Labour rulebook doesn’t mention IHRA antisemitism definition or examples

By Georgina Lee-29 May 2019

Last summer, Labour found itself in a bitter row over antisemitism, with many Jewish leaders condemning the party for its handling of the issue.

Marie van der Zyl, President of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, accused Jeremy Corbyn of “leading the Labour Party into a dark place of ugly conspiracy theories” and said the opposition had “become a home for overt antisemites and antisemitism”.

Labour adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism in 2016.

The sticking point last year was whether to also incorporate the IHRA’s eleven examples of antisemitic behaviour.

After months of wrangling, in September 2018, the party said it had adopted “all of the IHRA examples of antisemitism”.

But FactCheck can reveal that there is no mention of the IHRA, its definition, or any of the eleven examples in the 2019 Labour Party Rulebook — or the section of their website that deals with Labour’s code of conduct.

What was promised?

On 4 September 2018, a Labour spokesperson said that the party’s ruling National Executive Committee (NEC) “has today adopted all of the IHRA examples of antisemitism, in addition to the IHRA definition which Labour adopted in 2016, alongside a statement which ensures this will not in any way undermine freedom of expression on Israel or the rights of Palestinians.”

The NEC has the power to update codes of conduct without waiting for approval from the party conference. But eight months after the announcement, it is not possible to find the IHRA definition or its examples anywhere in the 2019 Labour Party Rulebook.

Are the IHRA examples included in any other published party documents?

There’s a section on Labour’s website called “Code of Conduct: Antisemitism and other forms of racism”.

You might expect this page to include the IHRA definition and its examples — but it doesn’t.

At the bottom, there is a link to the now-defunct 2018 party rulebook, which the webpage says “contains all of Labour’s codes of conduct”. The 2018 rulebook does not include the IHRA definition or its examples either.

Labour’s website contains only one document that uses the IHRA definition of antisemitism:
the 2017 Race and Faith Manifesto. But crucially, this doesn’t include the eleven IHRA examples.

In July 2018, the Jewish Chronicle published what they understood to be Labour’s internal guidelines on handling antisemitism.

This document, titled “NEC Code of Conduct: Antisemitism”, sets out “examples of conduct likely to be regarded as antisemitic” that were “in part derived from the IHRA working examples”.

As that language suggests, the guidelines don’t include the full suite of IHRA examples — in fact, they omit the following four:

• “Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations”
• “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
• “Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.”
• “Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”

It’s not clear whether that Code of Conduct still applies, or whether it’s been superseded by the announcement that Labour has adopted all eleven IHRA examples.

What do Labour say?

We asked Labour to point us to a public document that includes the eleven IHRA examples. They were unable to do so.
FactCheck understands that not every policy adopted by the NEC is placed on the party’s website, including the definitions of Islamophobia and disability.

The Conservatives have form too

FactCheck caught the Conservatives in an almost-identical omission last year. In July, we reported that the Conservative rulebook didn’t use the term antisemitism, despite Theresa May’s assertion that the party had adopted the IHRA definition.

Just hours after we published our article, the Conservative party webpage seemed to have been quietly updated to include a mention of the IHRA that wasn’t there before.

Resounding Victory For Modi At Lok Sabha Election 2019

By S. Sivathasan –MAY 28, 2019

S. Sivathasan

Mahatma Gandhi cited in a single cryptic sentence his reason for selecting Nehru as India’s first Prime Minister – “India is safe in Nehru’s hands”. Today India in her millions have echoed in chorus, “India is safe in Modi’s hands”. This affirmation comes after trial and test for a full five-year term. A billion Indians had a million reasons for deciding so.

I wrote five articles on Modi’s electoral prospects, from 7 October 2018; the last being on 19 May 2019, two days ahead of exit polls results. In my articles 1 – 4, I maintained with assurance and certainty that Modi and BJP will have 300 + seats. I give below some of my predictions made in my articles up to May 19, 2019 and the actuals after the elections.

How did such forecasts become possible? Having followed India’s progress, multi-sector growth, all too visible developments and owing them very much to the Modi regime, the polity had decided well ahead whom to attribute the success to. A repeat of the same became the urge and mission of the voter. To those who surveyed happenings in India, every ripple was observable. Predictions became easy.

Making them better understood, were eloquent expositions by Modi and his Ministers in Parliament. The countrywide speeches made by the leadership carried the masses sky high. Modi himself flew 100,000 miles to address the masses at 160 mammoth meetings. In contrast to these persuasive speeches was the puerile prattle from the Congress leader. Little wonder he lost even the family pocket borough – Amethi in UP — to Smriti Irani whose victory was certain from the day Rahul announced his shift to Vayanadu

To this writer what moved mountains in the voting pattern in favour of BJP was the sustained performance of the regime in five years, presented in a masterly fashion by Modi. Above all, the charisma he exuded gripped his audiences like a narcotic. He took the masses as intelligent human beings who could understand all the statistics that he splashed across. From the very outset, when he entered national politics six years ago, he got the trusted support of his lieutenants and carried the masses with him.

His reading and absorption of Swami Vivekananda he used with deadly effect. To him food to the starving, poverty alleviation of the neglected farmer, satisfying the material side of life before reaching for the less intelligible spiritual, were all relevant and important. Sages mortified the flesh. Vivekananda and Modi understood perfectly Ramakrishna when he said “To the starving man God appears in the form of bread”. This perception underlay the payment of a token Rs. 6,000/= per annum per farmer family. Doubling of farmer income by 2022, the 75th year of independence is the solid pledge for the immediate future. Rahul promised 12 times more immediately after victory! Who believed it?

Seat share that the polity gave, displayed trust reposed in Modi and disbelief of Rahul. Sathyam Eva Jayathe – Truth Alone Triumphs – is inscribed in bold relief in Lok Sabha. “Na Anarithum”- never untruth- was not ever inscribed in Rahul’s mind. It was best exemplified in his refusal to acknowledge his untruth over Rafael Deal even after Nirmala Sitharaman, Minister of Defence ripped and demolished him five times in parliament and out.

The dust has settled over the hustings. What hovers yet more is the euphoria about the victory. It has won the encomia of the world and brought genuine – not formal – accolades from world leaders. India’s reactions were different. After voting in phase III when 302 or 59% of the electorates had voted, it became clear that BJP was winning. After phase IV on April 29 and 69%, the leadership was reassured of a great victory. 

Not wishing to waste even a day from then, Modi ordered a macro plan be outlined for the first 100 days rolling into 2022 (75th year of independence), 2030, 2040 and even 2050. The 22 oppositionist formations showing their hideous front and divided back, scampered for their own safe haven and stridently reassured themselves and the voters of a great victory. Six Prime Ministerial aspirants had already become PMs and remained rivals till 23, May 2019. However strident their cry, the country thought otherwise. Modi is now set on his next five-year term with a third term to follow.

Read More

Foreign policy complexities to the fore in India 

May 29, 2019, 8:33 pm

In his second term in office Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi will continue to find that his challenges on the foreign policy front are as exacting and as complex as his domestic chores. One of his foremost challenges locally is to generate jobs in increasing numbers for the employable who are entering the job market monthly in the tens of thousands, it is reported. However, challenges such as job creation, it is bound to be found, are tied-up considerably with the deftness and effectiveness with which the Modi administration manages its foreign policy questions.

Interestingly, this close link between domestic economic issues and foreign policy formulation and direction is not peculiar to only India in the South Asian region. The dominance of economics over most other considerations is so great currently that the foreign policy posers in focus here could be found to be common to most states of this region, big or small.

There is the case of Sri Lanka, for instance. For understandable reasons its present preoccupations are of a security nature but once Sri Lanka satisfies itself that its security chores have been satisfactorily dealt with it would need to think of long term stability and the latter could only come through ethnic and religious harmony combined with sustained economic growth and re-distributive justice. In fact, the achievement of the latter tasks will lay the basis for national security in the long term. These issues call for a deft handling of questions on a number of fronts and these challenges spare none of the states of the region.

India has been on a fine balancing act over the years on the foreign policy front but the present correlation of international political forces is such that it would be required of India to carry out this act with increasing delicacy and tact. It is reported that Prime Minister Modi’s first international state visit in his second term would be to none other than the Maldives; a small state in South Asia, like Sri Lanka. As some commentators have pointed out, this serves the purpose of underlining India’s concern for the sustenance of democracy in the Maldives but the visit is also indicative of the great importance India places on good neighbourly relations.

Viewed from this perspective, it does not strike the observer as advisable for India to keep the Pakistani Prime Minister out of the Indian Prime Minister’s upcoming swearing-in ceremony. Inasmuch as it is important for India’s closest neighbours to be on the best of terms with her always, it is crucial that India ensures that all efforts are made by her to mend fences with Pakistan. Minus such exercises even a measure of peace is inconceivable in South Asia.

It is hoped that Sri Lanka would understand the message from India coming out of Modi’s planned visit to the Maldives, and work out its implications perceptively. Opposition sections in Sri Lanka in particular have this fatal tendency of attaching disproportionate importance to extra-regional actors on resolving dilemmas confronting Sri Lanka currently on the foreign policy front but there is no getting away from the paramount importance of having cordial and mutually-beneficial ties with India. This is in consideration of India being our closest neighbour and the biggest country in the region at that.

China and Russia, for example, are unlikely to sacrifice their good relations with India for Sri Lanka’s sake, come crunch time. Besides, these states are not likely to undermine their ties with the US and the West to further Sri Lanka’s interests if such actions run contrary to their own national interests. Such are the ways of Realpolitik.

Accordingly, it would be in Sri Lanka’s legitimate interests to make the best use of India’s current regional policy emphasis on generating greater cordiality in its immediate neighbourhood. The same applies to the Maldives. In other words, India’s smaller neighbours in particular would do well to work in concert with India insofar as their best interests are served this way. Ideally, a good neighbourhood policy should be the choice of India’s closest neighbours as well.

However, India’s field of engagement in the days ahead would far transcend South Asia. Almost immediately after Modi’s visit to the Maldives he is expected to attend a Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Kyrgystan and a G20 summit in Osaka, Japan. In other words, the Indian leader would be interacting with all the powers that matter currently because the two organizations in question have to do with almost all of them.

The SCO has within its fold China and Russia, for instance, and the G20 features the foremost powers of the West led by the US along with many other world heavyweights. India would be perceiving it to be in her interests to work cordially with all these powers and she cannot be at serious cross-purposes with any one of them.

Given that complexity, fluidity and ambiguity chiefly characterize the current international political and economic order, India would have no choice but to adopt a highly nuanced and flexible foreign policy. For example, she cannot afford to have long, strained ties with China, although it is plain that she is engaged in a struggle for influence and control with China in the South Asian region.

Such competition is only to be expected between two major regional powers but it would be in their economic interests in particular to relate as cordially as possible with each other. India is a major economic power in her own right, but China’s economic penetration is world wide and it would be foolhardy on a state’s part to ignore this fact.

On the other hand, India cannot afford to even briefly forget contemporary power realities which are in a state of flux. While getting on as best as she could with China it would be in her interests to be on the most cordial terms with the US and other Western powers that matter as well. This is in order to balance her ties with China and Russia and to also perpetuate her commitment to democracy and its principal values. Meanwhile, India would like to be on the best of terms with Russia in view of Russia’s recent tilt towards Pakistan and also in consideration of Russia’s attempts to regain a firm foothold in South-west Asia and Afghanistan.

India ought to be concerned about the US’ perceived manoeuvres in the Asia-Pacific but she would believe it to be in her interests to not to be at cross-purposes with the US in this theatre because of the tremendous and growing economic importance of the ASEAN region, where China’s economic links are growing.

Accordingly, a country of India’s stature cannot afford to look at the world in stark black-and-white terms. For India and other powers of her kind the world presents itself mainly in shades of grey. Their foreign policies would need to be finely calibrated to meet their prime needs. It could be said that Modi’s leadership is likely to be tested very considerably in the arena of foreign policy as well.

Hopefully, India under Modi’s Premiership, would consider it to be on its priority list to ensure that SAARC is up and running once again. BIMSTEC has its merits in comparison to SAARC no doubt, but SAARC is no spent force and should be seen as vital in re-establishing good neighbourly relations in the region.

Will Balochistan Blow Up China’s Belt and Road?

Violence in the Pakistani province is on the rise—and now Chinese nationals are the target.

Pakistani naval personnel stand guard near a ship at the Gwadar port on Nov. 13, 2016. AAMIR QURESHI/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

BY MUHAMMAD AKBAR NOTEZAI

| MAY 30, 2019, 4:10 PM

In 2015, when Chinese President Xi Jinping’s plane entered Pakistani airspace, eight Pakistan Air Force jets scrambled to escort it. The country’s leadership warmly welcomed the Chinese leader—and his money. On his two-day state visit, he announced a multibillion-dollar project called the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which would form part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative and would revolve around the development of a huge port in the city of Gwadar.

Gwadar, a formerly isolated city in Pakistan’s southwestern Balochistan province, boomed. As soon as the CPEC was announced, tourists, including journalists, started visiting Gwadar. The Pearl Continental, the only five-star hotel in the area, had been on the brink of closure. Now guests thronged. But not everyone was happy about that. Baloch nationalists and underground organizations opposed the CPEC from the beginning, on the grounds that it would turn the Baloch people into a minority in their own province. They threatened attacks on any CPEC project anywhere in Balochistan.

 

There was plenty of reason to believe their threats. During the tenure of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, who led Pakistan from 1999 to 2008, Baloch insurgents killed Chinese engineers and workers in the province. One of the incidents took place in Gwadar, where in May 2004, militants killed three Chinese engineers. The engineers had been driving to work. When they slowed down to pass over a speed bump, a terrorist in a nearby car detonated the barrier with a remote control.

In recent years, violence had waned. There were no new projects, and the city seemed to have settled into its own rhythm. But following the CPEC announcement, according to theNews International, a Pakistani English daily, Pakistan deployed a total of 17,177 security personnel from the Army and other security forces to ensure the security of Chinese nationals. In the years since, Gwadar has become something of a military cantonment. Army, police, and other law enforcers mill about.And locals traveling around Gwadar face routine harassment at security checkpoints.

The policing has done little to deter attacks. In recent months, two reported incidents have put the province on edge. The first attack occurred on April 18, when 15 to 20 Baloch insurgents dressed in military uniforms forms forced 14 passengers off a public bus and shot them, one by one. Most of victims were from the Pakistan Navy and Coast Guards, whom Baloch insurgents view as an occupying force.

Then, on May 11, the Pearl Continental in the heart of Gwadar came under fire. Situated on a promontory overlooking the port and the Arabian Sea, the hotel is mammoth and a favorite of foreign dignitaries. Security there is intense, and since it is near Gwadar’s port area there are already plenty of military personnel in the area. Three armed attackers from the Balochistan Liberation Army’s Majeed Brigade nevertheless managed to breach the defenses and open fire on people inside. According to officials, five individuals—four hotel employees, including three security guards, and a navy officer—lost their lives.

The Pearl Continental attack in particular bodes ill for Chinese investment in Balochistan.Before this month, it was hard to imagine that Baloch insurgents would be capable of carrying out the attack in the center of Gwadar, even with the local support. But now any sense of security has been undermined.

 

Established in 2011, the Majeed Brigade, a suicide attack squad within the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), is reportedly named after Abdul Majeed Baloch, who attempted to assassinate then-Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1974 in Balochistan. In 1973, Bhutto had ordered a military operation against the Baloch because Baloch insurgents had vowed war against the state of Pakistan after Islamabad had dismissed the democratically elected National Awami Party government in Balochistan in February 1973. The operation triggered a major insurgency in Balochistan that lasted until 1977. Majeed was killed by security forces before he could carry out his plan against Bhutto.

In the first several years after the BLA was formed in 2000, it mostly waged attacks on national security forces, state infrastructure, and Punjabi settlers. In more recent years, under Aslam Baloch, who died in Kandahar in December 2018, the Majeed Brigade has focused on Chinese nationals and Chinese-funded projects. Such attacks seemed more likely to provoke media attention. He tapped his oldest son, Rehan Baloch, for a suicide attack on Chinese engineers in Dalbandin, a city in Balochistan, last August. The attack resulted in minor injuries for the engineers. He also oversaw an attack on the Chinese consulate in Karachi a few months later. Two police officials and two visa applicants were killed.

As these incidents suggest, the Majeed Brigade is gaining momentum. And it is joined by new groups, such as the Baloch Raaji Aajoi Sangar, an alliance of Baloch separatist groups specifically focused on attacking CPEC projects. From the beginning, the Baloch have been pushed to the wall. They have never been treated as equal citizens of Pakistan, nor have they been given equal constitutional, economic, and political opportunities. This is why some Baloch protest peacefully, some do nothing, and some have taken up arms against the state.

For now, China is undeterred. It has invested too much in Balochistan to back down. Yet things are set to become even more tense. After signing a memorandum of understanding earlier this year, Saudi Arabia has been setting up an oil refinery in Gwadar, very close to the country’s border with Iran. Iran accuses Pakistan of providing refuge to Saudi-sponsored Sunni Baloch insurgents targeting the Iranian state, while Pakistan believes that Iran has provided refuge for Baloch insurgents fighting Pakistan. Meanwhile, Iran has territorial claims on Makran, a strip of semi-desert territory on the coast surrounding Gwadar. Iran wants to make inroads into the Makran region by going soft on Baloch insurgents.

If these attacks continue, the CPEC’s chances of success will decrease, as will the possibility of Saudi-Iranian tensions on Pakistani soil. It is time for Islamabad to start treating the Baloch as stakeholders in the development of the Gwadar port, to make the CPEC successful. But unfortunately, Islamabad has always treated the Baloch as a problem, not a solution—and even increasing violence probably won’t change that.

Sensation Of Financialization

Financialization involves the growth and transformation of finance such that with its hugely expanded size, scope and concentration, finance now overshadows, dominates and destabilizes the productive economy.

by Jomo Kwame Sundaram and Michael Lim Mah Hui-2019-05-30

• -

 

Over recent decades, the scope, size, concentration, power and even the purpose and role of finance have changed so significantly that a new term, financialization, was coined to name this phenomenon. 

 

Financialization refers to a process that has not only transformed finance itself, but also, the real economy and society. The transformation goes beyond the quantitative to involve qualitative change as finance becomes dominant, instead of serving the needs of the real economy.

 

 

Financialization involves the growth and transformation of finance such that with its hugely expanded size, scope and concentration, finance now overshadows, dominates and destabilizes the productive economy.

 

The role and purpose of finance has been qualitatively transformed. Finance used to profit from serving production and trade. Traditionally, financing production involved providing funds for manufacturers to finance production, and for traders to buy and sell.

 

Financialization, on the other hand, turns every imaginable product or service into financial commodities or services to be traded, often for speculation. Instead of seeking profits by financing the productive economy and trade, finance is now more focused on extracting rents from the economy.

 

Finance is hegemonic, dominating all of society without appearing to do so, transforming more and more things into financial products and services to be traded and sold. But financialization could not have happened on its own.

 

Its nature and pace have been enabled and shaped by ideological, legal, institutional and deliberate policy and regulatory changes. Regulatory authorities, both national and international, can barely keep up with its transformative consequences.

 

Size matters

 

One aspect of financialization refers to the size of finance relative to the whole economy, with the financial sector growing faster and securing more profit than other sectors. The simplest and most popular measure of finance uses national income accounts for ‘finance, insurance and real estate' (FIRE).

 

In the US, finance's share of GDP grew from 14% to 21% between 1960 and 2017, while manufacturing's fell from 27% to 11%, and trade's declined from 17% to 12%. The financial sector is almost twice as large as both trade and manufacturing sectors.

 

The growth of shadow banking, referring to activities similar to traditional banking undertaken by non-bank financial institutions that are not regulated as banks, is a growing and significant source of credit and accounts for much of the growth of finance.

 

Such institutions include hedge funds, private equity funds, mortgage lenders, money market funds and insurance companies. These financial institutions, including traditional banks, have used securitization, ‘off-balance sheet' derivative positions and leverage to create, manage and trade securities and derivatives, ballooning its business volume.

 

With heightened concerns about growing financial fragility, more sophisticated measures have been introduced to estimate ‘shadow banking'. Most country-level measures show shadow banking increasing rapidly before, and more worryingly, after the 2008-2009 global financial crisis!

 

At the same time, finance has also secured the most gains in the US, taking advantage of the sector's ability to leverage more than non-financial corporations, engaging in financial innovations and trading complex and opaque products netting super profits.

 

During 1960-2017, finance almost doubled its profits, from 17% to 30% of total domestic corporate profits, while manufacturing's share shrank by almost two thirds from 49% to 17%.

 

Jim Reid of Deutsche Bank estimated that that the US financial sector made around US$1.2 trillion (US$1,200 billion) in ‘excess profits', relative to the previous mean, in the decade before the 2008 global financial crisis.

 

Greater concentration

 

There are contrasting views of whether bank concentration leads to greater or less financial stability. But size certainly does not guarantee either good banking practices or financial stability.

 

In fact, the global financial crisis suggests that the "too big to fail" syndrome encouraged moral hazard. Big banks take on excessive risk as they believe they have a safety net -- governments will bail them out to prevent a financial system collapse.

 

Over the years, US banking has become more concentrated. This accelerated with the abolition of the Glass-Steagall Act and its replacement with the Graham-Leah-Bliley Act in 1999 which saw the creation of universal bank behemoths combining commercial and investment banking activities.

 

The top five banks in 1990 held less than 10% of total bank assets; by 2007, they had 44%. Seven years after the 2008-2009 Global Financial Crisis, the US banking industry is just as concentrated, with the top five banks – JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citibank and US Bancorp – holding US$7 trillion, or 44% of total bank assets.

 

Meanwhile, asset management is even more concentrated than banking. Together, the ‘Big Three' – Blackrock, Vanguard and State Street – are the largest shareholders in four-fifths of listed US corporations, managing nearly US$11 trillion, thrice the worth of global hedge funds. Such asset management relies on banks for leveraged access to financial markets.

 

Undoubtedly, many regulators have replaced previously weak regulation, which failed to check spreading systemic risk before the 2008-2009 global financial crisis, with new rules. But these do not seem to have effectively checked more recent abusive practices.

 

“Money is what powers economy” – as professor Anis H. Bajrektarevic writes – “but our blind faith in (constructed) tomorrows and its alleged certainty is what empowers money.”Recent technological, ideological, institutional and political changes have drastically transformed finance, enabling it to penetrate and dominate all spheres of life such that financialization is the new avatar.

 

Jomo Kwame Sundaram, a former economics professor, was United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development, and received the Wassily Leontief Prize for Advancing the Frontiers of Economic Thought.

 

Dr Michael LIM Mah Hui has been a university professor and banker, in the private sector and with the Asian Development Bank.

How we traced ‘mystery emissions’ of CFCs back to eastern China

May 22, 2019 1.23pm EDT

Since being universally ratified in the 1980s, the Montreal Protocol – the treaty charged with healing the ozone layer – has been wildly successful in causing large reductions in emissions of ozone depleting substances. Along the way, it has also averted a sizeable amount of global warming, as those same substances are also potent greenhouse gases. No wonder the ozone process is often held up as a model of how the international community could work together to tackle climate change.

However, new research we have published with colleagues in Natureshows that global emissions of the second most abundant ozone-depleting gas, CFC-11, have increased globally since 2013, primarily because of increases in emissions from eastern China. Our results strongly suggest a violation of the Montreal Protocol.

A global ban on the production of CFCs has been in force since 2010, due to their central role in depleting the stratospheric ozone layer, which protects us from the sun’s ultraviolet radiation. Since global restrictions on CFC production and use began to bite, atmospheric scientists had become used to seeing steady or accelerating year-on-year declines in their concentration.

Ozone-depleting gases, measured in the lower atmosphere. Decline since the early 1990s is primarily due to the controls on production under the Montreal Protocol. AGAGE / CSIRO

But bucking the long-term trend, a strange signal began to emerge in 2013: the rate of decline of the second most abundant CFC was slowing. Before it was banned, the gas, CFC-11, was used primarily to make insulating foams. This meant that any remaining emissions should be due to leakage from “banks” of old foams in buildings and refrigerators, which should gradually decline with time.

But in that study published last year, measurements from remote monitoring stations suggested that someone was producing and using CFC-11 again, leading to thousands of tonnes of new emissions to the atmosphere each year. Hints in the data available at the time suggested that eastern Asia accounted for some unknown fraction of the global increase, but it was not clear where exactly these emissions came from.

Growing ‘plumes’ over Korea and Japan

Scientists, including ourselves, immediately began to look for clues from other measurements around the world. Most monitoring stations, primarily in North America and Europe, were consistent with gradually declining emissions in the nearby surrounding regions, as expected.

But all was not quite right at two stations: one on Jeju Island, South Korea, and the other on Hateruma Island, Japan.

These sites showed “spikes” in concentration when plumes of CFC-11 from nearby industrialised regions passed by, and these spikes had got bigger since 2013. The implication was clear: emissions had increased from somewhere nearby.

To further narrow things down, we ran computer models that could use weather data to simulate how pollution plumes travel through the atmosphere.

Atmospheric observations at Gosan and Hateruma monitoring stations showed an increase in CFC-11 emissions from China, primarily from Shandong, Hebei and surrounding provinces. Rigby et al, Author provided

From the simulations and the measured concentrations of CFC-11, it became apparent that a major change had occurred over eastern China. Emissions between 2014 and 2017 were around 7,000 tonnes per year higher than during 2008 to 2012. This represents more than a doubling of emissions from the region, and accounts for at least 40% to 60% of the global increase. In terms of the impact on climate, the new emissions are roughly equivalent to the annual CO₂ emissions of London.

The most plausible explanation for such an increase is that CFC-11 was still being produced, even after the global ban, and on-the-ground investigations by the Environmental Investigations Agency and the New York Times seemed to confirm continued production and use of CFC-11 even in 2018, although they weren’t able to determine how significant it was.

While it’s not known exactly why production and use of CFC-11 apparently restarted in China after the 2010 ban, these reports noted that it may be that some foam producers were not willing to transition to using second generation substitutes (HFCs and other gases, which are not harmful to the ozone layer) as the supply of the first generation substitutes (HCFCs) was becoming restricted for the first time in 2013.

Bigger than the ozone hole

Chinese authorities have said they will “crack-down” on any illegal production. We hope that the new data in our study will help. Ultimately, if China successfully eliminates the new emissions sources, then the long-term negative impact on the ozone layer and climate could be modest, and a megacity-sized amount of CO₂-equivalent emissions would be avoided. But if emissions continue at their current rate, it could undo part of the success of the Montreal Protocol.

The network of global (AGAGE) and US-run (NOAA) monitoring stations. Luke Western, Author provided

While this story demonstrates the critical value of atmospheric monitoring networks, it also highlights a weakness of the current system. As pollutants quickly disperse in the atmosphere, and as there are only so many measurement stations, we were only able to get detailed information on emissions from certain parts of the world.

Therefore, if the major sources of CFC-11 had been a few hundred kilometres further to the west or south in China, or in unmonitored parts of the world, such as India, Russia, South America or most of Africa, the puzzle would remain unsolved. Indeed, there are still parts of the recent global emissions rise that remain unattributed to any specific region.

When governments and policy makers are armed with this atmospheric data, they will be in a much better position to consider effective measures. Without it, detective work is severely hampered.

Poorer countries refusing plastic waste imports could make the system fairer

This photo taken on April 17, 2019 shows recycled paper at the Northern Adelaide Waste Management Authority's recycling site in Edinburgh, near Adelaide. From grubby packaging engulfing small Southeast Asian communities to waste piling up in plants from the US to Australia, China's ban on accepting the world's used plastic has plunged global recycling into turmoil. Source: Brenton EDWARDS / AFP

 By Jen Allan[-MAY 30, 2019

THE world generated 242 million tonnes of plastic waste in 2016 – a figure that’s expected to grow by 70 percent in the next 30 years. But this same plastic is also a commodity that’s sold and traded in a global industry that generates US$200 billion every year.

Exporting plastic waste is one-way rich countries dispose of their waste. By selling waste to firms that then send it to countries where recycling costs are cheaper, rich countries can avoid the unpleasant task of finding somewhere at home to dispose of it. Unfortunately, most of this waste is shipped to countries that aren’t equipped to properly manage it.

When wealthy countries export their plastic waste to poorer countries with weaker recycling capacity, those plastics are often dumped, eventually polluting the land and sea. But a recent UN decision could help those countries most affected by plastic litter and with the least capacity to manage it. Due to a little-known treaty called the Basel Convention, poorer countries can now say no to the deluge of exported waste.

Activists urge progress at the Basel Convention. Source: IISD/ENB | Kiara Worth, Author provided

An enduring injustice

The Basel Convention was adopted by the UN in 1989 to manage the flow of toxic waste sent from rich to poor countries. It’s cheaper for wealthy countries to relocate their waste to areas with lower costs and oversight, and so opportunities to abuse the system emerge.

Italian waste management firms made headlines in 1988 because they stored hazardous wastes in a Nigerian fishing village, in drums labelled as building materials. For years Canada delayed repatriating waste – including nappies – dumped by a Canadian firm in the Philippines. The refuse has been sitting in the sun there since 2013.

The images of plastic waste piling up on beaches in many developing countries, including on some of the world’s most remote islands, prompted an effort led by Norway to use the Basel Convention for its original purpose.

Delegates negotiate the text to determine which plastics will be regulated by the UN decision. Source: IISD/ENB | Kiara Worth, Author provided

The negotiations held in Geneva over two weeks were intended to bring urgent action to address a complex issue. A few countries, such as Argentina and the US, were more cautious, as exporters of plastic waste themselves. They, like the recycling industry, warned that regulations could make it more difficult to recycle plastic, at a time when much more needs to be recycled. Statements went on for hours as developing countries recounted the plastics littering their lands, seas, beaches and even glaciers.

Norway brought forward a proposal to change how the treaty regulates plastics, by moving many types of plastics from the “non-hazardous” category to a list of wastes “of special concern.”

Starting in 2020, this will require developing countries to be informed if these plastics are in a waste shipment. With this information, countries can give, or revoke, their “prior informed consent”. For the first time, developing countries can refuse a shipment of plastics with the backing of international law.

Making the recycling industry fairer

This decision only applies to low-value, hard-to-recycle plastics. Think of food packaging or single-use water bottles: the plastics are soiled or mixed together (the lid, label, and bottle are different types of plastic), making them difficult to recycle. Most recyclers don’t want these plastics, which don’t generate a profit and increasingly are dumped in the landfills of poor countries.

Research shows how cheap plastics leach persistent organic pollutants into the environment – a particularly nasty group of chemicals that are toxic, travel through air and water over long distances, accumulate in animal tissue (including humans), and last a long time. More than 233 marine species have ingested plastic and litter has reached the deepest parts of the ocean.

SEE ALSO: Electronic waste is recycled in appalling conditions in India

The trade in global plastics is one driver of this problem, so giving developing countries the right to know what is entering their country and to refuse it is an appropriate solution to waste dumping.

China, previously the world’s largest importer of plastics for recycling, banned the import of cheap and contaminated plastics in 2018, displacing plastic waste to other countries. China’s neighbours, such as Indonesia, and Malaysia, shouldered a heavier burden, particularly since countries like the UK continue to export over 600,000 tonnes of plastica year.

Rich countries tend to produce the most plastic waste in the world per person and have better systems for managing it. If cheap and easy routes for dumping plastics close, wealthier countries may have to find ways to compel recycling companies to deal with their cheap plastics domestically.

This agreement is only the start, but it could empower poorer countries to refuse the deluge of plastics that ultimately end up lingering on their shores. In time, it may help redress some of the burning injustices in the global waste trade.

Jen Allan, Lecturer in Environmental Politics, Cardiff University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Autism symptoms replicated in mice after faecal transplants

Study aims to discover whether gut microbes play a part in development of the condition
Mice that had transplants from children with autism did not wrestle, push and sniff other mice as much as the control group of mice. Photograph: Redmond O Durrell/Alamy

Ian SampleScience editor @iansample-Thu 30 May 2019

Scientists have induced the hallmarks of autism in mice by giving them faecal transplants from humans with the condition.

The experiments were designed to test whether the communities of gut microbes found in people with autism have a role in their symptoms, an ideathat is gaining ground among researchers.

In the study, animals that had faecal transplants from children with autism became less sociable, less vocal and developed repetitive behaviours. In contrast, genetically identical mice that had transplants from people without autism were unaffected by the procedure.

Sarkis Mazmanian, a microbiologist who led the project at the California Institute of Technology, said that while gut microbes did not appear to cause autism, the findings raised the prospect of new treatments for some of the most common symptoms of the condition.

“Potentially this opens up the possibility that microbiome-based interventions may be effective in autism,” he said. “We’ve identified particular organisms and the products of those organisms that are drivers of symptoms in mice, but we don’t know if they drive symptoms in humans too.”

To perform the faecal transplants, the researchers fed a known amount of human stool down a tube into the recipient mouse’s stomach. The animals were then tested to ensure the microbes in the stool had colonised the gut.

The human gut is home to trillions of bugs. In return for moisture, warmth and nutrition, the microbes help to digest food, train the immune system, and keep metabolism in check. People have different populations of gut microbes depending on their diet, lifestyle and genetics, but studies have found particular differences in people with autism.

Writing in the journal Cell, the scientists describe how they used a tracking system to monitor how well mice socialised after they had received faecal transplants. They also recorded how often the animals buried marbles placed on the wood chips in their cages. Finally, they used ultrasonic microphones to eavesdrop on the creatures’ communications.

Mice that had transplants from children with autism did not wrestle, push and sniff other mice as much as the control group of mice, which had transplants from people without autism. Nor did they produce as many ultrasonic squeaks. And while control mice might bury one or two marbles and then move on, mice with autism-related microbiomes kept going, an indication of repetitive behaviour.

Autism affects about one in 60 people and tends to be diagnosed when children show deficits in social and verbal interactions and display repetitive behaviours such as hand-flapping, spinning and finger-flicking. “We were able to see all three of the core features of autism replicated in the mice,” said Mazmanian.

Tests on the mice with autism-related microbiomes revealed changes to gene expression in their brains and low levels of certain metabolites in their bodies, notably two substances called taurine and 5-aminovaleric acid, or 5AV. In follow-up experiments, the researchers fed taurine and 5AV to strains of mice that naturally exhibit autism-like behaviour, and found their repetitive behaviour and social skills improved.

Gil Sharon, the first author of the study, said that while human trials might one day test whether specific bacteria or their products can help people with autism, they may not happen soon. “A lot more work needs to be done before we can say we’re ready for human trials,” he said.

“We don’t want to give parents, children and loved ones false hope,” Mazmanian added. “We have not solved the problem. All we’ve done is introduce a potential new strategy that needs to be tested in people. This is the start of what may ultimately be a therapeutic for people with autism, but we are certainly not there yet.”

Last month, researchers at Arizona State University announced that faecal transplants had almost halved symptoms of autism in 18 children. Two years after the procedure, the number of children rated as having “severe” autism had fallen from 83% to 17%.

Jeremy Nicholson, the pro-vice chancellor for health at Murdoch University in Perth, Australia, said the California study was impressive, but he was doubtful about treating autism symptoms with microbes or pills based on the substances they produce. “Humans have very diverse microbiomes, so there is no one-size-fits-all [treatment]. It’s why probiotics work on some people and not others. We need to understand the mechanism behind this, and then work out if there are parts of that network that are druggable.”