Rajapaksa trio in trouble

 
 

Aug 13, 2017

The CID is to seek court assistance to take strong action against former first lady Shiranthi Rajapaksa and her two sons Yoshitha and Rohitha. This is due to Shiranthi and Yoshitha continually evading the CID.

Both have been told to be present at the CID on August 15. If they fail to do so, a court order is to be obtained as per clause 129/6 of the constitution to record statements from them.

Meanwhile, Rohitha is to be questioned by the FCID over expenses for a satellite project.

Sithara Kularatne

Bomb kills at least 15 in Pakistani city of Quetta

QUETTA, Pakistan (Reuters) - A bomb exploded near a crowded market in the Pakistani city of

Gul Yousafzai-AUGUST 12, 2017

Quetta on Saturday, killing at least 15 people, officials said, the latest attack to hit the restive southwestern province of Baluchistan.

Middle East-based Islamic State, which has a branch of loosely affiliated fighters in Afghanistan and Pakistan, claimed the attack shortly afterwards, saying a motorcycle suicide bomber had killed 17 soldiers.

The powerful blast hit as a paramilitary patrol passed by on the road, Baluchistan provincial home minister Sarfraz Bugti said, adding the patrol may have been the target.

"According to the information we have received so far, there are around 15 casualties, people who were martyred, and around 40 people were wounded," Bugti said. He said a state of emergency had been imposed in the city and all hospitals were on alert.

Quetta's chief of bomb disposal squad, Aslam Tareen, said initial information was that a suicide attacker rammed a motorcycle into a military vehicle.

Pakistan's army press wing said the patrol was the target and there were at least seven civilians among the 15 killed.

Vehicles are seen burning after a bomb blast in Quetta, Pakistan August 12, 2017.

It cited army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa as saying terrorists were trying to disrupt Monday's celebrations of 70 years of independence from Britain.

"Our resolve won't succumb to any challenge," Bajwa was quoted as saying in an official tweet from a top military spokesman.

Separatist militants in Baluchistan have waged a campaign against the central government for decades, demanding a greater share of the gas-rich province's resources.

Taliban and other Islamist militants also operate in the province, which shares borders with Afghanistan and Iran. A U.S. drone strike killed Taliban leader Mullah Akhtar Mansour last year in Baluchistan.

The province was rocked by a series of attacks late last year that claimed over 180 lives and raised concerns about a growing militant presence, including fighters affiliated with Islamic State, which has claimed several bombings in Baluchistan.

A judicial report released after an attack on the province's lawyers left more than 70 dead criticized security provisions in the region and called for increased clampdowns on extremists.

Interviews with Baluchistan police and an internal police report viewed by Reuters described a Baluchistan-based militant network in the province's remote mountainous area of Wadh with 500-1,000 operatives led by a former military asset. However, military intelligence officials denied the Wadh network exists and the father of the alleged leader says his son is not involved with militants attacking the state.

Writing by Kay Johnson, editing by David Evans

Saudi forces seal off besieged eastern Shia town, says rights group

Awamiya residents told Human Rights Watch that Saudi forces have been arbitrarily shooting at and arresting civilians

An activist photo shows ruined district of Awamiya (@SahatAlbalad)

Sunday 13 August 2017

Saudi Arabia's security forces have sealed off a Shia-majority town in the east of the Sunni-ruled kingdom, Human Rights Watch said Sunday, following months of unrest and clashes with police.

Saudi authorities last week said they seized control of a district of Awamiya, a town in the eastern Qatif region where protests have escalated into clashes with security forces in recent months.

HRW on Sunday said Saudi security forces had completely "surrounded and sealed off" Awamiya.

The New York-based group said that, based on comparative satellite imagery from February and August, large sections of the town had suffered extensive damage, including to civilian infrastructure.

"Saudi authorities should take immediate steps to allow people to safely return home, allow business and clinics to reopen, and compensate residents for property damage and destruction caused by security forces," HRW's Middle East director Sarah Leah Whitson said.

Saudi Arabia announced plans to demolish and redevelop the al-Musawara district of Awamiya, Qatif province, in 2016, citing health and safety reasons.

Demolition began on 10 May, after al-Musawara residents were evacuated, but Saudi forces met armed resistance.

Awamiya residents told HRW that security forces fired into populated areas far from al-Musawara, killing residents, occupied a school, closed clinics and pharmacies, and prevented essential services such as ambulances from reaching the area.

Saudi authorities should take immediate steps to allow people to safely return home

- Sarah Leah Whitson, HRW

Saudi authorities have blamed "terrorists" and drug traffickers for the recent unrest in Awamiya, where clashes between protestors and security forces since May have left civilians and police dead.

Security forces engaged in shoot-outs with an unknown number of armed men inside al-Musawara, and on 26 July brought in additional armoured vehicles and sealed the town's entrances and exits, residents and activists said.

Saudi forces 'arbitrarily shooting' at residents

But five residents interviewed said that Saudi security forces have put people in Awamiya at risk, arbitrarily shooting at or arresting those who emerged from their houses. The residents said that to their knowledge Saudi authorities never issued an order for people to leave Awamiya, and their only chance to leave safely has been for short periods allowed by security forces since 26 July.

The residents said that security forces closed all of Awamiya's clinics and pharmacies in May, which they believed was to ensure that militants could not seek medical treatment.

Since 26 July, they said, security forces had not allowed emergency services to reach the wounded or taken steps to provide humanitarian assistance to people who remain there, though all the shops in the area were closed.

One resident HRW named as Sami said his shop on the main street near al-Musawara "is covered in bullet holes ... I am certain that security forces are responsible because the size of the bullets are medium and large, which only security forces possess".

Security forces were going around shooting in residential areas at random

- Ali, Awamiya resident

Ali, who fled Awamiya on 30 July, said: "The town was constantly bombarded by shelling and security forces were going around shooting in residential areas at random. We were too scared to leave our homes. Anything that moved became a target."

Another resident, named as "Hadi," told HRW that he believed 20,000 to 25,000 of the town's 30,000 residents had fled, most since 26 July.

Saudi Arabia announced on 10 August that security forces had forced nearly all "terrorists and criminal elements" out of al-Musawara, and authorities took international journalists on a tour of the district on 9 August.

Saudi authorities have not released information on resident casualties, but Saudi activists said the violence has killed more than a dozen people, both Saudis and foreigners, in addition to at least five armed militants.

A Saudi interior ministry official told Reuters that eight members of the police and four members of the special forces had been killed.

Reuters added that a three-year-old boy died on 9 August from injuries suffered when an armoured vehicle fired on his family's car in June.

UN experts on cultural rights, adequate housing and extreme poverty condemned Saudi Arabia's destruction of al-Musawara on 24 May, noting that the operation had forced "residents out of their homes and of the neighborhood, fleeing for their lives".

They stated that the destruction of al-Musawara would "erase the traces of … historic and lived cultural heritage".

Shia discrimination

The town in Saudi Arabia's oil-rich east has a longstanding reputation of opposition to Saudi rule and was also the hub of a short-lived protest movement in 2011 inspired by the Arab Spring.

One of the movement's leaders, Shia cleric Nimr al-Nimr, was executed in January 2016 on a terrorism indictment. The execution sparked a series of events leading to a breakdown of diplomatic relations with Iran and heightened sectarian tensions across the Gulf region.

Saudi Arabia's minority Shia community, which makes up an estimated 10 to 15 percent of the country's population of 32 million, has long complained of marginalisation.

"Saudi Shia in Awamiya face discrimination every day, and for the last three months have been caught in the crossfire," Whitson said.

"Saudi authorities should take immediate steps to allow people to safely return home, allow business and clinics to reopen, and compensate residents for property damage and destruction caused by security forces."

The Game Is Over, and North Korea Has Won
 Donald Trump can whine all he wants, but we're now living in a world where American power is less relevant than ever

BY JEFFREY LEWIS-AUGUST 9, 2017

The Washington Post reported yesterday that North Korea has a large stockpile of compact nuclear weapons that can arm the country’s missiles, including its new intercontinental ballistic missiles that are capable of hitting the United States. That’s another way of saying: game over.
Also: I told you so.

There are really two assessments in the Post’s report. One, dated July 28, is that the intelligence community — not just the Defense Intelligence Agency, contrary to what you may have heard — “assesses North Korea has produced nuclear weapons for ballistic missile delivery, to include delivery by ICBM-class missiles.” The other assessment, published earlier in July, stated that North Korea had 60 nuclear weapons — higher than the estimates usually given in the press. Put them together, though, and its pretty clear that the window for denuclearizing North Korea, by diplomacy or by force, has closed.

These judgments are front-page news, but only because we’ve been living in collective denial. Both intelligence assessments are consistent with what the North Koreans have been saying for some time, for reasons I outlined in a column here at Foreign Policy immediately after the September 2016 nuclear test titled, “North Korea’s Nuke Program Is Way More Sophisticated Than You Think: This is now a serious nuclear arsenal that threatens the region and, soon, the continental United States.”
Authors rarely get to pick titles, and almost never like them, but I think the editors at FP got this one about right. It is about as subtle as a jackhammer, although even so the message didn’t seem to sink in.

Let’s walk through the evidence.

North Korea has conducted five nuclear tests. That is really quite a lot. Looking at other countries that have conducted five nuclear tests, our baseline expectation for North Korea should be that it has a nuclear weapon small enough to arm a ballistic missile and is well on its way toward testing a thermonuclear — yes, thermonuclear — weapon.

A lot of people got the wrong idea after North Korea’s first nuclear test failed, and subsequent nuclear tests seemed smaller than they should be. There was a common view that the North Koreans, well, kind of sucked at making nuclear weapons. That was certainly my first impression. But there was always another possibility, one that dawned on me gradually. According to a defector account, North Korea tried to skip right toward relatively advanced nuclear weapons that were compact enough to arm ballistic missiles and made use of relatively small amounts of plutonium. That should not have been surprising; both Iraq and Pakistan similarly skipped designing and testing a more cumbersome Fat Man-style implosion device. The disappointing yields of North Korea’s first few nuclear tests were not the result of incompetence, but ambition. So, while the world was laughing at North Korea’s first few nuclear tests, they were learning — a lot.

And then there is the issue of North Korea’s nuclear test site. North Korea tests its nuclear weapons in tunnels beneath very large mountains. When my research institute used topography data collected from space to build a 3-D model of the site, we realized that the mountains are so tall that they may be hiding how big the nuclear explosions are. Some of the “disappointments” may not have been disappointments at all, and the successes were bigger than we realized. I think the best interpretation of the available evidence is that North Korea accepted some technical risk early in its program to move more quickly toward missile-deliverable nuclear weapons.

The fact that North Korea’s nuclear weapons used less fissile material than we expected helps explain the second judgment that North Korea has more bombs than is usually reported. The defector claimed that North Korea’s first nuclear weapon contained only 4 kilograms of the limited supply of plutonium North Korea made, and continues to make, at its reactor at Yongbyon. (For a long while, experts claimed the reactor was not operating when thermal images plainly showed that it was.) The North Koreans themselves claimed the first test used only 2 kilograms of plutonium. Those claims struck many people, including me, as implausible at first. But they were only implausible in the sense that such a device would probably fail when tested — and the first North Korean test did fail. The problem is North Korea kept trying, and its later tests succeeded.

We also must take seriously that North Korea has perhaps stretched its supply of plutonium by integrating some high-enriched uranium into each bomb and developing all-uranium designs. North Korea has an unknown capacity to make highly enriched uranium. We’ve long noticed that the single facility that North Korea has shown off to outsiders seems smaller than North Korea’s newly renovated capacity to mine and mill uranium; we naturally wondered where all that extra uranium is going. (My research institute thinks it might be fun to estimate how much uranium North Korea enriches based on how much it mills, if you know anyone with grant money burning a hole in her pocket.)

Unless the intelligence community knows exactly where North Korea is enriching uranium and how big each facility is, we’re just guessing how many nuclear weapons the country may have. But 60 nuclear weapons doesn’t sound absurdly high.

The thing is, we knew all this already. Sure, sure it isn’t the same when I say it. I mean, I am just some rando living out in California. But now that someone with a tie and real job in Washington has said it, it is news.

The big question is where to go from here. Some of my colleagues still think the United States might persuade North Korea to abandon, or at least freeze, its nuclear and missile programs. I am not so sure. I suspect we might have to settle for trying to reduce tensions so that we live long enough to figure this problem out. But there is only one way to figure out who is right: Talk to the North Koreans.

The other options are basically terrible. There is no credible military option. North Korea has some unknown number of nuclear-armed missiles, maybe 60, including ones that can reach the United States; do you really think U.S. strikes could get all of them? That not a single one would survive to land on Seoul, Tokyo, or New York? Or that U.S. missile defenses would work betterthan designed, intercepting not most of the missiles aimed at the United States, but every last one of them? Are you willing to bet your life on that?

On a good day, maybe we get most of the missiles. We save most of the cities, like Seoul and New York, but lose a few like Tokyo. Two out three ain’t bad, right?

I kid — but not really. Welcome to our new world. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Photo credit: KNS/AFP/Getty Images

Brexit: UK retirees rushing to settle in Europe, say financial advisers

One company says monthly inquiries to its website have doubled in a year amid fears moving to Europe will become more difficult

 A British flag in Spain. ‘The golden age of British retirees heading to the Costas is probably over,’ said a migration expert. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images

Anushka Asthana Political editor-Sunday 13 August 2017

British retirees are rushing to settle in European countries such as Spain, Portugal and France before the Brexit deadline, according to financial advisers, believing that such a move will become significantly more difficult in the future.

One company that supports those moving to mainland Europe after they finish working revealed that the number of monthly inquiries to its website had doubled in a year, while actual business was up by 25%.

It came as experts said it was extremely unlikely that any post-Brexit deals with European countries would allow Britons to continue to move overseas in their later years as easily they can do now.

“The golden age of British retirees heading to the Costas is probably over,” said John Springford, a migration expert who is director of research at the Centre for European Reform.

He pointed to research that found that while young immigrants provided an economic boost in most OECD countries, people turned into a net drain on national finances somewhere between the age of 40 and 45.

“The thing about retirees they are expensive. There is no way Spain would allow lots of Brits to retire there and use their health system unless young Spanish people could come and work in the UK,” said Springfield. “If we don’t have free movement it is very unlikely we would have retirement rights.”

Carlos Vargas-Silva, of the University of Oxford’s centre of migration, policy and society (Compas), agreed that the UK could strike a bilateral arrangement with Spain, but said that might not be encouraged by the EU.

“In order for British people to continue retiring to Spain there would need to be something in return, likely to be around more flexibility for Spanish people working in Britain,” he added.

There were estimated to be almost 300,000 UK citizens living in Spain in 2016, with 40% (121,000) over 65. In France, the figures were 148,800 with earlier estimates suggesting about 19% are at retirement age.

Over 65s make up a third of UK expats in Malta, Cyprus and Portugal, while overall they account for one in five of the 890,000 Britons living in the EU.

While Brexit negotiations are likely to secure a deal to protect the rights of those already living abroad, there is a big question mark over what opportunities there will be after the UK leaves the EU.

A Home Office spokesman made clear that no decisions had been made, and that businesses and communities would be consulted on what a post-Brexit immigration system would look like.

However, he did admit that there were currently no routes through which non-EU citizens were able to retire into the UK, nor any bilateral arrangements of the type suggested by Vargas-Silva.

Advertisement

As such the only possibility for the current situation to continue would be an immigration system for Europe that was significantly looser than the one that exists for the rest of the world.

Jason Porter, business development director at Blevins Franks, which provides financial and tax advice to British expats, said he believed a deal would be struck. He argued that European countries had benefited from Britons buying property and spending money in shops and restaurants.

But he admitted there had been a surge in interest from those racing to beat the Brexit deadline.

“The feeling we are getting from our clients is that it is better to be in the country before Brexit than looking to do this after,” he said.

Blevins Franks, which specialises in financial advice for those retiring into Spain, Portugal or France, has seen a 20% to 25% increase in business, he said. Meanwhile, it received 900 inquiries to its website in 2017, compared with 450 a year earlier – with the Brexit rush a significant part of the reason, according to Porter.

Although he was confident of an agreement, Porter conceded that the process could become more difficult, and be easiest for those with sufficient capital to buy a home and not be a drain on the country’s welfare system.

“The main concerns that people thinking about retiring to Europe have are around three main issues: residence, healthcare and the UK state pension triple lock,” he said, arguing that the biggest worry for retirees would be access to healthcare.

Chris Burke, of the Spectrum IFA group, who advises largely British expats living in Spain, said he had one client who had taken early retirement to beat the Brexit deadline. “People who are looking to retire to Spain are bringing it forward and moving out now before Brexit,” he said.

He also said 20% of his clients already living abroad were looking into whether they could obtain Spanish or Irish passports.

Campaigners representing expats admitted that they had also witnessed a surge in the numbers attempting to beat the Brexit deadline.

Roger Boaden, founder member of Expat Citizens Rights in EU, which has almost 10,000 members, said he had seen as a “number of additional Brits on the scene buying property – in France” where he is based.

Advertisement

“If free movement goes and the UK becomes a third country, then unless there is a deal the Schengen rules come into play and the Schengen rules can be severe,” he said. “It is a big area of doubt”.

Sue Wilson, chair of Bremain in Spain – which is also part of the coalition fighting for expat rights, said the conversations were focused on the uncertainty facing those already living on the continent. 

“Four and a half million people do not know what their future will look like so that is the priority,” she said. “Then we can look at what happens in the future but one thing we are certain about – it is not going to look the same as now.

“On an anecdotal basis people are coming out – people who have had a dream for many years to retire to Spain are keen to do so while they still can.”

Surprising shifts in Trump’s support base

The life-cycle of American neo-populism seems to be short

by Kumar David-August 12, 2017, 5:00 pm 

On July 29, according to Gallup’s daily poll-tracker, President Trumps’ disapproval rating was 57% and his approval rating stood at only 38% (5% undecided). Starting from a nosedive at the end of May his approvals and disapprovals have hovered around these numbers. In 17 states - all had voted solidly for Trump in November 2016 - his approval was over 50%, but below 50% in 31 others including some he carried in the elections. In Vermont, Massachusetts, California, Maryland and New York, approval was less than 32%, which is abysmal for a new president of just six months vintage. More interesting and significant is the way in which his support has shifted across states implying a transition in American political dynamics. This is the topic of this article; but a digression first.

I was surprised by the limited understanding of underlying causes of the Trump phenomenon and the roots of American populism among those one would consider well informed leftists in Lanka. This was driven home to me in a Q&A session in June in Colombo. Even ‘higher level’ participants were unaware of the important socio-economic drivers behind Trump’s victory. They attributed it to superficial reasons; white racism, anti-Muslim prejudice, jingoistic rhetoric and "make America Great Again" chest beating. This is superficial; 60 million voted for Trump (Hilary, 63 million) because there was good reason to reject a system which had failed in jobs and living standards. The Trump mass loathed the well to do elite (Wall Street, Washington, Financiers) making money while the worker tottered and the middleclass stagnated. There is a wealth of data (income and wealth gap, unemployment, fall in real wages and collapse of American manufacturing) to prove this assertion. This alienation was garnished by anti-Mexican, anti-Muslim and anti-Chinese scaremongering, but many in Lanka don’t grasp the greater significance of socio-economic drivers, rather than intemperate rhetoric, in fashioning the political and electoral dynamics of American populism.

Why didn’t Democrats, who usually do well in working class, trade unions, left and radical circles (known as liberals in this strange country), win this vote? Failure of the system should play into the hands of the Democrats, should it not? It is more complicated than that, I need to explain. The Democrats, especially under Obama, were the party of rational, modern capitalism, as expressed by a commitment to global trade agreements, reliance on high tech, intellectual elitism, free-markets including capital export, and internationalism in combating climate change. But modernism stands in contradiction to the current needs of American national capitalism, modernism does not help to slow down America’s decline. Rational leadership of global capitalism is no longer on a parallel track with promoting US capitalism. The parallelism has eroded from the mid-1990s because of the shift of economic power to Asia, flabbiness of social classes in the West, and because capitalism, like all things animate and inanimate, has a life cycle. Gibbon described the decline and fall of the Roman Empire as a 300 year saga, but in the modern age, time flies faster.

To cut to the point, neo-populism was seed that fell on fertile ground. The white trash that intellectuals despise, the working class driven out of jobs by the defeat of American manufacturing in the rust-belt states, the impact of national security scaremongering, and the ability of hostile actors (ISIS, China, Afghanistan and technology) to stand outside America’s control, changed perceptions for 60 million voters. Make America Great Again was a resoundingly appropriate battle cry, part valid part imagined, to rescue America from its fate. Time cannot be reversed but time progresses by kinks and quirks. The long and short of it is that the rise of American neo-populism was written into the genes of American capitalism’s life-line. A clownish boor, an error prone bungler, a crude vulgarian; a cranky personality, all this did not matter to an alienated populace in the worst of times.

But it has, almost by definition, got to be a temporary dysfunction; the Gallop Poll ratings seem to suggest that. The daily chaos in the White House and the unending gibberish on twitter confirm a president who will live from one crisis to another, but may survive his term. That’s what I am coming to next.

The Approve-Disapprove spread

It is no surprise that nationally, Trump’s disapproval ratings exceed approval, and that in the New England states, California and New York approval is less than one in three. What is surprising is the fine grain, the results in nine other states. I believe these reflect generic trends. The cases include both minuses and some remarkable pluses. The notation in the graphics is as follows: A score of +10, for example, means that approvals exceed disapprovals by 10%; say 53% approve, 43% disapprove and 4% ‘don’t know’. The findings are from the aforesaid Gallup Poll:

[See http://www.gallup.com/poll/214349/trump-averaged-higher-job-approval-states.aspx]

The graphics were prepared by NBC television.

[See http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-s-base-sticks-him-except-south-n787856]

The first graphic shows a remarkable countertrend. Trump has secured a huge approval over disapproval margin, in excess of 20%, in West Virginia, North Dakota and Wyoming. What on earth do these three have in common apart from being over 80% non-Hispanic white? (Hispanic is Spanish speaking people of Mexican, Cuba, Porto Rican and Central American origin). But there are lots of predominantly rural and non-Hispanic-white states! The secret is that big time fossil fuel production and Trump’s "damn global warming" anthem resonates in these states. Wyoming and West Virginia are first and second in coal production and North Dakota is second in crude oil production. A sad takeaway from this is that the masses, in bulk, are attuned to their wallets and damn the planet and the rest of the human race. Trump won these three states with over 60% of the vote in November 2016.More important is that this selective endorsement of Trump in certain regions and lobbies indicates that the energy, old-technology and protectionist business sectors, and to a degree banking, thanks to the promise of dismantling regulations, are aligning themselves with him. Trump is not going to be a pushover unless the Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who has now empanelled a Grand Jury, unearths financial corruption, tax evasion or brazen dealings with gangland - collusion with Russia even if established will not be fatal. The strength of American democracy and its institutional supports, as opposed to the frivolous and debased nepotism and bias of ours, does make a contrast.

Equally remarkable, but for an opposite reason, are the solid Republican states of Arizona, Texas and Georgia; Trump won all three by over 7% in November. Now he is underwater by 7 to 9 points. This dosen’t make sense does it? It is known that though he is scraping the bottom of the barell nationally, his base is holding up well. It is estimated that about 85% of Republicans are still behind him. These three states are all politically backward Republican happy hunting grounds. But, there is a demographic shift taking place in parts of the south including these three. Non-Hispanic whites are less than 55%, and Hispanics, who may have been carried away by neo-populism last year, seem to be having second thoughts. These demographically determined voting patterns could have a long term impact. Hispanics are about 14% of the population now, the second largest but fastest growing ethnic/racial minority – nationally blacks are 15% and non-Hispanic whites 63%. Native Americans, Chinese and Indians make up the sediment.

Is the working class returning?

Another and more significant finding lies the heart of industrial America – Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio and Iowa. Trump carried all in 2016. Ohio and Iowa are flip states between Democrats and Republicans, not hard-core working class like the first three which the Republicans last won 30 years ago in 1988. Ohio and Iowa are more rural than industrial and it is not surprising that neo-populism is holding up better than in the Hispanic influenced south. It is good news for Trump that his disapproval margins are small.

Let me lead into the critical group, the last three states, with a quote from the NBC report. "Trump won the presidency with narrow victories in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Democrats thought these three were a great wall around the Great Lakes, but Trump smashed through and won where no Republican has since 1988. Now the Gallup data says the bricks are falling; he is underwater by nine or more points in all three. Despite his strength among blue-collar workers there are factors working against him. All three have long histories as union strongholds and big urban centres that are very sour on Trump".

Trump won these important, white, traditional working class states, by a small total majority of 78,000 votes. If the Gallup Poll findings are reliable this majority is evaporating and workers in the rust belt are drifting away from the neo-populist agenda; nothing that was promised has materialised, and the President is locked down in time-wasting squabbles. Since recent experiences have shredded the credibility of opinion polls I am cautious about getting my hopes up, but a little optimistic that neo-populism of the American variety is withering. I hope a social-democratic current, to the extent that Bernie Sanders was a manifestation of social-democracy, will emerge in the Democratic Party under a younger fresher leader. A Labour victory in Britain however is a prerequisite.

White Supremacy in the Age of Trump

The U.S. has a long history of upper-class whites who have benefited from racism.


By Keri Leigh Merritt / BillMoyers.com-August 9, 2017

Since before the election, poor white voters largely have been blamed for the rise of Donald Trump. Although their complicity in his election is clear and well established, they’re continually targeted as if their actions are the primary reason Trump won. But in fact, higher-earning, college-educated whites supported him at even greater rates.


In short, when we hold the working class responsible for white supremacy, other whites are absolved of racial wrongdoing. By allowing the spread of civic ignorance, by propagating historical lies and political untruths, and by engendering an insidious form of racism, upper class whites are undoubtedly just as culpable — if not more so — than working class whites in the quest to maintain white supremacy.

Certainly, there is no apology for the racism of working-class whites, nor any excuse; but we should seek to understand the ways in which white supremacy and power are completely intertwined. Throughout American history, the economic elite have used vile forms of racism to perpetuate the current hierarchy — politically, socially and economically. White supremacy is most commonly conceptualized as a way for lower-class whites to feel socially superior to people from other ethnic backgrounds. More important, though, white supremacy is a tried-and-tested means for upper class whites to grow their wealth and power.

Whether pitting laborers of different races against each other, stoking racial fears through a sensationalistic and profit-driven media or politically scapegoating entire nationalities, America’s white elite have successfully modernized age-old strategies of using racism to prevent the formation of a broad coalition of people along class lines.

o be sure, the concept of white privilege must seem far-fetched to working-class whites who come from generations of cyclical poverty. They constantly are told that African-Americans are the primary recipients of welfare and social benefits, and that policies like affirmative action are greatly detrimental to all whites. By controlling key aspects of the economy, especially education, politics and the media, the white elite often very easily manipulate less affluent whites.

First, by governing and managing the education system in this country, the upper classes remain in control of the equality of opportunity. While much of America is plagued by an underfunded, failing public school system that gets exponentially worse the deeper the area’s poverty, the affluent live in areas with higher property taxes, and thus, better local school systems. Despite this disparity, the rich also are always able to send their children to private (and increasingly, “charter”) schools, escaping the bleak educational realities that most Americans are left to suffer.

As the abolitionist Henry Ward Beecher wrote about the lack of public education in the slave South, “[I]gnorance is an institution. They legislate for ignorance the same way we legislate for schoolhouses.” Today, as Republicans continue slashing education funding at the federal, state and local levels, they legislate for ignorance. They fear statistics and facts, realizing what may follow the political enlightenment of the lower classes. “Knowledge is not only power,” Beecher aptly concluded, “but powder, also, liable to blow false institutions to atoms.”[1]

Second, elite authority over the educational system also means regulation over the teaching of subjects like history, government and civics. An overwhelming majority of Americans have shockingly little understanding of our own past and our own government, often leading to lower-class political apathy.

Third, a small number of extremely wealthy white men control and operate much of the American media. With just a handful of corporations owning the majority of our country’s media, it is worth remembering that news today is essentially a product to be sold, a commodity. Trump himself has created a political firestorm by branding certain news outlets as “fake news,” but the media monopoly obviously presents valid concerns about fair and balanced reporting. Each of the few very powerful, rich men have their own reasons for deciding what qualifies as “news.”

Finally, business owners and corporate leaders have historically sought to keep workers segregated, either physically or by job. Since antebellum times, masters attempted to engender racism between poor white laborers and enslaved blacks, trying to keep each side distrustful of the other. By perpetuating and encouraging a vile form of racism, they attempted to establish psychological segregation, ultimately thwarting the prospect of an interracial coalition. Today, elites use white supremacy as a powerful tool in preventing unionism — as just witnessed with the failure of the United Auto Workers election at a Mississippi Nissan factory.

Thus, even though working-class whites certainly support Trump and his policies, it is important to remember why. Indeed, poorer whites may be the ones branded as hardened white supremacists, but let’s not forget who benefits the most from racism: the white economic elite.

“You are kept apart that you may be separately fleeced of your earnings,” the famous populist leader Tom Watson once told a gathering of white and black laborers. “You are made to hate each other because upon that hatred is rested the keystone of the arch of financial despotism which enslaves you both.” With a few short breaths, Watson had laid bare the most important reason why white supremacy has always thrived in this country, especially during times of severe economic inequality.
Many vestiges of the past — including a long history of upper-class whites using racism to their advantage — have re-emerged in Trump’s America. As our nation impetuously tumbles toward a very uncertain future, we must take heed that the racist rhetoric and divisive political issues have only just begun. The millionaires and billionaires of this country literally have a fortune to protect, and white supremacy has always helped assure their place at the apex of society. As Watson rightfully crowed to his interracial crowd, “You are deceived and blinded that you may not see how this race antagonism perpetuates a monetary system which beggars both.”[2]


[1] “Anti-Slavery Lectures,” The New York Times, Jan. 17, 1855, 5.

[2] Thomas E. Watson, “The Negro Question in the South,” The Arena (Boston), VI, Oct. 1892, 540-550.

An American tourist gave the Nazi salute in Germany — so a stranger beat him up, police say


Sculptures by artist Rainer Opolka in front of the Church of Our Lady in Dresden, eastern Germany, on March 18, 2016. (Jens Meyer/AP)

By Amy B Wang and Rick Noack August 13 at 10:25 AM

An American tourist in Germany was beaten up by a passer-by after he began giving the Nazi salute outside a cafe in Dresden, police said Sunday.

The incident occurred about 8:15 a.m. Saturday as the man left a cafe called Europe in the Neustadt district of Dresden, police said in a statement. The district is known to be a liberal part of the town and a popular meeting spot for students.

The tourist was identified only as a 41-year-old American man who was “severely drunk,” according to police. He suffered minor injuries, while the stranger who assailed him fled the scene, police said.
Police said the U.S. national is under investigation for violating German laws prohibiting Nazi symbols and that they are still seeking the passer-by for causing personal injury, according to the Associated Press.

The Nazi salute — the right arm straight and angled slightly up, palm down — was used as a greeting and a way of expressing devotion to Adolf Hitler under the Third Reich. Germany outlawed the salute after World War II, along with Holocaust denial and other symbols and signals associated with the Nazis. A conviction can carry a prison sentence of up to three years, although courts often impose fines instead.

In a step toward changing the site beyond recognition to reduce its appeal as a pilgrimage site for neo-Nazis, Austria's lower house of parliament purchased the building Hitler was born in.(Reuters)

In a step toward changing the site beyond recognition to reduce its appeal as a pilgrimage site for neo-Nazis, Austria's lower house of parliament purchased the building Hitler was born in.(Reuters)

The Dresden incident occurred just a week after two Chinese tourists were detained for giving Nazi salutes outside Berlin's Reichstag, once home to the Imperial Diet. The two tourists were fined nearly $600 each but were permitted to leave the country with their tour group, police said. Similarly, a 30-year-old Canadian tourist was detained in 2011 after being photographed giving the Nazi salute outside the Reichstag. He, too, got off with a fine.

Germany is not the only European country to ban the salute. Earlier this month, Switzerland’s Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a man who appeared in 2013 photos making the Nazi salute outside a Geneva synagogue.

In Dresden, memories of World War II and Nazi practices have provoked clashes and divisions for decades.

Every year, hundreds of right-wing protesters from across Europe march in the eastern German city on February 13 to commemorate its bombardment by allied forces toward the end of World War II. Dresden had no strategic military significance and its destruction remains a dark chapter for the allied forces, which has been used by the far-right to stoke anti-American tensions.

In recent decades, the February 13 commemorations have repeatedly escalated into large-scale violent clashes between Nazis and participants of counter-protests, who fear that the far-right could hijack the city’s destruction during World War II for its political purposes.

Members of the region’s far-right movements have also made no secret out of their fascination with Hitler. The leader of a Dresden-based anti-migration group, Pegida, was once photographed with a Hitler mustache, for example. And last year, a group of Nazis on a train near Dresden forced a 32-year old Indian to perform a Hitler salute, raising fears of anti-immigrant attacks in the region.


Isaac Stanley-Becker contributed to this report.

Bangladesh: The immortal slogan of “Joy Bangla”

The imprecise nature of political slogans is a virtue. Actual political programmes do not derive from words alone but from the balance of class forces that exist at a particular point in time.

by Anwar A. Khan-Aug 13, 2017

( August 13, 2017, Dhaka, Sri Lanka Guardian) Remarkable political movements always employ slogans that encapsulate in a few powerful words the aspirations of those fighting for a new world. French revolutionaries fought under the banner, “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,” words that still resonate with radicals. The first words of the U.S. Constitution—“We the People”—have quickened the hearts of generations of populist activists. Emiliano Zapata’s soldiers longed for “Tierray Libertad,” and the peasant armies of Mao Tse Tung went to war for “Land to the Tiller.” “Joy Bangla” is such a slogan having great power, force, potency or effect and also most patriotic slogan for the people of Bangladesh. Every slogan has a context, circumstances that give rise to the words and make them effective. For example, when the Chinese communists were waging their long struggle against the army of Chiang Kai-shek, they relied upon mass support from peasants, who formed the base of the Red Army. By pronouncing the slogan of “Joy Bangla”, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman echoed and reverberated millions of voices at the speed of light from one end of the country to another to liberate Bangladesh from the brutal hands of Pakistan military junta and its local hellish accomplices.

The imprecise nature of political slogans is a virtue. Actual political programmes do not derive from words alone but from the balance of class forces that exist at a particular point in time. What slogans do is clarify the most basic political cleavages; and they help people develop the mindset most suited to active participation in whatever struggles are at hand. “Joy Bangla” slogan has its glorified context. Bangladesh’s War of Independence in 1971 was valiantly fought against the blood thirsty Pakistan’s Army and their mango-twigs in the name of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and enunciating “Joy Bangla” slogan. Words change meanings. In our daily life, we listen and say many things to justify our conversation – some words stay out in our mind, many go away with time. With human psychology, nobody can remember everything but when we say “Joy Bangla” our mind may immediately pick up that we are talking about Bangladesh. Although slogans work slowly, but this slogan is electrifying and its mighty power is ever lasting.

The political slogan gives a good feeling to the people. Creating a prominent identity is what every political party desires and so getting an extra identity is surely a bonus. Slogan is sewed with our political name and is used everywhere along with it … so it technically works as a shadow for a political party’s name. “Joy Bangla” slogan, undoubtedly is the most powerful slogan which united the whole nation of Bangladesh into a solitary political platform to fight and achieve our own country, Bangladesh. A political party name cannot stand alone as compressed communication to speak for its people. Thus political slogans have a key role in communicating the essence of a political party. Slogan is appealing as well as elaborate as compared to the one word noun. A phrase with a meaning is apparently easier for people to relate to and remember; thus the impact of this noun is accentuated with its shadow i.e. slogan. And “Joy Bangla” slogan is standing on this glorious spirit.
A slogan actually works as a DNA for any political party. A truly successful slogan, if it is to continue to stay successful, is not just a benefit but a commitment – it is what the political party stands for! This DNA for the political party does not only attract the people but also helps in garnering the necessary support from the people. “Joy Bangla” slogan is much more than that. Many times a slogan is actually a précis of a political organisation and is designed to mirror the commitment and loyalty of its people. Moreover, slogans can also work as bridge between the political party and the people to build and strengthen the relationship. Since it gives meaning to the name, it can create feelings and attract people towards it. Thus, a person can relate and eventually be inclined towards the slogan resulting in increase of supporters. “Joy Bangla” slogan’s support base was huge and it will remain huge in future.

Slogans are usually based on a short sentence easy to remember words, long lines are hard to memorise so the shorter the better! The message they leave and what picture they sketch in our minds when someone reads, hears or simply sees a slogan is crucial. Since the political name cannot specify the essence of its goal, it has to make something memorable that represents the party and the country itself. We should keep an eye on the sound it produces and the nerves it touches when it strikes the people’s mind. “Joy Bangla” slogan truly touches our nerves to fight the evil forces. Slogan also works best to display the real perspective for any political party, this way it can attract the larger audience easily and can also connect with them emotionally. For more than 100 years, political parties have used slogans in their political movements. All political parties have used catchy phrases to tell their people what makes their political philosophy or service special or different. When done well, a slogan can become the centre-piece of a political party’s identity. “Joy Bangla” slogan is not only the centerpiece of Bangladesh Awami League but also the centerpiece of the country, Bangladesh.

Political parties use slogans because it is an easy and quick way to grab the attention of the public by using simple and catchy phrases and “Joy Bangla” slogan is such a simple and catchy phrase but its power is strong-boned and strong-willed for emancipation of the people of Bangladesh. A very productive route for a political party to go down is a reliable slogan and “Joy Bangla” is such a reliable political slogan. The very slogan is believed to have that a phrase with meaning strikes more of a chord with the people and the country than just the political party name alone because the slogan is a deserving of esteem and respect; not only it gives the people a commitment but tells them what the party stands for deserving of esteem and respect of the same breath.

“Joy Bangla” slogan has been exerting great power over the people of Bangladesh since long because it can give meaning to the name so it needs to apply to their everyday lives and should connect emotionally with them. The Sheikh’s electrifying voice on Mar 7, 1971 will remain alive all the time in our life, When he roared: “My brothers, today I appear before you with a heavy heart…The audience at the-then Race Course Ground (now Suhrawardy Uddan) hung on to every word of his 19-minute-long speech amid pin-drop silence 46 years ago. The crowd repeated after him when he was seen saying: “He didn’t agree with me, rather he (President Yahya Khan) yielded to Mr. Bhutto’s demand.” And people assembled there erupted in an echo when he was heard uttering those immortal lines: “…The struggle this time is our struggle for emancipation, the struggle this time is the struggle for our independence.” The crowd endorsed in unison as the deep resolute voice of Bangabandhu was heard saying : “You can’t keep seven crore Bengalis subjugated. Now that we have learnt to court death, no one can dominate us.” People there present resonated with the cry of “Joy Bangla” as the speech concluded with that immortal slogan.

According to Valerie Ann Taylor: “Joy Bangla’ slogan worked miracle” Joy Bangla” is not only the slogan of the Awami League, it is the slogan of our Liberation War, it is the slogan of Bangladesh. A slogan is a tag-line or phrase that creates to visually express the importance and benefits of a great speech. By and large, it’s a theme to a struggle that usually have a genuine role in people’s lives. It has the ability to loan people’s time and attention by putting people at the heart of the solution. Fact is, it is so crucial for a great armed uprising to fight and defeat the Pakistani occupation forces in 1971 to establish Bangladesh.

Every day we see millions of messages and catchphrase everywhere from print media to online advertisements. True, there are some slogans that we know by heart but a millions of them have come and gone that we hardly ever noticed. What is it about a political slogan that catapults it into fame? Here is a solitary one: “Joy Bangla”. It is simple, catchy, short and easy to remember and it perfectly defines Bangladesh, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and his political party. It makes the persons to feel the taste and remind them of the slogan, “Joy Bangla.” It also highlights our pre-independence exploitation, oppression and persecution by the Pakistani rulers and various facets of the Bengali struggle.

Aside from having outstanding political recall, the slogan of Joy Bangla, the “V” factor that makes us look twice, think thrice and delight the imagination of success. According to Charles Whittier: “A political slogan should be a statement of such merit about a political service that is worthy of continuous repetitive pronouncement; it is worthwhile for the general public to remember; and is phrased in such a way that the general public is likely to remember it.” “Joy Bangla” is an all time memorable political slogan. A goodeniaceae slogan must stay consistent. Reveal the real purposes and benefits of the common benefits. Using proven words and short keywords Bangabandhu pronounced: “Joy Bangla” and the whole country became tumultuous. Bangabandhu also received a tumultuous welcome from the people of all walks of life.

It is very indignant that after 1975 to till 1990, people, especially the young, used to feel shy in voicing the ‘Joy Bangla’ slogan because they were taught that they shouldn’t utter it by the shenanigan politicians like Gen. Zia, Gen Ershad and a voyeur politician like Begum Zia. What is the meaning of the two words of that distinguished slogan? …. The meaning is victory of the Bengladesh. Joy Bangla’— the slogan of the 1971 liberation war— is raised by Awami League and its affiliate organizations and all people of Bangladesh during our glorious Liberation War in 1971. But the Joy Bangla slogan is not only the slogan of Awami League…it is the slogan of our independence…it is the slogan of Bangladesh…The future generation must utter the slogan louder shedding the shame.

Because the most popular and memorable Bengali slogan is “Joy Bangla” or “Hail Bangladesh.” Now the slogan is on everybody’s lips. Joy means victory. So Joy Bangla means victory for Bangladesh. This was the war cry used by the Freedom Fighters during our Liberation War in 1971. The country is moving forward and the youth will make the country forward further through their hard-work and merit. And this will be the future Joy Bangla. We must work hard for full revival of the spirit of Liberation War; and we all need to work together so that the future generation chants the ‘Joy Bangla’ slogan in a louder voice. For, the reasons that the underlying spirit of Bangabandhu’s unique political activities were embodied in the slogan of Joy Bangla. The basic spirit has not changed since the country’s founding and will never be changed. The large crowd gathered to hear the historic speech of Bangabandhu was at its enthusiastic best, shouting ‘Joy Bangla’ slogan and beating drums by dozens. People there then were moved.

Since the advent of Joy Bangla Slogan, it fought the front-line battle to penetrate our minds, and win our hearts. This Slogan-bite exercises a profound influence on our language, people, and culture? In a word, yes! Joy Bangla moves the country-Bangladesh and the world as well. Correct politics is the life of a political party. It expresses itself through political strategy and tactics. Strategy and tactics are raised to people through slogans and on that basis; people are united and directed to struggle. So, it is long-term. Bangabandhu’s politics was correct and long-term fundament. First, by putting forward basic political slogans that accord with the course of historic development and by putting forward slogans of action for each stage of development and each major turn of events in order to translate these political slogans into reality. So, in order to lead the whole masses of Bangladesh society, politics led by Bangabandhu had to make political strategy and tactics corresponding to the historic development of Bangladesh on the one hand, and strategic and tactical slogans as reflection of respective strategy and tactics on the other.

This slogan is correct with Bangabandhu’s stance for creating Bangladesh. Among the two aspect of people’s democratic revolution – national revolution and democratic revolution – the principal aspect is national one because Bangladesh was a Pakistan’s colony, the whole nation was oppressed under colonial exploitation and rule and we want its end under Bangabandhu’s great leadership. The solution of this national revolution was to establish independent and sovereign Bangladesh and this was possible through national liberation war in 1971 at the clarion call of Bangabandhu and his thunderous “Joy Bangla” slogan. Bangabandhu’s strategy was to resolve national contradiction, to establish independent and sovereign Bangladesh by overthrowing Pakistan’s colonial ruling regime. While chanting this slogan, general people of Bangladesh sought oppressed and suppressed people’s victory over exploiters and dream of freedom and democracy in 1971.

So, raising the slogan “Joy Bangla” is truly patriotic; it means Bangladesh. This matches with the social development of Bangladesh. Clearly it expresses Bangladesh people’s national spirit, patriotism and victory. This is why this slogan ends any type of hesitation. This is the solution of the question of national liberation of Bangladesh and solution of any national contradiction. It matches with our politics. So, this is correct. It is definitely Sheikh Mujib, the most prominent figure in Bangladesh’s history, if you talk about Bangladesh and the “Joy Bangla” slogan. “This slogan epitomises the aspirations of Bengali people over many years. Right after Bangabandhu’s six point demand, another slogan became popular: “Tomar amar thikana, Padma, Meghna, Jamuna.” (The land that is criss-crossed by these rivers is ours.) This is also the reflection of the communal harmony that has always been the cardinal principle of Bengali culture.” “For the first time in 1971, the aspirations of people of all religions and social classes found a common platform,” Shamsuzzaman Khan points out.

Two simple words can inspire a generation, unite a community, and change a nation. Two simple words can conjure up images of a multitude of movements. Two simple words can transcend cultural differences. These two simple words provided inspiration for the Bangladesh liberation movement, helped establish Bangladesh. These two simple words are: “JOY BANGLA!” This great slogan was a creed written into the founding documents that declared the destiny of a nation. Yes we could set up our own country. This slogan resonates positively within our community. A slogan is a memorable motto or phrase used in a political, commercial, religious, and other context as a repetitive expression of an idea or purpose. “Joy Bangla” is such a memorable and adorable political slogan.

A slogan can be used for a powerful cause where the impact of the message is essential to the cause. The slogan can be used to raise awareness about a current cause; one way is to do so is by showing the truth that the cause is supporting. A slogan should be clear with a supporting message. Slogans, when combined with action, can provide an influential foundation for a cause to be seen by its intended audience. Slogans, whether used for advertising purpose or social causes, deliver a message to the public that shapes the audiences’ opinion towards the subject of the slogan. The most memorable slogans are concise and to the point. Impossible is Nothing. Possible is Success. William Safire once wrote, “Good slogans have rhyme, rhythm or alliteration to make them memorable.” This gold standard of slogan has all four.

It was a quick and monumental about-face. The Sheikh’s slogan emphasised his reasoned demeanor and deliberate decision-making process. There are three simple communications devices that every campaign needs: a message, issues that support the message, and an effective political campaign slogan. Memorable slogans often use short “phrase bursts,” a staccato style that breaks up a longer sentence into easily-recalled phrases. “Joy Bangla” sounds with resonance of the same category.

Our tactical line should be to destroy the anti-national, anti- independence and anti-liberation forces from this sacred soil of Bangladesh as the end result. Long Live Joy Bangla. A diamond is forever. The power of dreams is for a limitless time. The taste of a new generation will grow up for “Joy Bangla” slogan. His master’s voice will remain eternal. We repeat to rebel is justified. Smash the obnoxious nexus of anti-liberation forces from this country once and for all crying out in a very louder tone “Joy Bangla.” Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and the “Joy Bangla” slogan are synonymous. In point of fact, the spirit of “Joy Bangla” slogan will remain immortal in the history of Bangladesh.

-The End-