The Pohottuwa: Where it is and where it should be

• If we conflate the fringe movements of the West with the rise and empowerment of what is now the Pohottuwa, we’re as mistaken as those pundits who contend that the Rajapaksas should be ignored and cast aside
   
• The Pohottuwa is not the product of this global trend (which is now waning). It is the product of discontent on the cultural plane Not the economic plane
   
• The truth is that the leaders of this government are seen to be flirting with political movements which were displaced by Trump, Farage, and Le Pen, among others:

2018-09-07

Back in 2015 when Syriza won more than 70 seats in the Greek Parliament and with it the mandate to govern (with its leader Alexis Tsipras as the president), socialists the world over celebrated the coming of the Global Left. But as Stathis Kouvelakis notes in “Syriza’s Rise and Fall” (in the New Left Review), Syriza erred by moving from a militant party of the left (“with a strong culture of internal debate, heterogeneity, involvement in social movements and mobilizations”) to a party containing a passive membership and a more active and aggressive leadership.  

The result was a mess of a vanguard party system, with the membership playing a pathetic second fiddle to the leadership. The consequences of this were seen soon enough, with no less a figure than Tsipras kowtowing to popular pressure from the European Union and caving into its demands. So much for the Fringe Left.  

Gomin Dayasiri, at the launch of Manohara de Silva’s “Bedumwaadin ge upayamarga saha vivastha sanshodana” held at the Sri Lanka Foundation Institute, began his speech by comparing the movement for a more nationalist political party (back then the concept of a third party was only palely being tossed here and there) to the rise of rightwing movements throughout the West: Donald Trump, Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson, Marine Le Pen. Implicit in his contention was that if the West was seeing a return to “traditional values” (which was what the rightwing fringe leaders were harping about), there was nothing wrong in aiming at a restoration of the old order in Sri Lanka. Dayasiri made this speech more than a year ago, well before Le Pen and Farage went down and Trump’s popularity began to wane.  

My point is this: if we conflate the fringe movements of the West with the rise and empowerment of what is now the Pohottuwa, we’re as mistaken as those pundits who contend that the Rajapaksas should be ignored and cast aside. Where is Trump now? Where is Le Pen? Where is Farage and where is Johnson? More importantly, what was it that led them to clinch power and then quickly lose it?  

The rise of the extreme right (and even left) in Europe and the United States was the consequence of a cosmopolitan and lotus-eating world order that eschewed national concerns for a mad rush and drive towards globalisation. Centuries ago, Diogenes, the madman who slept in a bathtub on the roads of Greece, proclaimed that he was a citizen of the world. From mercantilism to free trade and to complete globalisation, the madman eventually became a prophet.  

"The shift from fringe to centre is a hard shift to make, but if the Pohottuwa is to make a proper, cohesive, comprehensive comeback, it must let go of both those myths: globalism and rabid anti-globalism."

But this prophet, though a darling of world leaders and CEOs of global companies (or, as the Avocado Collective so aptly puts it, “sellers of overpriced industrial goods”), wasn’t taken kindly to by the people, many of whom vented out their fury and feelings of inadequacy by voting for people who not only rebelled against the “liberalism” of their opponents, but also against the rabid conservatism of their own party. The late John McCain is reported to have criticised Trump for straying away from the old and dear principles of bipartisan compromise which made up American Conservatism. It is this rift, between what is perceived to be “good sense” in mainstream politics and the populist thrust of the fringe movements, which brought to power, and then displaced, the likes of Trump and Le Pen. They were the inevitable consequence of an electorate that was getting tired of globalisation and multinational finance.  

The Pohottuwa is not the product of this global trend (which is now waning). It is the product of discontent on the cultural plane. Not the economic plane. And the reason for that is simple enough: in Sri Lanka, the economic has almost always been taken over by the cultural.  

---

• Still, it is hard to resist the urge to compare the Rajapaksas and their imminent return to power
   
• MR is not Donald Trump and Gota, despite what some commentators like might suggest, is not Adolf Hitler
   
• The supporters of the Pohottuwa, who have seen the rise of Trump as a sign of the second coming of the Rajapaksas

---

The truth is that the leaders of this government are seen to be flirting with political movements which were displaced by Trump, Farage, and Le Pen, among others: the Democrats in the United States and the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in Britain. Those images of our finance and foreign ministers shaking hands of the likes of Nisha Biswal soon turned sour, and the racist epithets which supporters of the present administration hurled against China soon soured, and (a) we had to go back to China, and ( b) America began undergoing a radial trans-valuation of its economic and cultural landscape after Trump’s election.  

Still, it is hard to resist the urge to compare the Rajapaksas and their imminent return to power, whether at the fringe or the centre, with what’s happening out there in the West. And yet, the imperatives governing both these political trends are different and vastly so. Mahinda Rajapaksa is not Donald Trump and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, despite what commentators like Tisaranee Gunasekara might suggest, is not Adolf Hitler. Added to this is another reason, more subtle and consequently easier to miss. 

Political writers and columnists, particularly in the English press, are not a little obsessed with seeing a political context through the lens of Western history. Why else are the Rajapaksas being compared to Caligula and Hitler and, by implicit suggestion, the president and prime minister being compared to Obama and self-righteous liberal world leaders? The problem here, however, is that it is not just the supporters of the present administration who are making such grandiloquent claims by comparing the one with the other; it is also the supporters of the Pohottuwa, who have seen the rise of Trump and other extreme right movements in the West as a sign of the second coming of the Rajapaksas. Unfortunately for them, tragically, all they see is the rise of those movements, and not their subsequent fall.  

If the Pohottuwa, or the Podu Jana Peramuna, is to forge ahead, it will therefore have to change its propaganda substantially. I am not suggesting that, as per Dr Dayan Jayatilleka’s suggestion, it moves on and embraces his version of internationalism (“Smart Patriotism”). In a country with a numerical and ethnic majority that is clearly opposed to such internationalism, not even Fidel Castro’s anti-Americanism can spur the people and their leaders to affirm globalism from a leftist standpoint. This is not my opinion; whatever my feelings on the matter, the truth is that the people are tired of globalists, whether from the left or right, and that they want a strong leader to make up for the weak government we have at present. You can argue that it is racist, anti-feminist, and anti-everything that liberals hold dear. Whatever argument you make, however, the truth will remain: the people are tired, of concepts and promises.  

But then the people are making a mistake. Having repudiated globalism, they eagerly seize on the (perceived) rise of the Global Right as a sign of their return. This is a dangerous myth to indulge in, not least because fringe movements are exactly that: fringe, and therefore doomed perpetually to be in the sidelines. The shift from fringe to centre is a hard shift to make, but if the Pohottuwa is to make a proper, cohesive, comprehensive comeback, it must let go of both those myths: globalism and rabid anti-globalism. The reason is easy enough to guess: we are not the West. We are Sri Lanka. And in “being” Sri Lanka, we have our own economic, social, and cultural imperatives that defines what the political moment is, or at least should be. The more the Pohottuwa subscribes to this fallacious worldview, the more doomed it will be to remain as a fringe party.

Sept. 5 th Namal’s‘Rogues for rogues’ protest cirus a damp squib ! only drinking bouts

By Chandrapradeep

(Lanka e News - 07.Sep.2018, 4.15PM) The so called ‘Jana bala’  protest staged on September 5 th by the corrupt and crooked  Rajapkse family with a view to ‘baptize’ Namal Rajapkse as the future leader , as well as to frighten the judges who are hearing the cases against the countless rogues including  the Rajapakses of the corrupt Rajapakses’  nefarious decade turned out to be  a damp squib. Like how it started from nowhere it ended there without achievement of any aim  or objective . This protest which was better known as  a ‘rogues for rogues ‘ campaign or ‘Horunge Rasthiyaduwa’ while promising  , ‘to overthrow the government tomorrow’ turned out to be a total fiasco. 

The ‘rogues for rogues ‘ who bragged that they would get down 200, 000 people to Colombo to join  their ‘Jana bala’ alias  ‘Horunge rasthiyaduwa’ in order  to surround the parliament , Temple Trees and cripple the activities in Colombo , finally could not but admit  only about 100 000 people came to Colombo. Though they said they would see to it the present government  will be packed home ,it is those who participated in the protests  who went home crestfallen. The Machiavellian mendacious Rajapakses  who conspired to create mayhem by sacrificing a life brutally , and blame it on  the government could not implement the gory plan because this conspiracy was exposed ahead.

A fiasco- confirmed beyond doubt…. 

According to Police intelligence reports , only about 30,000 people could be got down to Colombo in this protest campaign organized  by Namal. Though the  original plan was to transport  the crowd in buses numbering over thousand  , only 275 bus loads of people arrived. Diplomatic divisions  said , about 20000 to 25000 people  congregated. 

No matter what , it is common knowledge only a maximum of about 5000 people assembled near the Lake House .Namal Rajapakse and clan chose the Lake House roundabout to hold their meeting  . Owing to this the venue got crowded , while many of his  other Rajapakse vagrants were enjoying- eating and drinking on the by roads thereby  creating road blocks. Finally  Namal ‘s clan could not hold a proper rally.

Truly speaking they were unable to get even a fraction of the crowd they could muster at the last May day rally. This was  because the hope of the party supporters that Mahinda will be the prime minister if the ‘Bud’ won at the local government elections,  had by now  completely  evaporated. .  Namal’s action destroyed  even the strength of the anti government Rajapakse groups like dashing coconuts on the ground .

Dream of Dilith and Reno collapses…

It were the media campaigns of Dilith Jayaweera (Derana TV) and Reno De Silva (Hiru TV) which were most anxious to pedestal  the crooked Rajapakses and make them  ‘Kings’. Both of them are dictated by ulteriror motives : Reno wanted to re – install Mahinda as president to get a presidential pardon for kudu Duminda. Dilith on the other hand wanted to make Mahinda president because of the illicit earnings of Gotabaya which were laundered  via the share markets during the Rajapkse corrupt nefarious decade. Namal Rajapakse devastated all those hopes on the 5 th.(yesterday)

All what Namal could succeed  was getting down this crowd to Colombo and sending  them back aimlessly without any worthy message to the masses  from the  leaders , and simply saying ‘cheerio ‘ to the people  , thereby proving how incapable he is as an organizer. His so called sympathizers were only transported to and fro , and they went back like cattle that were transported  to Colombo  , but rejected and sent back .

At the concluded rally they could not even erect  a stage with a lorry base. Except a mega phone they could not use even a  buffel fixed on the   diki of the motor vehicle . Their megalomaniac leader Mahinda Rajapakse could not even silence the crowd to make his public address only to fade away without making a speech . 

Their loud and proud threats that they would lay siege to government Institutions were unavailing .No government nerve center was surrounded ,nor could they convey any worthwhile message to the government  Though they were to protest throughout  the night , only the kasippu drinkers and their thovil  dancing was witnessed at the  Lake House roundabout. There was nothing politically achieved. About 2000 to 2500 were to remain back throughout  the night, yet by midnight   the entire protest circus was over , and the clowns did  the vanishing trick  . They  fled without their gowns as soon as the midnight hour struck.

No youths only drunkards…

If a huge crowd (though there wasn’t such a crowd) is to be got down to Colombo by the opposition with the objective to pressurize and  topple the government , there must be valid reasons , not liquor bottles and hired vagrants. Either  the government should have committed a grave wrong against the people, or there  must be something that stimulates the  people’s enthusiasm    targeting  a forthcoming election .This damp squib had none of these aims. The whole objective and motive of this protest was to disentangle the knotted conflicts within  the Rajapakses’  leadership. In the end , the entire exercise  ended where it began without reaching any goal – starting from nowhere it only got there !

It was very evident the entire protest was dictated by the internal  issues of the Rajapakses and their politicians . The focus was not on resolving the issues of the people. There was absolutely nothing creative nor inspiring  with no attention paid in  that direction. 

The number of newly registered youth voters is said to be 1.7 million. Though Namal claims himself as a youth , it is a pity he could not rope in a single youth of this group for his protest . Those who participated were the usual pro Rajapakse lackeys and lickspittles. 

90 % of the participants were evidently drunk to the brim. They only smelled of arrack not patriotism. When various individuals of the independent social media  tried to get ‘ voice cut’ every one of them responded every time  with ‘cut voice’  liquor influence. They were so drunk they were almost on all  fours . 

It is the chief organizer Namal who brought together all the  drunkards . Hence he  must be ashamed of himself .  He being not  a drunkard , at least  in the maiden effort to baptize  to make him  the future leader he could have  seen to it   his  maiden effort is carried out decently and respectably (his  rackets and perfidies  notwithstanding).  

He could have learnt a lesson from Late R. Premadasa’s life at least   because Namal  can never learn  anything virtuous from his own Rajapakses.   Premadasa who was born to low society  parents adhered to his sobriety and sanity all along, and tried to build a virtuous society free from inebriation.. 

There never had been  anyone who could muster crowds as did he . And it is the low society  people of the cities   who participated in his campaigns. Though certainly it Is not possible to muster a   completely sober crowd , as a disciplined leader setting an example to others he made sure insobriety is not encouraged,.  

This was best illustrated during his entire Gam Udawa program shows  which were conducted every fortnight. He completely forbid liquor consumption though some drank on the sly.  Hence Premadasa could curb and control inebriation and drunken behavior.

Therefore it is only an individual having  no people’s  support  who will resort to  gatherng crowd by providing liquor and  arrack as inducements. 

One dies and 105 hospitalized 

One participant of the ‘rogues for rogues’ (horunge rasthiyaduwa) , took ill and while being transported to the hospital died in the Suwaseriya ambulance. He was a heart patient , reports say. In all there were 105 casualties  transported by ambulances and other vehicles to the hospital .  They had become sick following   consumption of liquor and had   fallen down at various points  , and due to  food poisoning. 

 The irony of ironies  is , it is the Rajapakses who screamed and shouted against the Suwaseriya ambulances when the government introduced them for the benefit of patients , and now it is the same Suwaseriya services that came to their rescue. A politician no matter how opportunistic he is , should not oppose a good project of a government. It is hoped the Rajapakses  are intelligent and intelligible enough to realize this at least now, and will turn over  new leaf. .

We want a government- Mahinda’s government 

A most important  salient political point must be made known before concluding this article.

During Namal’s entire campaign just one slogan ‘we want a government – Mahinda government ‘ was all that was heard.

If that is the one and only objective , without wasting national wealth and  without making the people to suffer on the roads , Mahinda Rajapakse could have resorted to one simple thing . :H e can  topple the government 6 months before its full term is completed , and take over the reins. That is by a  political  methodology   strengthening the country’s Democracy.  The methodology is simple , the members of the Alliance including Rajapakse supporting the 20 th amendment tabled by the JVP in parliament , and providing the two third majorityin parliament . Unbelievably only Mahinda’s  groups which are not supporting it at present. All the other parties are in support.

If the 20 th amendment is given support , there will be no executive president appointed on the votes of the people. It will only be a president sans executive powers appointed by parliament .In that case the present  power pickle would be over , and the powers will be vested with the parliament and prime minister will be  the head. In that event instead of the scheduled presidential elections on 2020 -01-08 it will be the general elections. 

It cannot be forgotten , Mahinda lent support to the 19 th amendment . He supported that while he had 140 members with him and had the majority , also cannot be forgotten.

Hence ‘if they want ‘ a government and a Mahinda’s government’  what they should  do is , support the 20 th amendment ,and  do their best to form a Mahinda government on  2020-01-09 ,shouldn’t they ? There is nothing militating against that. Based on what theory can one say  , when the next government is being formed Ranil Wickremesinghe of the UNP will be the prime minister again .

Without following  that what are the Rajapakses trying to demonstrate and accomplish  ? I t is therefore crystal clear  they want not only a Rajapakse government but a ‘despotic government’ which existed during the Rajapakse corrupt nefarious decade.  They want a corrupt despotic regime again and not the  power under any circumstances which would render them  accountable to the parliament  .  

We who are for genuine  patriotism swear hereby , never will the plans and plots of Rajapakses work .There is no room for a dictator to rear  his head again even if Namal gets crowds  down  to Colombo until his hair has turned  gray and makes them roam the streets while performing his own  clownish  acts .  

Chandrapradeep 

---------------------------
by     (2018-09-07 10:58:46)

TORTURE, THREATS AND HARASSMENT AGAINST PODIKUMARIHAMI AND HER FAMILY BY THE MAHIYANGANA POLICE

Image: Podikumarihami.

07/09/2018

(07^th September, 2018)  Today there was an attempt to plant a parcel of Cannabis at Podikumarihami’s house. Her estranged husband had come home after many days, and planted it under her mattress. Having noticed him going near her bed, Podikumarihami had become suspicious of his behavior and gone to check under her mattress, only to find a parcel of Cannabis there. Thereafter, Podikumarihami and her son had questioned her estranged husband, and he had divulged that officers from the Mahiyangana police had given him the parcel to be planted in Podikumarihami’s house. Thereafter, Podikumarihami and her son had taken him to Mahiyanganaya police and complained about this incident. The police officers have dismissed her complaint by saying “these things happen,” and have not taken any action till now. So Podikumarihami returned home and burnt the parcel of Cannabis.

We the undersigned activists and civil society organisations condemn the continuous attacks, threats, persecution and torture against Podikumarihami and her family by the Mahiyanganaya police. We also strongly condemn the failure by the State including senior police authorities, independent commissions, the Attorney General and the judiciary to ensure effective protection for Podikumarihami and her family and hold those responsible accountable for their actions.

TORTURE, THREATS AND HARASS... by on Scribd

Success Of Emirates & Failure Of SriLankan

By Latheef Farook –SEPTEMBER 8, 2018

Latheef Farook

Around early 1985, when I was working with Dubai based English Language Daily Khaleej Times, there were speculations of Dubai government planning to start an international airline.

Many dismissed it as wishful thinking. However some said it could be made a success story. I asked Mr. Maurice Flanagan, then Manager of Dubai National Air Travel Agency, who later became the founder and General Manager of Emirates Airline.

He confirmed and on 25 March 1985 Emirates Airline was launched with   its inaugural flights to Lahore with Pakistan International Airlines providing two of the airline’s first aircraft on wet-lease.

With $10 million in start-up capital it was required to operate independently of government subsidy. Pakistan International Airlines provided training facilities to Emirates’ cabin crew at its academy. 

Today this is the largest airline in the Middle East, operating over 3,600 flights per week from its hub at Dubai International Airport, to more than 140 cities in 81 countries. From March 2016 to February 2017 Emirates had the longest non-stop commercial flight from Dubai to Auckland.

Emirates operates a mixed fleet of Airbus and Boeing wide-body aircraft and is one of the few airlines to operate an all-wide-body aircraft fleet (while excluding Emirates Executive). As of November 2017, Emirates is the largest Airbus A380 operator with 103 aircraft in service and a further 42 on order. Since its introduction, the Airbus A380 has become an integral part of the Emirates fleet, especially on long-haul high-traffic routes. Emirates is also the world’s largest Boeing 777 operator with 151 aircraft in service.

When emirates airlines was launched, Sri Lankan airline, then Air lanka,  has made remarkable headway as one of the most successful third world airlines .Air Lanka was established as the flag carrier of Sri Lanka once the Sri Lankan government shut down the bankrupt Air Ceylon.

In 1998, the then administration of former President Chandrika Kumaratunga had sold 40 percent of the equity of SriLankan worth US $ 70 million, later increased to 43.6%, and give management to Emirates after it suffered years of losses.

However Emirates exited the airline after 2008 sold their shares to the government. SriLankan Airlines, which made profit of 4.4 billion rupees in 2008, the year in which the management agreement with Emirates Airlines ended, has lost 107 billion rupees since then.

Highlighting the precarious situation of Sri Lankan airlines, Deputy Minister Eran Wickremasinghe said on 24 March 2016, that colossal losses that state-run SriLankan Airlines was made to suffer since ex-President Mahinda Rajapaksa chased away Emirates Airlines, and a questionable aircraft deal, is a national financial crime.

The Rajapaksa administration had cancelled the visa of then Chief Executive Peter Hill because he did not bump enough paying passengers to accommodate a large entourage of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa in a single aircraft, he said.

“The CEO had said ‘We should not offload all these passengers since they are citizens and they are paying passengers where there is a contract’,” Wickramaratne told parliament.

“The next day his visa was cancelled in 2007.”

“From then on it became a loss-making airline. It made colossal losses. Its losses are bigger than the spending on health or education.”

By 2015 accumulated losses of 128 billion rupees, debt of 76 billion rupees (542 million dollars) and a hole in its balance sheet of 74 billion rupees. The hole in the balance sheet would have been bigger if not for capital injections by the Treasury from taxes collected from the people.

SriLankan Airlines had been given 100 million dollars each year to cover losses by the Treasury. SriLankan’s management had then decided to buy A330 and A350 aircraft in a reckless manner, he charged.

The Airbus A350-900s aircraft were made to travel 17 hours at a stretch, when the longest direct flight was about 11 hours.

He said according to documents 780 million dollars in government support was needed in the three years after acquisition. An 80 million dollar deposit had been paid.

“Aviation experts have told us that the lease contract terms are 25 percent more expensive than normal and it needs to be looked into. “The present value of the lease liability over the next 12 years is 1.5 billion US dollars.

“This is a financial crime. We have to investigate this.

According to local media SriLankan Airlines faces closure if tangible and sustainable restructuring cannot be achieved.

Meanwhile, according to Daily Mirror of Friday 7 September 2018, Minister  Champika Ranawaka disclosed that SriLankan had recorded a profit of Rs 80 billion when it was taken over by the government from the Emirates Airlines. Then after, the government established Mihin Air as a regional air service to Sri Lanka, Today the two airlines, have amassed a loss of Rs 200 billion and became liability to the Treasury. Each and every Sri Lankan pays Rs 10,000 per year to cover the cost of the two airlines which has become a curse to the country”.

Now the question is who is responsible for this disaster.

It is worthy to recall that Sri Lanka was an almost developed third world country during its independence in 1948 with political and economic stability, high level of free education, free health services and communal harmony.

It was the time when Dubai was unknown and unheard of. Population was only few thousands and suffered from extreme poverty and illiteracy. There was no school, hospital, electricity or drinking water. Turning to stormy seas for fishing and trade remained their only means of survival.

When the opportunity for development came in the wake of oil wealth  they, rulers and the people, alike grabbed it with both hands and made this desert strip a most modern city state.

Emirates hired people from all over the world irrespective of religion, language, culture or nationality. Those who performed well and contributed to the growth of the airline was promoted while others were sent home.

Read More

Loosing the forest for the trees - the tragedy of modern forestry.

Forests-Beyond The Wood IV. 

BY Dr.Ranil Senanayake-September 7, 2018, 9:33 am

What is known by science reveals the forest as an ecosystem of tremendous complexity. The trees, while providing the essential framework of a forest constitutes only a fraction of the total biodiversity. It contains a huge array of organisms, that continually change in form and function. Thus biodiversity is what gives a forest its identity. It should also be borne in mind that, from the small bushes of an area after a fire to the tall growth fifty years later, the species and architecture goes through many changes, and all these ecosystems are expressions of the growing, maturing forest.

The international response to the loss of natural forest ecosystems can be seen in the massive global investment in forestry. However, a great majority of these revegetation programs around the world do not seem to provide an environment that is hospitable for sustaining local forest biodiversity. A situation brought about by neglect of the ecological and biodiverse reality of a forest in project planning. There is no excuse to be found in the argument that there was no information. Forest Ecology has a long and distinguished history in the scientific literature. The result of this neglect was that institutional forestry activity was centered around the growing of even aged monocultures of fast growing trees with no requirement to attend to the rehabilitation of forests.

Forestry or 'the art and science of growling and managing forests' has a long and varied history and a multitude of responses, reflecting the environment, the social context and economic pressures that led to each type of response. Many of the early models of forestry in both European and non-European societies demonstrated a sensitivity to the natural systems. The dominance of monoculture plantations managed as clear cutting systems of silviculture are recent phenomena and may be a consequence of the economic order that arose after the industrial revolution . These narrow goals coupled with the history of European foresters, who arose as the protectors of the king's or noblemen's forests from the pheasants meant that forestry excluded social and biodiversity concerns.

Given this history the development of modern forestry, has tended to foster a professional style of educated, objective, benign forester-aristocrats, who see their role as a protector of forests from fire, insects and the greed or short sightedness of the public and politics This, attitude coupled with the automatic assumption of superiority in all matters European during the colonial period, saw the responses to forestry by other traditions being ignored. Modern, scientific forestry focusing on the fast production of wood and wood fibe became the norm.

In many non-European societies throughout the world the protection or growing of forests often took on different social or religious meanings. The example of Sacred Groves or Deorais exist in many traditions. In India, these forests are usually located at the origins of fresh water springs. They are associated with spirits, often a mother-goddess, deity. Their belief system, in the swift and immediate retribution meted out by the deity if the forest is disturbed, has served to protect these forests even today. The forest in turn provides the social functions by having a place of religious focus and community activity, as well as economic functions such as providing medicines or famine food or the ecological functions of stabilizing water and protecting genetic diversity. A study of various forest formations in north-east India suggest that sacred groves may be the last refuge for remnant populations of certain species .

A similar concept of sacred grove was seen in the Trobriand Islanders. This tradition was seen as the only force protecting the kaboma or sacred groves that were the only areas of uncut forest remaining on the Islands. To cut the rainforest species of trees that compose such sacred groves was believed to be dangerous because the angered sprits would bring human illness or crop failure. The highly evolved traditional responses to forest management as seen in the forest agriculture of Papua New Guinea, where the taller structure of the forest was recognized as a feature to be retained, while the smaller growth was cleared for agriculture

Forestry has to be developed within the local context. Both social and biodiversity needs have to figure prominently in its design, otherwise we will only perpetuate the tyranny of the 'Monoculture As Forestry Implementation Authorities'

As stated before, the identity of a natural forest ecosystem can be established. It has a certain state of complexity, biodiversity, soil quality, stability, ecological identity etc. The most mature or least disturbed providing the measure of best state. The species and patterns of ecosystems within a given natural forest will and does change over time, but all such changes involve species that were original to the area, in patterns that follow the natural seral succession of that forest. Here, seral succession refers to the patterns of change that occur if a patch of forest is cleared and left to natural regeneration processes. Often a progression from grassland, to scrubland to early forest to mature forest is seen.

The report on Biodiversity by the UNEP to the CSD has highlighted the massive problem inherent in the current discussions on forests. by pointing out that "Forests can only be sustained if you sustain the richness of forest ecosystems." this demonstrates the need to have forests as an issue managed by a multi-agency consortium rather that placing it under a single institution. It is a fact that none of the so called 'forestry' practices has been able to sustain the richness of natural forest ecosystems, yet there are innumerable claims that 'sustainable forestry' is being practiced.

The discussions on the sustainable management of forests still lack clear definitions creating a sense of confusion in the identification of goals. For instance, the inability to distinguish between plantations and forests have allowed processes that have led to a massive reduction of forest biodiversity. A clear definition of ‘a Forest’ needs to be clarified and harmonized in statements transmitted from the CBD to the IPF or the CSD. As forests are biological entities, any criteria or indicator chosen to represent biodiversity status must be rooted in biological variables. The current practices of assessing physical cover alone will not adequately indicate forest quality and trends. In this context, socio-cultural values should also be incorporated into the setting of criteria and indicators. Further, for every acre of forest that stands today, hundreds of acres of forest have been lost in the surrounding countryside. Yet there has been no mention of the need for rehabilitation and recovery of the biodiversity status of such degraded lands. If these fundamental issues are not addressed, the loss of forests and biodiversity in these critical ecosystems cannot be contained.

To be continued…

Israeli forces kill 17-year-old Palestinian on Gaza border during protest

At least 90 Palestinians were wounded with some being taken to hospital for treatment

Dozens of Palestinians in Gaza were hospitalised because of tear gas inhalation (MEE/Mohammed Asad)

 

Friday 7 September 2018 

A 17-year-old Palestinian was shot dead by Israeli forces on the Gaza border on Friday, according to local health sources. 

Bilal Khafaja, 17, was shot in the chest during skirmishes east of Rafah in southern Gaza, the Gaza Health Ministry said in a statement. 

Israeli forces had also wounded at least 90 Palestinians with 37 people requiring hospital treatment, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. 

The Ministry noted that at least 37 Palestinians required being taken to the hospital after Israeli forces fired live ammunition and tear gas at unarmed protestors.

Earlier Friday, the Israeli military said it had struck down Palestinian militants who had set off fire balloons from the Gaza Strip towards southern Israel. 

Protests in the upcoming weeks are expected to be well attended as negotiations to ease the blockade on Gaza continues to stall, security sources told Haaretz news. 

Gaza's health ministry also confirmed that  19-year-old Palestinian Amjad Hamdona died of wounds sustained during July protests. His death brings the number of Palestinians killed to 172. 

Palestinians continue to hold weekly protests across the Gaza Strip as part of the Great March of Return initiative that started several months ago. 

Protest organisers said that Friday's demonstration was under the slogan: "We are returning despite your wrath and fury, Trump" and in response to America pulling its funding from the UN Work and Relief Agency (UNWRA). 

Washington cut $200 million worth of funding from UNWRA and demanded the UN refugee agency redefines how a Palestinian refugee is classified. 

Why candidates must boycott Israel

BDS is the only way to grow grassroots political power while keeping it accountable to Palestinians.Ashraf AmraAPA images)

Joel Reinstein-4 September 2018

The recent Democratic Party primary victories of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and others have generated arguments among progressives and socialists about their stances on Palestine, and whether or how to hold them accountable.

Unfortunately, the principles of the Palestinian boycott, divestment and sanctions movement have been left out of much of the discussion. These guidelines clearly set out what accountability to Palestinian self-determination looks like, and must be foregrounded if our solidarity with Palestinians is to be successful.

The BDS movement’s demands and guiding principles are laid out on its website, run by the Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC). The BNC is a coalition of Palestinian groups representing the overwhelming majority of Palestinians, including trade unions, protest committees, women’s groups, youth organizations and political parties.

Its 2005 call for boycotts against Israel established three clear, simple demands as the bare minimum requirements for Palestinian self-determination, as agreed upon by the overwhelming majority of the Palestinian people: end Israel’s military occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip; end the dozens of discriminatory laws against Palestinian citizens of Israel; recognize Palestinian refugees’ right to return to Palestine.

The demands are based in international law, human rights and basic principles of equality.

Palestinians have asked people who respect their rights to boycott Israel until these demands are met.

The call to boycott Israel came in the aftermath of the Oslo accords and the ensuing “peace process,” which was supposed to produce a two-state solution to the so-called Israeli-Palestinian conflict. These lopsided negotiations took for granted Israel’s oppression of Palestinians, normalizing the denial of their rights and equality.

Oslo reframed Israel’s colonization of Palestinians as if it were a symmetrical conflict between feuding states. If realized, the process would have allowed Palestinian citizens of Israel and millions of Palestinian refugees to be permanently denied their fundamental rights, and it wouldn’t have granted genuine self-determination to Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza either.

The impact of the phony peace process was reinforced by normalization initiatives bringing Israelis and Palestinians together in the spirit of “coexistence,” whether in historic Palestine or elsewhere: various feel-good projects with language about “understanding” and “suffering on both sides” that ignored Israel’s blatant denial of Palestinian rights.

The BNC has made it clear that normalization is a target of the boycott, and that anyone claiming to stand with Palestinians shouldn’t engage in it. Doing so amounts to violating the boycott.

“Anti-normalization” can be a touchy subject among people sympathetic to Palestinian rights, with many saying that it’s difficult to understand, while others reject it outright. But anti-normalization, following the guidelines laid out by the Palestinian leadership of the movement, is crucial.

Before BDS, the public discourse in the US around Palestine allowed only for debates between hardline right-wingers supporting Israel, and supposed “left-wingers” backing the “peace process.” Palestinian rights were excluded from a debate in which liberal Zionist bigots claimed to be acting in their interests: the goalposts were set to entirely hide the very idea of Palestinian self-determination.
BDS has changed that.

The boycott movement’s framework of human rights and equality cut through the false equivalency of normalization.

Camaraderie

Even without access to corporate news media or politicians’ platforms, boycott and divestment campaigns have offered a vehicle for solidarity activists to force the public acknowledgement of Palestinian claims. Countless one-on-one conversations between students, congregants, scholars, artists and union members have been sparked by local campaigns for boycotts or divestment that made Palestine immediately relevant to people’s lives.

Each campaign has offered a tangible way for more and more people to get involved, to not just support Palestine abstractly but to personally struggle for it and cultivate a sense of responsibility for solidarity with Palestinians, as well as a sense of pride and camaraderie.

Eventually the movement may become large and strong enough to start exerting public pressure for sanctions against Israel, and in the United States, we can cut Israel off from massive US military aid and diplomatic protection. If enough of us are ready to participate in mass protests and strikes, we can force the hand of whoever is in power, no matter their party.

This is very much doable if we consciously use boycott and divestment campaigns to build up to it.
BDS is the only way to grow that kind of grassroots political power while keeping it accountable to Palestinians. Through the boycott, its three demands and its anti-normalization principles, BDS can clear away the deliberate obfuscation of anti-Palestinian bigots by drawing a bright red line between who does and does not support Palestinian rights.

It has pulled the rug out from under liberal Zionists who say they support equality for “both Israelis and Palestinians,” a claim that was once taken seriously but is now reduced to a weak disclaimer in opposing BDS. And because the boycott is led by the BNC, there’s an organizational means of holding the entire international movement accountable to the Palestinian people, holding the line against immense pressure to compromise Palestinians’ fundamental rights.

As student groups in the Gaza Strip put it, no one may “speak on behalf of an entire people without taking the necessary steps needed to be accountable to it.”

Clarity

The clarity of BDS’ demands, methods and leadership also creates a framework for uniting culturally and politically disparate people behind it. It can truly be a mass movement not bound to any particular demographic or political tendency, because it doesn’t leave room for misinterpretation or the “nuance” of false friends. We all boycott Israel until the three demands are met.

Crucially, because BDS’ three demands represent all sections of the Palestinian people, BDS also unites Palestinians against Israel’s material and ideological attempts to divide them. Palestinian citizens of Israel, Palestinians living under the suffocating blockade of Gaza, Palestinian refugees, Palestinians in the West Bank, Palestinians in the diaspora all face different circumstances, creating pressure that can lead to fractures between different groups.

While the BNC can’t claim to be the political leadership of the Palestinian people, it can foster unity and prevent some Palestinians from being used as a bargaining chip for others.

Respect for BDS is by definition the minimum for respecting Palestinian self-determination. It is in fact a very effective and necessary “litmus test,” as detractors have described it.

It’s like the picket line of workers on strike. When people cross a picket line, it’s weakened, and it’s weakened further still if its supporters make exceptions for anyone to cross their picket.

When progressives or socialists who support Palestinian rights are evaluating electoral candidates, we must insist that progressive candidates not violate the BDS picket line, the definition of respect for Palestinian self-determination. As several socialists have argued, candidates must not compromise on the principles of opposing war and imperialism.

This isn’t about any kind of moral judgement, but reality we have to confront to win. Without worrying about whether someone has good intentions, BDS is how we separate the wheat from the chaff, and nothing other than BDS can do that.

People’s lives are at stake, and the US gives $3.8 billion every year that Israel uses to kill Palestinians. Anyone who’s going to be part of the US state must be held to a strict standard, and respecting the boycott is the bare minimum.

We must listen to the coalition representing the overwhelming majority of the Palestinian people.

Joel Reinstein has organized in labor as well as BDS campaigns. He is a member of Jewish Voice for Peace.

Aggrieved Kurdish fighters quietly join Syrian regime side in battle for Idlib

In the third part of our series looking at the conclusion of the 21st century’s most devastating conflict, we examine the role of Kurdish militants

Martin Chulovand Mohammed Rasool-Fri 7 Sep 2018

Throughout seven years of war, the Kurds of Syria’s north have been a wildcard. Their loyalties have remained uncertain and their push for autonomy buffeted by a raging conflict that has consumed almost all before it.

As a showdown nears in the north-west of the country, home to a prominent Kurdish enclave until earlier this year - and now central to the outcome of the war - the Kurds are quietly renewing their claim. Dozens of Kurdish militants who had fought with US forces in the fight against Islamic State have now allied with Syrian regime forces in Idlib province for what is likely to be the war’s final, bloody battle.

The presence of the Kurds in the fight for Idlib adds a new dimension to a clash that has drawn in every player in the long, savage war. The alliance has been kept under wraps both by Syrian officials, who have been wary of Kurdish ambitions throughout the war, and by Kurdish forces themselves, who remain nominally allied to Washington in the fight against Isis.

A last-ditch diplomatic attempt to avert a fight for Idlib province, where up to3 million people are crammed into over-stretched towns and cities, is being held in Tehran on Friday. Russia and Iran, both backers of the Syrian regime, and Turkey, a backer of many groups who stood against the Syrian leader, will attempt to thrash out a deal that prevents what aid agencies say will be a bloodbath if, as expected, a full-scale assault is launched.

 Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, is meeting Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and Russian president, Vladimir Putin, in Tehran to discuss the future of Idlib. Photograph: Don Emmert/AFP/Getty Images

On the ground, there is little hope that diplomacy will deliver an outcome. Speaking of global leaders, Amin Azzam, an anti-Assad fighter from the town of Jisr al-Shughour in Idlib, said: “They have failed us for five years. Why would they save us now?”

To the south of the city, a small number of Kurds have gathered with Syrian forces and Iranian-backed militias to await orders. The men are believed to be members of the Syrian Democratic Forces, part of an alliance of Arabs and Kurds raised by the US to take on Isis in the north-east.

With that fight now largely over, the SDF remain bitter at being ousted earlier this year from the town of Afrin in Idlib by Turkish-led Arab forces who had been raised to fight Assad. That defeat left the Kurds without a stronghold in an area in which they had been historically strong and strategically relevant. It also shifted the loyalties of many.

Kurdish leaders say avenging the loss of Afrin remains a priority. Aldar Khalili, a leader of a Syrian Kurdish political bloc, said Kurds would readily deal with Assad to win back the town.

“As of now there aren’t any movements toward sending the forces in Rojava (north-eastern Syria) to the liberation operations in Idlib alongside the Syrian government and Russian forces,” he said. “But we have shown our readiness to go into negotiations with the Syrian government to clear all parts of Syria from the Isis, jihadis and terrorist groups backed by Turkey.”

Another Kurdish leader said small numbers of SDF members had made the long, difficult journey to join Syrian forces. “It’s symbolic on one level and strategic on another. This means we need the regime. There is a partnership growing, but we need to get our pound of flesh from them.”


A Kurdish girl who lives in Cyprus, stands with her face painted during a protest against the Turkish offensive targeting Kurds in Afrin, Syria. Photograph: Petros Karadjias/AP

Containing Kurdish ambitions, and even preventing a consolidation in Syria, has been central to Ankara’s projection in Syria in the past two years of war. Chasing Kurdish forces from Afrin allowed Turkey to boast that there was no Kurdish enclave along its border west of the Euphrates river. Just as potently, it allowed the Kurds to claim they had been betrayed by a fickle ally.

When the city was under attack, the SDF’s calls for US support were rebuffed. Allies in one corner of the country, they were abandoned in another, with Washington’s already strained relationship with Ankara more important than its bond with Kurdish leaders.

The episode brought the alliance to breaking point. Four Kurdish officials have told the Guardian in recent months that anti-Isis operations have all but stopped. “Those we are carrying out sometimes don’t involve the Americans at all,” said one senior figure. “There is not the trust there was and they should not be surprised if we look after ourselves.”

A senior regional intelligence source said US military leaders have told the SDF that they would not accept their members participating in the Idlib operation, alongside Syrian forces and their Iranian allies.

“If they go, they’ll be without uniforms or flags. They’ll try to look like Syrian troops,” the source said.


The capture of Afrin, celebrated by Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army fighters, angered Kurds. Photograph: Aref Tammawi/EPA

Khalil said their expulsion from Afrin changed the equation for the Kurds. “The situation in Afrin can’t go on like this and as the coalition of political parties who believe in future democratic Syria, we are ready to go into the negotiations with the Syrian government. We want to build a future democratic Syria that includes every community within the Syrian society equally and we are ready to participate not only in terms of the military but politically and economically.”

In Afrin, local woman Arin, 31, said a low-level insurgency against Turkish forces and its allies continued ahead of the expected Russian-led air assault. “The situation in Afrin is bad and there are random arrests of Kurds with allegations that people are part of the YPG ( a group aligned to the Turkish militant organisation the PKK). “We hear about attacks on the checkpoints of the armed groups controlling the city and there are assassinations every week carried out by the youth who defended the city before it was invaded.”

Afrin remains a focal point of Kurdish resentment and an incentive for many to deepen their engagement with the regime.

“The armed men who are controlling the city are mostly from the areas that were lost to the government like Ghouta, Daraa and other areas,” said Arin. “It was them who changed the dynamic here, not us. We as Kurds were happy here until they fought us. If they fight us, they can expect vengeance. Blood brings blood.”