NATO. He wrote this column for the Chicago Tribune.

Read the original:

Ivo Daalder: No, were not at war. The dangers of how we talk about the COVID-19 pandemic - TwinCities.com-Pioneer Press